|
Sapphire vs. Gorilla Glass
|
08-30-2014, 05:17 PM
BernDog wrote:Basically, yes. 
08-30-2014, 06:39 PM
Black wrote:Basically, yes. IIRC, materials science says cracks usually start at scratches. Reducing the number and depth of scratches means reducing the chance that a hard material will crack. The picture pRICE posted from the flex test shows the typical flaw that hard materials usually don't flex/bend far without breaking.
08-30-2014, 06:45 PM
Apple doesn't do anything half-ass. If any group of persons should know that, it's this one.
it is entirely possible that Apple intends to employ a heretofore unknown variant of sapphire that improves on its inherent strengths and/or remedies its inherent weaknesses. Nobody knows - until Apple product that uses this material hits the street, everything stated is mere speculation. And last time I checked, Black was a healthcare professional, not a materials engineer.
08-30-2014, 11:57 PM
The better watches have always had sapphire crystal watch faces. I can attest that they are very hard to scratch (pun intended)
08-31-2014, 11:03 AM
And, if Apple ends up not using sapphire at this point, there's going to be one hell of a firestorm over it
And AAPL may suffer for it, though not too much, and it will rebound. Once again Apple would probably be punished for not doing something they didn't say they were going to do. Either way, I suggest not dropping the device. LOL! The better watches have always had sapphire crystal watch faces. I remember first seeing sapphire watch crystals on Rado watches, a good many years ago. They were popular and stood up well to a harsh work environment, something that style of watch wasn't really designed for. I assumed this was Apple's intention when the first got into the sapphire business. I also assumed that they would look to see how it could be used in 'Phones, but didn't really expect to see it on the 6. But I love being surprised with good stuff. Apple doesn't do anything half-ass. If any group of persons should know that, it's this one. That's sig-worthy. I am constantly surprised when I see comments here that fail to consider Apple might have something planned that was heretofore unthought of, and that Apple would jump into the deep-end with no planning. Not that they haven't had missteps, but they are far from envying a "throw a ton of stuff against the wall and hope something sticks" philosophy. Apple never made a phone and went into a field of established manufacturers seems to have done OK. They aren't a typical "me, too!" company. Samsung is on it's what- fourth watch, now? No matter what Apple does in September, October, or whenever, plenty of people will have something to say about how Apple failed or could have done better. I'm waiting to see what and how they did something that didn't occur to everybody else. I'm expecting to be entertained.
08-31-2014, 02:12 PM
RAMd®d wrote: This is why following Apple is my "sports".
08-31-2014, 09:59 PM
N-OS X-tasy! wrote: You never owned one of the amazingly strong Titanium PowerBooks I take it? Titanium was going to be a wonder material and they were utter dogs. Or how about the plastic MacBook cases that suffered from years of cracked cases? Or the years of power supply failures/(silent) recalls? Apple weighs cost of component and profit margin as much as anyone, probably more so, since their profit margins are so high. Sometimes it works out sometimes it doesn't. Doesn't mean the materials chosen for the new iPhone won't be a success, but pretending every device is free from major, not even minor, defect is a little silly. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
