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.
Apples special gold isnt so special after all
- Thread starter pragmatous
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm an apple fanboy.
----------
Apple stated they invented a new kind of allow making it stronger but they're using the standard process used by everyone.
It's a lie.
When you say something, then that something is false, that is a lie. Apple is caught lying. That's the point of the article.
The question is: Why did apple lie? Was it knowingly or did something happen and had to change to the standard process?
You can't market your item and make claims that it's a new kind of alloy and then use alloy that's used all the time. It's a marketing no-no. Companies get fined for false advertisements all the time.
That's what this is. A false advertisement. Apple needs to fix it.
----------
Apple stated they invented a new kind of allow making it stronger but they're using the standard process used by everyone.
It's a lie.
When you say something, then that something is false, that is a lie. Apple is caught lying. That's the point of the article.
The question is: Why did apple lie? Was it knowingly or did something happen and had to change to the standard process?
You can't market your item and make claims that it's a new kind of alloy and then use alloy that's used all the time. It's a marketing no-no. Companies get fined for false advertisements all the time.
That's what this is. A false advertisement. Apple needs to fix it.
Just wanted to point out that there is no need to wait for the patent to be approved before using it in a product. In fact, if companies waited for patent approval before bringing out products, they would be way outdated by the time they are released, because patent approval takes YEARS.
You can always go and retroactively sue / demand license fees from your competitors once the patent is approved, since your rights to the patent starts from the day you filed your application.
While that may be true, they can't really get in trouble because they never actually advertised this (Ive was merely quoted as saying "The molecules are closer together in Apple gold" in an interview) and even if they did, they had the disclaimer on Apple website about requiring FCC approval and its features being subject to change until then, at which point they could have removed such language.
Much ado over nothing IMO
Only a very tiny minority will be buying the Edition anyway
And anyone who is... isn't likely to be scrutinizing the gold composition looking for value
I seriously doubt the people who are posturing and arguing in the forums and on blogs about it will be making a purchase, so who cares?
Only a very tiny minority will be buying the Edition anyway
And anyone who is... isn't likely to be scrutinizing the gold composition looking for value
I seriously doubt the people who are posturing and arguing in the forums and on blogs about it will be making a purchase, so who cares?
Right. As long as they change their language along with changing materials it's probably fine.
You can't say this device is made out of solid 24k gold, sell it for 10k dollars, and it's only plastic with gold paint.
You can't say this device is made out of solid 24k gold, sell it for 10k dollars, and it's only plastic with gold paint.
It does seem like a strange thing to say since it IS a conventional alloy. The normal way to get molecules closer together is to lower the temperature.
Or forging. Believe this is why forging results in stronger metal than casting.
As someone pointed out, you don't have to wait until a patent is approved to use it. More to the point, Apple does not wait at all:
Out of those "200 patents" Apple had applied for when the iPhone came out, how many were already granted? I think none, or almost none.
Heck, swipe to unlock and bounceback didn't get approved until late 2010 and 2008, IIRC. (And then greatly repealed later on by the USPTO.)
Apple did not lie. In fact, they're really good at telling the truth, and nothing but the truth, but not the whole truth.
--
Apple: "we took a refined 316L stainless steel — an alloy that is remarkably corrosion resistant — and cold forged it to make it up to 80 percent harder." "We also reduce impurities to achieve the mirror finish. "
Translation: This is all true. But what we didn't tell you, is that EVERYONE does this to make metal harder and shinier.
--
Apple: "To harvest the crystal, we use a very thin diamond-cutting wire. The sapphire is then precision-machined into its final form and polished for many hours to produce the desired finish."
Translation: See above. Another dirt common method. Although the use of the royal "we" is amusing since they almost certainly buy the crystals already finished from a third party factory that's long been dedicated to doing this.
--
Apple: "Each has a watch case crafted from 18-karat gold that our metallurgists have developed to be up to twice as hard as standard gold. "
Translation: Like everyone else, we buy 18 kt gold that has been rolled into work hardened bars and cut into blanks. These are commonly at least twice as hard as regular 24 kt gold. But since you don't know that everyone else does the same thing up to that point, we sound special to you.
--
The upshot is, Apple does tell the truth. They just count on people being ignorant of manufacturing processes, and thus easy to impress.
Personally, I think that people who spend more time watching shows like "How It's Made" are less likely to fall prey to this kind of marketing.
Don't even get me started on how much the new round Mac case has in common with millions of deep extruded and robot polished pots and pans. But the way Apple tells it, such common methods seem amazing
The upshot is, Apple does tell the truth. They just count on people being ignorant of manufacturing processes, and thus easy to impress.
Personally, I think that people who spend more time watching shows like "How It's Made" are less likely to fall prey to this kind of marketing.
Don't even get me started on how much the new round Mac case has in common with millions of deep extruded and robot polished pots and pans. But the way Apple tells it, such common methods seem amazing
It's called Marketing 101. That said, Apple products usually do have great fit and finish. Other companies have taken notice (look at the Galaxy S6, for instance), but Apple was ahead of the game on this. For the Watch, it appears that Apple took its cues from the watch industry, while others such as Samsung and Motorola stayed closer to the tech industry for their earlier products.
The mechanism for attaching the bands does appear to be something new (not "revolutionary" but an improvement for swapping bands easily), and the modern buckle is an interesting take on the clasp mechanism. Also, the space black method is using DLC (probably applied using a PVD method), when cheaper alternatives exist.
Good point. Apple is amazing at their marketing.
As someone pointed out, you don't have to wait until a patent is approved to use it. More to the point, Apple does not wait at all:
Out of those "200 patents" Apple had applied for when the iPhone came out, how many were already granted? I think none, or almost none.
Heck, swipe to unlock and bounceback didn't get approved until late 2010 and 2008, IIRC. (And then greatly repealed later on by the USPTO.)
Apple did not lie. In fact, they're really good at telling the truth, and nothing but the truth, but not the whole truth.
--
Apple: "we took a refined 316L stainless steel an alloy that is remarkably corrosion resistant and cold forged it to make it up to 80 percent harder." "We also reduce impurities to achieve the mirror finish. "
Translation: This is all true. But what we didn't tell you, is that EVERYONE does this to make metal harder and shinier.
--
Apple: "To harvest the crystal, we use a very thin diamond-cutting wire. The sapphire is then precision-machined into its final form and polished for many hours to produce the desired finish."
Translation: See above. Another dirt common method. Although the use of the royal "we" is amusing since they almost certainly buy the crystals already finished from a third party factory that's long been dedicated to doing this.
--
Apple: "Each has a watch case crafted from 18-karat gold that our metallurgists have developed to be up to twice as hard as standard gold. "
Translation: Like everyone else, we buy 18 kt gold that has been rolled into work hardened bars and cut into blanks. These are commonly at least twice as hard as regular 24 kt gold. But since you don't know that everyone else does the same thing up to that point, we sound special to you.
--
The upshot is, Apple does tell the truth. They just count on people being ignorant of manufacturing processes, and thus easy to impress.
Personally, I think that people who spend more time watching shows like "How It's Made" are less likely to fall prey to this kind of marketing.
Don't even get me started on how much the new round Mac case has in common with millions of deep extruded and robot polished pots and pans. But the way Apple tells it, such common methods seem amazing
Glad that it was settled, that Apple didn't use less gold than other brands.
About the process of making gold, read this.
http://atomicdelights.com/blog/a-glimpse-at-how-the-apple-watch-is-made
It was written by someone who has experience in this field. But if you don't believe any of them, then you can sue. When you won, you can come back here and gloat.
Until then..
Last edited:
Coincidentally I was flicking through a magazine yesterday and saw a Hublot advert that made a big thing of their "Magic" gold which does use a ceramic matrix. It's a fascinating process that starts with a ceramic blank full of microscopic holes. Molten gold is then forced into the blank under tremendous pressure to fill the holes. Pictures and more here: http://www.watchtime.com/wristwatch-industry-news/technology/hard-timers-hublot-conjured-magic-gold/
Apple obviously hasn't trademarked, "Magic"!
Apple is good in marketing and advertising their products. They emphasize an ordinary process to make it sound special, unlike certain companies who make a special something sounds ordinary. The technique is telling the truth that not many people know about, and make it sounds so ground breaking.
But that's not all about talking. Apple did set a very high standard bar for every components of their product from Raw to Finishing.
But that's not all about talking. Apple did set a very high standard bar for every components of their product from Raw to Finishing.
It's all going to be OK. There's so many other aspects to focus on, the materials used in Apple Watch are inconsequential.
Very cool man thanks for sharing!
----------
I'm hoping I can buy one next year! I'm sure I can think of a few ways to make use of it.
Coincidentally I was flicking through a magazine yesterday and saw a Hublot advert that made a big thing of their "Magic" gold which does use a ceramic matrix. It's a fascinating process that starts with a ceramic blank full of microscopic holes. Molten gold is then forced into the blank under tremendous pressure to fill the holes. Pictures and more here: http://www.watchtime.com/wristwatch-industry-news/technology/hard-timers-hublot-conjured-magic-gold/
Apple obviously hasn't trademarked, "Magic"!
----------
I'm hoping I can buy one next year! I'm sure I can think of a few ways to make use of it.