Maybe we’re just too stupid to understand Apples genius?
Lol what alternative hell are we living in smh
Lol what alternative hell are we living in smh
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Addresses 2018 iPad Pro 'Bending' Controversy, Says Subtle Deviations May Be More Visible Due to New Design
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple used to focus on build quality when their specs weren’t the best, now that they’ve got the specs to boast about in these latest A-series chips build quality for iPad has gone down the toilet.
Forget the "micron" talk and speak in a language a large segment of the world's population can understand: millimeters. 400 microns is 0.4mm. (And yes, even Americans understand that unit of measure if you are an engineer or scientist.) I'm sorry but the photo shown in this article shows a bend of more than 0.4mm. I doubt you could even see a bend of less than 0.4mm. Apple should replace products that are clearly bent like the one shown in the article's main photo.
I like how they act like they intended for these iScreens to bend. Sell them for $99.95 and they can bend all they want. Nobody cares about chamfered plastic antennas excuse when their iTouch is rocking back and forth on a table.
If that's the case then why would Apple say something like this "The new straight edges and the presence of the antenna splits may make subtle deviations in flatness more visible only from certain viewing angles"
0.4mm should be imperceptible like you say, yet Apple makes that type of comment that the imperfections may be more visible from certain viewing angles. There seems to be a contradiction.
My take is that the flaws are far more than what Apple is admitting, it's more than 0.4mm, and they are noticeable and Apple is trying to downplay or justify it by saying it's a new manufacturing process.
Last edited:
I take any admission from apple as a sign that there is a problem, the measurements and reasons given are only a cover/smoke screen I believe, It allows uneducated a form of acceptance to the issue. I fear it will be a larger problem which will continue to UNFOLD as we live with our new devices.
I never wanted thinner, just a new updated version.
I never wanted thinner, just a new updated version.
This is the same that happen with the iPhone 6 Plus, they will fix it next gen with better design. But this should not of happen in the first place.
Apple quoting manufacture tolerance is all well and good but what about overall long term strength of the device subject to fatigue in daily operation?
The question I would love Apple to answer is this - “Will a 12.9” iPad Pro gen3 bend at a significantly weaker loading point as compared to the previous generation iPad Pro with home button in a typical transportation scenario (to be determined but a backpack is probably the best one). Additionally a comparison between iPad and MacBook 12” and MacBook Pro 13.3”.
Bends at the point of manufacture are what they are - 14 days return covers that. However Apple are pushing and pricing these iPad Pros as laptop replacements - as such people will expect to transport and use them in a way they have always done with a laptop. Apple needs to communicate this to their customers as it’s not fair selling them a ‘laptop replacement’ but omitting such a key metric that affects the product in typical transportation.
Clearly the iPad is going to be weaker than a folded shut laptop - but we should be told how much strength of the chasis has been reduced down at each hardware revision.
Thinness always comes at the price of durability, unless you increase the strength grade of the metal or revise the frame design - They’ll know the bend point of these devices already, so should release the data - unless the gen 3 is significantly weaker than the gen 2 and they designed in that way in order to have a silly thin device that bends in use.
The question I would love Apple to answer is this - “Will a 12.9” iPad Pro gen3 bend at a significantly weaker loading point as compared to the previous generation iPad Pro with home button in a typical transportation scenario (to be determined but a backpack is probably the best one). Additionally a comparison between iPad and MacBook 12” and MacBook Pro 13.3”.
Bends at the point of manufacture are what they are - 14 days return covers that. However Apple are pushing and pricing these iPad Pros as laptop replacements - as such people will expect to transport and use them in a way they have always done with a laptop. Apple needs to communicate this to their customers as it’s not fair selling them a ‘laptop replacement’ but omitting such a key metric that affects the product in typical transportation.
Clearly the iPad is going to be weaker than a folded shut laptop - but we should be told how much strength of the chasis has been reduced down at each hardware revision.
Thinness always comes at the price of durability, unless you increase the strength grade of the metal or revise the frame design - They’ll know the bend point of these devices already, so should release the data - unless the gen 3 is significantly weaker than the gen 2 and they designed in that way in order to have a silly thin device that bends in use.
Last edited:
Even a straight line can appear curved with the right kind of breaks. See for example these examples. I believe this is why some iPads are appearing more curved/bent than they actually are. In other words, the vast majority of the new iPads are probably within Apple‘s specification (under 400 micron deviation), but they appear more bent when seen from the right angles.
On the other hand, there does seem to be the issue of some iPads being genuinely bent, but most of the pictures showing such iPads seem to be very annectodal evidence and can probably be attributed to user fault and manufacturing defects.
Apperently the picture used in this article has nothing to do with bent iPads from factory https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ible-due-to-new-design.2163794/#post-26969970
I hope you’re right, and they don’t push it through like the terrible butterfly keyboards.
Don’t forget antennagate. The engineers have stated to Jobs that the new antenna design can compromise reception, but Jobs sided with Ive and green lighted the iPhone 4 design. Long story short, free case and fixed design for the CDMA version and iPhone 4S.
So it’s not new that Apple sometimes sided with designers instead of engineers, namely due to Ive’s strong position in the company thanks to the blessing from Jobs.
Imo same story again here. That’s why it’s my principal not to buy any new Apple products where it’s the first version. Waiting for the second revision (or even third) will give you a more perfected product in lieu of patience.
So according to Apple, the latest iPad Pros are actually held to a stricter standard for flatness than previous iPads, but the wrinkle is that even the smallest variations may now be more visible than on previous models due to the new straight edges of the device.
Doesn't this automatically obviate every single criticism of the new iPad Pro that doesn't involve extremely bent iPads? If nobody had complained of older iPads bending (or appearing bent), then it should be even less of any issue now.
As for how strong these iPads will hold up under daily wear and tear, time will have to tell, I suppose.
That's the reality of working in a design-led company like Apple, I guess. As an engineer, it's not your job to tell the designers that it can't be done; it's your job to make it happen somehow.
Doesn't this automatically obviate every single criticism of the new iPad Pro that doesn't involve extremely bent iPads? If nobody had complained of older iPads bending (or appearing bent), then it should be even less of any issue now.
As for how strong these iPads will hold up under daily wear and tear, time will have to tell, I suppose.
That's the reality of working in a design-led company like Apple, I guess. As an engineer, it's not your job to tell the designers that it can't be done; it's your job to make it happen somehow.
Microscopic?
These bends are quite visible in the new iPads, and are not in other tablets, to include prevues generation iPads - that is, Apple can do better.
Since you're supposed to buy a new one every year this is an irrelevant question?
Oh, stuff the turd polishing already. There is nothing 'microscopic' about that bend.
Actually it does not obviate every single criticism, this is not a bold new world for Apple, iPhones 5 and 5s has straight edges. They did no show up the slightest wrinkles or deviations , all designed them correctly ! It was rhe 6 they got wrong in fact , the 6 plus , and that is the comparison here, design of structural integrity
Whilst there are assumptions and presumptions in many posts there is generally one misconception or lacking clarification on simply you can return it within 14 days be it in spec or any other reason
This return/exchange period is denied to many genuine Apple customers as it is not a global policy from Apple.
There are many places where Apples 14 day return policy "you will be thrilled with the products" etc is non-existent and to casually fob this possible issue off as Apple will allow simply your money back in not true
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.apple.com/my/shop/browse/open/salespolicies#standardexchangepolicy
3. Standard Exchange Policy
All products purchased at Apple Store in Malaysia cannot be returned or exchanged under these Terms. Exceptions for exchange will be allowed for defective products only. If you believe that your product is defective, please call Apple Store Customer Service at 1800-80-6419. If Apple determines, in its sole discretion, that the product is defective, you will be eligible to exchange your product. Apple reserves the right to test your defective products.
To send back a product eligible for exchange, simply follow the instruction of Apple Store Customer Service and send back your product with the original receipt (or gift receipt) and original packaging within 14 days of the date you receive the product.
Please note the following:
As with many Apple details they are very cleverly written with often no clear or precise reference
This is typified in the current statement:
"This flatness specification allows for no more than 400 microns of deviation across the length of any side"
This can be interpreted several ways eg the device could be rippled yet as long as each ripple is less than 400 microns it's in spec or if bowed or arched is 400microns at the centre twice the allowable deviation etc
The same goes for these:
"The design of these new iPad Pro models incorporates a precision aluminum unibody enclosure that is strong, light, and durable"
"After the plastic cools, the entire enclosure is finished with a precision CNC machining operation, yielding a seamless integration of plastic and aluminum into a single, strong enclosure"
There is lots of nice words like precision, strong, durable that have no detailed definition or reference point
The statement seems contradictory or somewhat obscure as any bend induced by the bonding and cooling process you would of thought "the precision CNC machining operation" which is now of a higher spec would of literally machined "flat" to spec. IMO this is just smoke and mirrors and we just take their word that it is "new iPad Pro models meet an even tighter specification for flatness than previous generations" but this could be any number from 1 micron
The human eye has a reasonable level of accuracy of around 10mm in 45000mm according to researchers of ancient great pyramids, well before simple trigonometry and CNC machines were available.
If we simply take Apple 400 microns 0.4mm over 280.6mm (IPP 12.9") that's 1 in 701 opposed to 1 in 4500 of ancient Egyptians LOL
While flatness for some functions of design is of lessor importance and errs towards cosmetics it's undeniable that rightly or wrongly Apple have a perceived questionable problem with the new IPads. This has propagated further to other aspects of endurance, strength and their ability to meet the public perception of the companies image of quality and aftersales support or warranty
There is a precedence set on several if not more previous issues and how they have been dealt with that leads to Apple not being given the benefit of the doubt
This return/exchange period is denied to many genuine Apple customers as it is not a global policy from Apple.
There are many places where Apples 14 day return policy "you will be thrilled with the products" etc is non-existent and to casually fob this possible issue off as Apple will allow simply your money back in not true
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.apple.com/my/shop/browse/open/salespolicies#standardexchangepolicy
3. Standard Exchange Policy
All products purchased at Apple Store in Malaysia cannot be returned or exchanged under these Terms. Exceptions for exchange will be allowed for defective products only. If you believe that your product is defective, please call Apple Store Customer Service at 1800-80-6419. If Apple determines, in its sole discretion, that the product is defective, you will be eligible to exchange your product. Apple reserves the right to test your defective products.
To send back a product eligible for exchange, simply follow the instruction of Apple Store Customer Service and send back your product with the original receipt (or gift receipt) and original packaging within 14 days of the date you receive the product.
Please note the following:
- Eligible products can be exchanged only in the country or region in which they were originally purchased.
- Apple provides security features to enable you to protect your product in case of loss or theft. If you do not disable these features prior to sending back your device for an exchange, Apple may refuse to exchange.
As with many Apple details they are very cleverly written with often no clear or precise reference
This is typified in the current statement:
"This flatness specification allows for no more than 400 microns of deviation across the length of any side"
This can be interpreted several ways eg the device could be rippled yet as long as each ripple is less than 400 microns it's in spec or if bowed or arched is 400microns at the centre twice the allowable deviation etc
The same goes for these:
"The design of these new iPad Pro models incorporates a precision aluminum unibody enclosure that is strong, light, and durable"
"After the plastic cools, the entire enclosure is finished with a precision CNC machining operation, yielding a seamless integration of plastic and aluminum into a single, strong enclosure"
There is lots of nice words like precision, strong, durable that have no detailed definition or reference point
The statement seems contradictory or somewhat obscure as any bend induced by the bonding and cooling process you would of thought "the precision CNC machining operation" which is now of a higher spec would of literally machined "flat" to spec. IMO this is just smoke and mirrors and we just take their word that it is "new iPad Pro models meet an even tighter specification for flatness than previous generations" but this could be any number from 1 micron
The human eye has a reasonable level of accuracy of around 10mm in 45000mm according to researchers of ancient great pyramids, well before simple trigonometry and CNC machines were available
.If we simply take Apple 400 microns 0.4mm over 280.6mm (IPP 12.9") that's 1 in 701 opposed to 1 in 4500 of ancient Egyptians LOL
While flatness for some functions of design is of lessor importance and errs towards cosmetics it's undeniable that rightly or wrongly Apple have a perceived questionable problem with the new IPads. This has propagated further to other aspects of endurance, strength and their ability to meet the public perception of the companies image of quality and aftersales support or warranty
There is a precedence set on several if not more previous issues and how they have been dealt with that leads to Apple not being given the benefit of the doubt
