I don't think he was being entirely s for serious.
Re. Sapphire, if TouchID is rolled out across the next iPhone plus both sizes of iPad later this year then Apple are probably going to double their need for home buttons. They may be smaller than whole screens, but they need to come from somewhere too.
This $500 million will be conveniently forgotten when we look at the iPhone 6 component costs. "Look how much profit Apple is squeezing out of their customers!"
Which does seem quite a bit beyond the area of material needed for the mentioned sensor and wearable devices. "but there is not doubt that the scope of the production is beyond wearable devices and the iTouch sensor."
I highly recommend you follow their sources as they have simply quoted someone else then inflated the numbers dramatically.
Sapphire is quite appropriate when laminated with another substrate, which might be glass or lexan for all I know. This is stated or implied by most of the earlier stories on sapphire. I haven't read anything lately that would suggest otherwise.
I do have doubts that Apple can ramp up this fast for iPhone 6 production, but there is not doubt that the scope of the production is beyond wearable devices and the iTouch sensor.
Unfortunately, such applications typically use aluminum oxynitride which results in a highly expensive product.
Sapphire is quite appropriate when laminated with another substrate, which might be glass or lexan for all I know. This is stated or implied by most of the earlier stories on sapphire. I haven't read anything lately that would suggest otherwise.
I do have doubts that Apple can ramp up this fast for iPhone 6 production, but there is not doubt that the scope of the production is beyond wearable devices and the iTouch sensor.
Actually when treated they can make sapphire with a pretty high ultimate tensile strength.
As for production. It has been stated that the equipment shipped or shipping to Mesa, AZ is already capable of producing close to 100 million ~5" display covers already, and they have enough on order to ramp that up to 200 million. Once the initial testing and process is verified companies can ramp up production pretty quickly. Also, if Apple keeps to its standard release timeframe they have close to seven months before the iPhone 6 will be released. I don't see any issues with production as long as nothing unexpected happens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro
I highly recommend you follow their sources as they have simply quoted someone else then inflated the numbers dramatically.
Seriously? It is stated in this very article.
And both this article and the other provided source the original research done by 9to5 Mac, and neither of the articles inflated any numbers from the original article.
http:// 9to5mac [dot] com /2014/02/06/exclusive-apple-just-procured-enough-sapphire-crystal-furnaces-to-make-100-200m-5-inch-iphone-displays-in-arizona/
[Note: You will have to copy, paste and correct the address since AI forums replaced the original address with their own address. See below for pasted link.]
I'm gonna go on record and say I'd bet that iPhone 6 will include a sapphire glass display. You don't spend an initial upfront investment of a half a billion for watch displays. Why? Because the iWatch won't cost $700 a pop, that's why. iWatch and iPhone 6 both will have sapphire glass. And keep in mind, too, that this half a billion investment on Apple's part is just the initial disclosed investment in this technology. They may announce more payments as they are required by law to do so. After all that's the only reason we knew about this investment in the first place. Tim Cook spoke about it after those documents were published and the cat was out of the bag.
Right, because Apple has a history of making expensive strategic purchases and turning that into a product in 6 months time.
Refer to the Authentec purchase (2012) and Touch ID (2013). 14 month turnaround from acquisition to shipping product.
I'm gonna go on record and say I'd bet that iPhone 6 will include a sapphire glass display.
Disagree, even when they get the new forges to increase output, they'll not have enough stock to cover the next iPhone.
My belief is they'll start making their own Touch ID covers, lenses for the cameras and iWatch screens, learn to increase yield over the coming year, add more forges, maybe even build another plant. Then the end of next year they'll do iPhone screens.
And both this article and the other provided source the original research done by 9to5 Mac, and neither of the articles inflated any numbers from the original article.
http:// ************ /2014/02/06/exclusive-apple-just-procured-enough-sapphire-crystal-furnaces-to-make-100-200m-5-inch-iphone-displays-in-arizona/
[Note: You will have to copy, paste and delete the spaces around ************ since AI forums replaced ************ with their own address. See below for pasted link.]
[URL=http:/2014/02/06/exclusive-apple-just-procured-enough-sapphire-crystal-furnaces-to-make-100-200m-5-inch-iphone-displays-in-arizona/]http://************/2014/02/06/exclusive-apple-just-procured-enough-sapphire-crystal-furnaces-to-make-100-200m-5-inch-iphone-displays-in-arizona/[/URL]
This is as valid of proof that anyone is ever going to get without being inside one of these companies and then NDAs likely apply.
I am going to go on record once more. Apple will never release a watch. They may release a device that is worn on your wrist, but it will no more be a watch than an iPhone is a clock.
And yet it will probably be able to tell time as well, and it may be called an iWatch even though it be much much more than just a watch. Look no further than the iPhone to see precedent for this. It is a mobile computing device that happens to be able to make phone calls. But they used "Phone" in the name anyway. Same may happen to this wrist-worn device. It may be able to tell time as well as serve many other more useful functions, and it may be called iWatch. And the media will miss the point just like they did with iPhone ("$600 for a PHONE!?!?! Apple must be nuts!).
My question for you: if Apple releases a wrist-worn device, will they name it "iWatch"? And if so, does that fit your opinion above, or not?
Initial reports were that apple has built capacity for producing 200 million units worth of iPhone glass. That is an awful lot of extra capacity if i is just intended for the iwatch !
Much is being made about capacity and cost. The assumption is that the iPhone 6 will be ONE model and it is an all or nothing proposition for sapphire.
Much like the iPhone 5S and 5C models, I envision a premium model costing hundreds more WITH the sapphire screens and certainly other upgrades, as well as a lower cost option WITHOUT sapphire for a broader customer base.
This allows for the arguments regarding capacity ramp in Arizona to be moot (if capacity is indeed limited at launch - some argue otherwise) and only limiting customer choice and not limiting customer access to the iPhone 6. It also makes the cost issue moot as it allows the customer to choose whether they pick the premium package including sapphire along with the added cost, or the more basic model.
Initial reports were that apple has built capacity for producing 200 million units worth of iPhone glass.
That is an awful lot of extra capacity if i is just intended for the iwatch !
Reading the information carefully, Apple has contracted for such equipment and has not finished building the facility yet, let alone gotten to the point where they can even perform mass sampling runs for QC. Other information suggests that new processes for mass production are involved and that this is all somewhat bleeding edge from a manufacturing standpoint.
My thought is that for a device that is going to bag 50 MM+ units in a quarter, at this point you better already have your manufacturing processes nailed down, proven, and scalable. The Arizona plant doesn't sound anything like that.
Hence, I'm inclined to believe that the Arizona plant with all of this manufacturing capability is going to miss the window for this year's iPhone launch. Hope I'm wrong.
Much is being made about capacity and cost. The assumption is that the iPhone 6 will be ONE model and it is an all or nothing proposition for sapphire.
Much like the iPhone 5S and 5C models, I envision a premium model costing hundreds more WITH the sapphire screens and certainly other upgrades, as well as a lower cost option WITHOUT sapphire for a broader customer base.
This allows for the arguments regarding capacity ramp in Arizona to be moot (if capacity is indeed limited at launch - some argue otherwise) and only limiting customer choice and not limiting customer access to the iPhone 6. It also makes the cost issue moot as it allows the customer to choose whether they pick the premium package including sapphire along with the added cost, or the more basic model.
I can agree with your message here. I'll be one of those paying up for the sapphire, if (and only if) it doesn't sacrifice structural integrity to gain scratch resistance. In other words, if it shatters more easily than Gorilla Glass, then count me out. I want it all if I'm paying more $$.
Comments
Cause it's a damn message board, if we aren't assuming things on rumors (assumptions), then what the hell are we doing here.
Plus I like how my idea sounds.
... and "sounds" starts with "s".
... but so does "silly".
Maybe I was justp1ayin?
All that means is the "iWatch" might debut before the next iPhone...
This $500 million will be conveniently forgotten when we look at the iPhone 6 component costs. "Look how much profit Apple is squeezing out of their customers!"
Of course there is doubt.
Please provide evidence that Apple will eventually have the capacity to produce sufficient amounts of sapphire for 200 million 5" display devices.
The reports on what GT Advanced has ordered and received tends to support a number, area, in that range.
http://www.macrumors.com/2014/02/06/sapphire-production-future-iphones/
Which does seem quite a bit beyond the area of material needed for the mentioned sensor and wearable devices.
"but there is not doubt that the scope of the production is beyond wearable devices and the iTouch sensor."
I highly recommend you follow their sources as they have simply quoted someone else then inflated the numbers dramatically.
Unfortunately, such applications typically use aluminum oxynitride which results in a highly expensive product.
Wasn't the iWatch supposed to have a bendable display? How will they accomplish that with sapphire?
Sapphire is quite appropriate when laminated with another substrate, which might be glass or lexan for all I know. This is stated or implied by most of the earlier stories on sapphire. I haven't read anything lately that would suggest otherwise.
I do have doubts that Apple can ramp up this fast for iPhone 6 production, but there is not doubt that the scope of the production is beyond wearable devices and the iTouch sensor.
Actually when treated they can make sapphire with a pretty high ultimate tensile strength.
As for production. It has been stated that the equipment shipped or shipping to Mesa, AZ is already capable of producing close to 100 million ~5" display covers already, and they have enough on order to ramp that up to 200 million. Once the initial testing and process is verified companies can ramp up production pretty quickly. Also, if Apple keeps to its standard release timeframe they have close to seven months before the iPhone 6 will be released. I don't see any issues with production as long as nothing unexpected happens.
I highly recommend you follow their sources as they have simply quoted someone else then inflated the numbers dramatically.
Seriously? It is stated in this very article.
And both this article and the other provided source the original research done by 9to5 Mac, and neither of the articles inflated any numbers from the original article.
http:// 9to5mac [dot] com /2014/02/06/exclusive-apple-just-procured-enough-sapphire-crystal-furnaces-to-make-100-200m-5-inch-iphone-displays-in-arizona/
[Note: You will have to copy, paste and correct the address since AI forums replaced the original address with their own address. See below for pasted link.]
http://************/2014/02/06/exclusive-apple-just-procured-enough-sapphire-crystal-furnaces-to-make-100-200m-5-inch-iphone-displays-in-arizona/
This is as valid of proof that anyone is ever going to get without being inside one of these companies and then NDAs likely apply.
I'm gonna go on record and say I'd bet that iPhone 6 will include a sapphire glass display. You don't spend an initial upfront investment of a half a billion for watch displays. Why? Because the iWatch won't cost $700 a pop, that's why. iWatch and iPhone 6 both will have sapphire glass. And keep in mind, too, that this half a billion investment on Apple's part is just the initial disclosed investment in this technology. They may announce more payments as they are required by law to do so. After all that's the only reason we knew about this investment in the first place. Tim Cook spoke about it after those documents were published and the cat was out of the bag.
Right, because Apple has a history of making expensive strategic purchases and turning that into a product in 6 months time.
Refer to the Authentec purchase (2012) and Touch ID (2013). 14 month turnaround from acquisition to shipping product.
I'm gonna go on record and say I'd bet that iPhone 6 will include a sapphire glass display.
Disagree, even when they get the new forges to increase output, they'll not have enough stock to cover the next iPhone.
My belief is they'll start making their own Touch ID covers, lenses for the cameras and iWatch screens, learn to increase yield over the coming year, add more forges, maybe even build another plant. Then the end of next year they'll do iPhone screens.
That isn't the source.
I am going to go on record once more. Apple will never release a watch. They may release a device that is worn on your wrist, but it will no more be a watch than an iPhone is a clock.
And yet it will probably be able to tell time as well, and it may be called an iWatch even though it be much much more than just a watch. Look no further than the iPhone to see precedent for this. It is a mobile computing device that happens to be able to make phone calls. But they used "Phone" in the name anyway. Same may happen to this wrist-worn device. It may be able to tell time as well as serve many other more useful functions, and it may be called iWatch. And the media will miss the point just like they did with iPhone ("$600 for a PHONE!?!?! Apple must be nuts!).
My question for you: if Apple releases a wrist-worn device, will they name it "iWatch"? And if so, does that fit your opinion above, or not?
That is an awful lot of extra capacity if i is just intended for the iwatch !
Much like the iPhone 5S and 5C models, I envision a premium model costing hundreds more WITH the sapphire screens and certainly other upgrades, as well as a lower cost option WITHOUT sapphire for a broader customer base.
This allows for the arguments regarding capacity ramp in Arizona to be moot (if capacity is indeed limited at launch - some argue otherwise) and only limiting customer choice and not limiting customer access to the iPhone 6. It also makes the cost issue moot as it allows the customer to choose whether they pick the premium package including sapphire along with the added cost, or the more basic model.
As a side note, some argue the cost difference between GTAT sapphire and GLW glass is dwindling: http://seekingalpha.com/article/1957211
Initial reports were that apple has built capacity for producing 200 million units worth of iPhone glass.
That is an awful lot of extra capacity if i is just intended for the iwatch !
Reading the information carefully, Apple has contracted for such equipment and has not finished building the facility yet, let alone gotten to the point where they can even perform mass sampling runs for QC. Other information suggests that new processes for mass production are involved and that this is all somewhat bleeding edge from a manufacturing standpoint.
My thought is that for a device that is going to bag 50 MM+ units in a quarter, at this point you better already have your manufacturing processes nailed down, proven, and scalable. The Arizona plant doesn't sound anything like that.
Hence, I'm inclined to believe that the Arizona plant with all of this manufacturing capability is going to miss the window for this year's iPhone launch. Hope I'm wrong.
Thompson
Much is being made about capacity and cost. The assumption is that the iPhone 6 will be ONE model and it is an all or nothing proposition for sapphire.
Much like the iPhone 5S and 5C models, I envision a premium model costing hundreds more WITH the sapphire screens and certainly other upgrades, as well as a lower cost option WITHOUT sapphire for a broader customer base.
This allows for the arguments regarding capacity ramp in Arizona to be moot (if capacity is indeed limited at launch - some argue otherwise) and only limiting customer choice and not limiting customer access to the iPhone 6. It also makes the cost issue moot as it allows the customer to choose whether they pick the premium package including sapphire along with the added cost, or the more basic model.
As a side note, some argue the cost difference between GTAT sapphire and GLW glass is dwindling: http://seekingalpha.com/article/1957211
I can agree with your message here. I'll be one of those paying up for the sapphire, if (and only if) it doesn't sacrifice structural integrity to gain scratch resistance. In other words, if it shatters more easily than Gorilla Glass, then count me out. I want it all if I'm paying more $$.
I highly recommend you follow their sources as they have simply quoted someone else then inflated the numbers dramatically.
So what are the numbers ordered per your source? and is there a link?