The factory that's being built is far too big to just pump out watch screens, camera covers, touch ID buttons and watch sensor covers. So there's definitely something cooking. What that is going to be, is anybody's guess.
And of course you have the expertise to correlate the size of a sapphire factory with its output, right?
$1B in revenues for over 200,000,000 devices per year averages $5 per device, and the watch face will cost a lot more. I don't see anything in the numbers (size of factory, Apple's investment, or GTAT projected revenue) that clearly indicates additional large volumes for Apple.
I kept all my iPhones in my back pocket since the original, and I've never had a problem of easily cracking the screen when it's dropped. If you're noticing more cracked screens with women, it's more likely that they have smaller hands making it more difficult to hold onto their phones, increasing the odds of it being dropped.
how tight do you wear your pants, young female wear them real tight, and when you put a phone in them it bend the phone, most guys pants do not have tight rear pocket and they tend to be off to the side so when you sit your not sitting directly on the phone.
If you been the phone what it is doing is creating stress in the glass and as those stressed build it only take a small impact on the glass surface to make it break.
This makes sense. There doesn't seem to be much of an upside to sapphire compared to Apple's new ion-infused glass anyway.
People would rather a screen that is lighter, clearer, brighter, and less prone to shattering anyway.
As far as apple's partnership with GT, demand for iPhone 6, iPads, and the future Watch could all exhaust the sapphire supply without even adding iPhone screen panels to the mix.
Right and now sapphire is one more component that Apple need and they control the supply of. There may well be another product we don't know about, still to come, that utilizes sapphire too. The ramp up seems to be excessive for just the ?Watch alone. It's all good and I am sure GTAT will do very well in the long run.
And of course you have the expertise to correlate the size of a sapphire factory with its output, right?
$1B in revenues for over 200,000,000 devices per year averages $5 per device, and the watch face will cost a lot more. I don't see anything in the numbers (size of factory, Apple's investment, or GTAT projected revenue) that clearly indicates additional large volumes for Apple.
Please cite the line in my post where I said $1 billion in revenue.
Based on the size and number of furnaces and the sheer square footage of the plant (in comparison to other plants), the production potential seems to be well beyond what's needed for the watch and the current iPhone lines.
Just do the math and work out how much sapphire 200 million phones and 20 million watches would consume. They would never have needed Mesa. Salem alone would have been enough.
Is "cracking" the same as "shattering?" My understanding is that sapphire is more resistant to scratching than Gorilla Glass, but is MORE likely to shatter on impact. Is that not correct?
That didn't prevent the screen on my 4 from smashing when it hit the sidewalk, even though it was the type that curled around the edges and protruded above the screen surface. The energy absorption in anything less than an Otterbox is too limited to protect the device from impacts great enough to smash the screen.
Aw, that ruins my idea for improving the net aperture on the rear-facing camera by ditching the sapphire cover and replacing it with Gorilla Glass! It would be like removing a ND filter!
It would shatter if it weren't bonded to the screen below.
As I said, the 4 had glass up to the corners, unprotected. On both sides. That made it more likely it would break, even with a case, but much less likely than without the case. It's unfortunate that the way it was dropped that it did break. It's most likely to break if it lands on a corner.
We can look at two popular plastics. Acrylic and polycarbonate. Acrylic has better light transmission. But that doesn't prevent polycarbonate from being used as Windows, and for lenses on better glasses, and in camera lenses. The reason is that in the thicknesses normally used, the difference is negligible. If you look through two pieces of those plastics or sapphire and glass, you won't see much of a difference, just a few percent. But if you look through a thick piece, say an inch, or more, then you will.
Sapphire has been used for phone covers for years. The ridiculously expensive Vertu phones, previously owned by Nokia, have been using sapphire. I'd like to know what the breakage of their phones are.
Say, in 2014-2015 Apple sells 200,000,000 million (IDK, 400,000,000 million?) devices requiring TouchID Covers, Camera Lens Covers, Sensor Covers ...
The big question, then, is what is Apple going to do with all the single-cell sapphire that it has contracted?
One possibility is the manufacture of semiconductor devices: CPUs, GPUs, RAM (DRAM and SRAM), SDD storage, etc.
Sapphire has excellent heat dissipation and non-conductor characteristics. This means that, using sapphire, more transistors can be packed in a smaller amount of space -- requiring less power, generating less heat ...
The tech is called SoS (Silicon on Sapphire) or SOI (Siiicon on Insulator). It offers great promise.
You can surf the for SoS or SoI and find many articles!
It just could be that the doubling of the transistors on the A8 are partially due to use of SoS.
Apple won't have to do much to differentiate the 6S from the 6. Main benefit for Apple is a second year of manufacturing the same basic design, so Foxconn doesn't have to retool or retrain their people. 6S will be able to be built faster, more efficiently, and more cost effectively than the 6. Demand will be there after a year of press coverage of how great the 6 and 6 Plus are, so those who just bought 5S a year ago will be ready to jump on the 6S in 2015Q3 after their two-year commitments are up. Apple will introduce the A9, maybe more RAM but not a lot (maybe 1.2 gig or 1.5 gig). A9 will provide speed boost, maybe improved battery by reducing size of other components in gen 2 and increasing battery size to take over that space. And, iOS 9 will be, of course, awesome, which will motivate people to make the move. And, iPhone 6 size increase from their iPhone 5S will be motivation as well. Apple is so smart to do two years of same basic design with simple incremental improvements in the second year - everyone is locked into two year agreements for the most part, so why not 'spread' the same basic design across both years? Focus on manufacturing efficiencies and incremental improvement to reduce cost, yet still impress the hell out of the 'S' year iPhone users every two years,
Obviously manufacturing will be more efficient for Apple but for consumers Apple always adds a "killer" feature to its S models to help them stand out.
3GS - video camera
4S - Siri
5S - Touch ID
6S- ???
"And next year, two of three Apple Watch models will also feature sapphire covers, and the material will also be used on the back to protect the wearable device's heart rate sensor."
Sapphire is not used to protect the sensors on the back of the watch, rather it's used for the superior dielectric and light transfer properties. Skin doesn't scratch glass, use some common sense.
AppleInsider first discovered back in 2010 that Apple had entered into a $20 million exclusive arrangement to use amorphous metal alloys with unique atomic structures that could make products thinner, lighter, and resistant to wear and corrosion.
While the idea of Liquidmetal was exciting, the reality of the material is that it's too unique and too expensive to produce in such large quantities.
-----------------
AI first you say that Apple can use amorphous alloys, plural, then you say Liquidmetal is too expensive to produce in large quantities,
But 1; Is the sim ejector tool to expensive to produce in large quantitates ?!
2; Any BMG alloy can be a Liquidmetal Technology alloy, especially if it is manufactured on an Engel Liquidmetal injection molding machine. Liquidmetal Technology is as much about new metal mixtures as well as how these new alloys are formed with Amorphous properties.
3: The new watches do indeed have "...metal alloys with unique atomic structure that could make products thinner, lighter, and more resistant to wear and corrosion."
those properties to be exact, as stated on the Apple Watch pages, are: -the aluminium alloy is 60% stronger and "very light" -the 18kt gold is 2 times harder -the stainless steel is 40% harder and resistant to chips.
these are all different BMG alloys ..... the sim ejector tool is also a different BMG alloy.
Liquidmetal Technology does not market just one single BMG alloy.
Does this mean we don't get to bash Corning Gorilla Glass in forums anymore?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35
LOL!
This is just like one of those 'scientific' studies done by Big Tobacco companies that 'proved' that smoking is not addictive.
Corning is shaking in their boots.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35
Gorilla Glass is extremely flawed. The reason is GG is covered by a thin layer of material that keeps the glass relatively stronger than regular glass. But that thin layer material is not very scratch resistant. And once that thin layer is scratched the entire plate is severely weakened. On the other hand sapphire is not a layered product. The entire crystal is strong and resists scratches much better.
Gorilla Glass = man wearing a bullet proof suit. Once the suit is compromised the glass easily cracks
It would shatter if it weren't bonded to the screen below.
As I said, the 4 had glass up to the corners, unprotected. On both sides. That made it more likely it would break, even with a case, but much less likely than without the case. It's unfortunate that the way it was dropped that it did break. It's most likely to break if it lands on a corner.
We can look at two popular plastics. Acrylic and polycarbonate. Acrylic has better light transmission. But that doesn't prevent polycarbonate from being used as Windows, and for lenses on better glasses, and in camera lenses. The reason is that in the thicknesses normally used, the difference is negligible. If you look through two pieces of those plastics or sapphire and glass, you won't see much of a difference, just a few percent. But if you look through a thick piece, say an inch, or more, then you will.
Indeed, so many of the criticisms seem to ignore that the application is a laminate, not simple a Sapphire screen.
A sapphire screen and LiquidMetal case (crystalline screen and amorphous case instead of the other way around) would be worth doing for the sheer weirdness factor.
Comments
And of course you have the expertise to correlate the size of a sapphire factory with its output, right?
$1B in revenues for over 200,000,000 devices per year averages $5 per device, and the watch face will cost a lot more. I don't see anything in the numbers (size of factory, Apple's investment, or GTAT projected revenue) that clearly indicates additional large volumes for Apple.
I kept all my iPhones in my back pocket since the original, and I've never had a problem of easily cracking the screen when it's dropped. If you're noticing more cracked screens with women, it's more likely that they have smaller hands making it more difficult to hold onto their phones, increasing the odds of it being dropped.
how tight do you wear your pants, young female wear them real tight, and when you put a phone in them it bend the phone, most guys pants do not have tight rear pocket and they tend to be off to the side so when you sit your not sitting directly on the phone.
If you been the phone what it is doing is creating stress in the glass and as those stressed build it only take a small impact on the glass surface to make it break.
Right and now sapphire is one more component that Apple need and they control the supply of. There may well be another product we don't know about, still to come, that utilizes sapphire too. The ramp up seems to be excessive for just the ?Watch alone. It's all good and I am sure GTAT will do very well in the long run.
Please cite the line in my post where I said $1 billion in revenue.
Based on the size and number of furnaces and the sheer square footage of the plant (in comparison to other plants), the production potential seems to be well beyond what's needed for the watch and the current iPhone lines.
Just do the math and work out how much sapphire 200 million phones and 20 million watches would consume. They would never have needed Mesa. Salem alone would have been enough.
It would shatter if it weren't bonded to the screen below.
As I said, the 4 had glass up to the corners, unprotected. On both sides. That made it more likely it would break, even with a case, but much less likely than without the case. It's unfortunate that the way it was dropped that it did break. It's most likely to break if it lands on a corner.
We can look at two popular plastics. Acrylic and polycarbonate. Acrylic has better light transmission. But that doesn't prevent polycarbonate from being used as Windows, and for lenses on better glasses, and in camera lenses. The reason is that in the thicknesses normally used, the difference is negligible. If you look through two pieces of those plastics or sapphire and glass, you won't see much of a difference, just a few percent. But if you look through a thick piece, say an inch, or more, then you will.
Need to be, know you won't be.
Sapphire has been used for phone covers for years. The ridiculously expensive Vertu phones, previously owned by Nokia, have been using sapphire. I'd like to know what the breakage of their phones are.
The big question, then, is what is Apple going to do with all the single-cell sapphire that it has contracted?
One possibility is the manufacture of semiconductor devices: CPUs, GPUs, RAM (DRAM and SRAM), SDD storage, etc.
Sapphire has excellent heat dissipation and non-conductor characteristics. This means that, using sapphire, more transistors can be packed in a smaller amount of space -- requiring less power, generating less heat ...
The tech is called SoS (Silicon on Sapphire) or SOI (Siiicon on Insulator). It offers great promise.
You can surf the for SoS or SoI and find many articles!
It just could be that the doubling of the transistors on the A8 are partially due to use of SoS.
Obviously manufacturing will be more efficient for Apple but for consumers Apple always adds a "killer" feature to its S models to help them stand out.
3GS - video camera
4S - Siri
5S - Touch ID
6S- ???
What can Apple add to make the 6S stand out?
Double the battery with double the C/GPU power?
Sapphire is not used to protect the sensors on the back of the watch, rather it's used for the superior dielectric and light transfer properties. Skin doesn't scratch glass, use some common sense.
While the idea of Liquidmetal was exciting, the reality of the material is that it's too unique and too expensive to produce in such large quantities.
-----------------
AI first you say that Apple can use amorphous alloys, plural, then you say Liquidmetal is too expensive to produce in large quantities,
But
1; Is the sim ejector tool to expensive to produce in large quantitates ?!
2; Any BMG alloy can be a Liquidmetal Technology alloy, especially if it is manufactured on an Engel Liquidmetal injection molding machine. Liquidmetal Technology is as much about new metal mixtures as well as how these new alloys are formed with Amorphous properties.
3: The new watches do indeed have "...metal alloys with unique atomic structure that could make products thinner, lighter, and more resistant to wear and corrosion."
those properties to be exact, as stated on the Apple Watch pages, are:
-the aluminium alloy is 60% stronger and "very light"
-the 18kt gold is 2 times harder
-the stainless steel is 40% harder and resistant to chips.
these are all different BMG alloys ..... the sim ejector tool is also a different BMG alloy.
Liquidmetal Technology does not market just one single BMG alloy.
I thought we discovered that that wasn’t LiquidMetal.
Silly AI. Analysts are never wrong!
Does this mean we don't get to bash Corning Gorilla Glass in forums anymore?
Originally Posted by sog35
LOL!
This is just like one of those 'scientific' studies done by Big Tobacco companies that 'proved' that smoking is not addictive.
Corning is shaking in their boots.
Gorilla Glass is extremely flawed. The reason is GG is covered by a thin layer of material that keeps the glass relatively stronger than regular glass. But that thin layer material is not very scratch resistant. And once that thin layer is scratched the entire plate is severely weakened. On the other hand sapphire is not a layered product. The entire crystal is strong and resists scratches much better.
Gorilla Glass = man wearing a bullet proof suit. Once the suit is compromised the glass easily cracks
Sapphire = block of iron
Apple is also expected to introduce a new iPad Air and iPad mini this fall with Touch ID, presumably covered by sapphire as well.
Wow. I forgot about the iPad lines and their synthetic sapphire camera lenses and (future) Touch ID sensors.
And who knows? Maybe there will be 4.7" and 5.5" iPod touch models with synthetic sapphire
camera lenses and Touch ID sensors too. Could breathe new life into iPod touch sales.
It would shatter if it weren't bonded to the screen below.
As I said, the 4 had glass up to the corners, unprotected. On both sides. That made it more likely it would break, even with a case, but much less likely than without the case. It's unfortunate that the way it was dropped that it did break. It's most likely to break if it lands on a corner.
We can look at two popular plastics. Acrylic and polycarbonate. Acrylic has better light transmission. But that doesn't prevent polycarbonate from being used as Windows, and for lenses on better glasses, and in camera lenses. The reason is that in the thicknesses normally used, the difference is negligible. If you look through two pieces of those plastics or sapphire and glass, you won't see much of a difference, just a few percent. But if you look through a thick piece, say an inch, or more, then you will.
Indeed, so many of the criticisms seem to ignore that the application is a laminate, not simple a Sapphire screen.
I'm waiting for a killer iPhone that has rounded edge sapphire glass front and back, joined with an iPhone 4'ish Liquid Metal band around the edges!
Basically scratch proof front, back, and sides.
Rumor mills take note.