I've only seen Omega watches use the material though? And even then it's just for the bezels I think, apart from that we've had sim removal tools? Must be a tricky material to make or work with if it's been used in such a limited manner so far?
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 Renews Rights to Liquidmetal Technologies' Alloys for Consumer Products
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I've only seen Omega watches use the material though? And even then it's just for the bezels I think, apart from that we've had sim removal tools? Must be a tricky material to make or work with if it's been used in such a limited manner so far?
YES ... LQMT is ready :
Can Liquidmetal® alloys be used without restrictions?
No, Liquidmetal® Technologies Inc. already has long-term contractual commitments for consumer electronics and watch parts.
http://www.engelglobal.com/en/uk/liquidmetal-en.html
Can Liquidmetal® alloys be used without restrictions?
No, Liquidmetal® Technologies Inc. already has long-term contractual commitments for consumer electronics and watch parts.
http://www.engelglobal.com/en/uk/liquidmetal-en.html
Because apple are holding into the rights to it in order to suppress innovation by competitors.
If apple can innovate, no one else will either.
That explains why my iFixit bit, instead of the screws, stripped in the middle of trying to open my rMBP. The screws never showed any wear.
If both Apple and Swatch own exclusive rights in their area of expertise and neither manages to take large scale advantage of this, it might indeed be that the material itself is the issue...
(ps: guess you know this but just for those that don't, Omega is one of the many Swatch Group brands)
I think Swatch is like Volkswagen or Fiat? It owns everyone haha. But yeah I'm sure Omega wouldn't have any problems selling an all liquid metal watch so will be interesting to see what Apple do with it, if Omega, presumably, can't make an entire watch out of it yet.
This is great news for consumers. I'm excited to see Apple take these rights forward into some incredible new revolutionary products. And the best bit Apple's exclusive rights to the technology means samesung et all can't copy this time.
Yea, great news. They've done so much with the technology the past 4 years.
Last edited:
Samsung used LiquidMetal for years for corrosion/scratch resistant parts in their phones, starting back in 2002. They even sold a $1500 phone with a whole chassis made of it, in 2008, two years before Apple got involved with LM.
Could be that.
And/or perhaps LM Tech is making enough progress using Apple funds, that Apple wants to keep exclusive rights.
I think most everyone is confused about this. For the skimmers, I'll boldface:
HERE IS WHAT THE EXCLUSIVE AND THE TIME EXTENSION MEANS
What Apple originally licensed, was the perpetual exclusive rights to use, in consumer electronics, any technology created or acquired by Liquidmetal Technologies between Aug 2010 and Feb 2012.
In other words, if LiquidMetal Technologies invented a better alloy in 2011, then Apple would be the only company able to use that alloy in a consumer electronics device... forever.
However, if LM Tech invented the better alloy in 2013, anyone could use it under the original terms.
That's why Apple purchased another two years of rights that ran into 2014, and now they have purchased yet another year into 2015.
Summary: Apple's exclusive license to use LM's inventions (made between 2010 and 2015) in consumer electronics lasts forever.
It's driven by demand and design goals.
MacPro is user expandable in many ways, but big.
At the other extreme, MBA is skinny, portable, and pretty fixed.
Apart from the times Apple has copied from Samsung, Google (re: Android's features), or other companies?
Plus, enough of the article stated the metal would be used for shiny pretty buttons, and for screws so you can't see what's inside. Since a patent on a rounded rectangle is not on the inside of the unit, the competition-bashing makes no sense.
It's not about copying and improving specific features. Samsung did try to copy iPhone wholesale. Even Google agreed.
After the lawsuits, they deviate more. Without the lawsuits, they will just keep doing it since they are all about lowest cost, and jamming more specs.
I'm curious as to why. They claim Apple-related revenue is minor for them and they are losing money hand over fist with or without Apple. My only hope would be a buy-out (Samsung, are you THAT evil?) were I long. Seems Apple, if anything, holds them back at this point.
They will use this for the back of the iWatch. It will be a small, complex, precision part, which will be light, strong, molded, unibody. Rights with swatch or whomever will be worked out, as Apple always does.
it appears Apple may hold exclusive patents and rights on the use of Liquidmetal® with regards to it's use in 3D printing. I believe it has only been licensed for injection molding in the past. This would definitely be in line with what kdarling stated above.
The Liquidmetal Technologies website makes no direct mention of 3D printing capabilities for their flagship product, yet Apple apparently already has patents on it. http://www.3ders.org/articles/20131...etal-patents-two-are-3d-printing-related.html
Perhaps the sim ejector tool that was reportedly being made with LM for testing purposes was even 3D printed?
The Liquidmetal Technologies website makes no direct mention of 3D printing capabilities for their flagship product, yet Apple apparently already has patents on it. http://www.3ders.org/articles/20131...etal-patents-two-are-3d-printing-related.html
Perhaps the sim ejector tool that was reportedly being made with LM for testing purposes was even 3D printed?
Last edited:
Not that I don't like your vision on how Apple might be able to use Liquidmetal but I can't imagine for Swatch to want to support Apple in any way to enter their core market, nor for Apple to acquire them taking their size.
About as on topic as you can get with such news...
[Can't believe no-one has mentioned HEAD Tennis/Squash racquets, I would have figured that at least out of a bunch of hoighty Apple users at least someone you would have.
Sure it's not consumer electronics or jewellery, but I had one of these bad boys back in the day http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/like/190...e&hlpv=2&ops=true&viphx=1&hlpht=true&lpid=107 because my Dad was obsessed with me having the best equipment. It was nice, and even if was only a placebo affect, I did play better with the thing.]
[Can't believe no-one has mentioned HEAD Tennis/Squash racquets, I would have figured that at least out of a bunch of hoighty Apple users at least someone you would have.
Sure it's not consumer electronics or jewellery, but I had one of these bad boys back in the day http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/like/190...e&hlpv=2&ops=true&viphx=1&hlpht=true&lpid=107 because my Dad was obsessed with me having the best equipment. It was nice, and even if was only a placebo affect, I did play better with the thing.]
Do you know which model of phone this was? Was it released in the West or limited to Asia or even just Korea? Would love to see what reviewers said - positives and negatives.
Tried to a Google search but not much was returned (aside from, as you say, phones with minor parts using Liquidmetal, a USB flash drive from SanDisk, some sports equipment and some specialised/non-consumer items).
It was the 2008 Samsung Ego. 2009 UK release announcement here. Sold for $1500 to $1800.
IIRC, reviewers liked the dual SIM capability and camera, but knocked it for not having 3G.
It was sort of like a "poor" man's version of the 2004 Vertu Ascent series, which also used LiquidMetal, but additionally had leather, a sapphire screen and 24 hour concierge service... and cost $5,000 to $10,000.
Here's a funny NY Times review where they ran over the 2005 Vertu Ascent Motorsport version with a Porsche to prove the LiquidMetal strength and resistance to scratches.
Last edited:
Cheers.
Liquidmetal with its properties excites me. Really sounds like a material which would make a great outer casing for a phone.
There are obviously some issues holding it back from being used in mass market products and I hope Apple can overcome them. But wherever it has been used in small quantities like the above Samsung and Vertu phones, Omega watches, military uses etc. it seems to review/work well (talking purely about the use of Liquidmetal and not the product overall).
The failure I've come across is in golf drivers which occasionally had a tendency to shatter on impact - but with the 'glass like' properties it almost seems like an obvious issue which could've/should've been unearthed during testing (and something which shouldn't affect its use in consumer electronics).
Tried on an Omega watch made using Liquid Metal, can't say I was all that impressed, looked duller and darker than my stainless steel one. Although I do appreciate it's physical properties.