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.
Corning Again Criticizes Sapphire as Potential Alternative to Gorilla Glass
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You need to research a bit more on what the sapphire thing with GT Advanced is all about. It's more than just resisting scratches.
If the article below is correct, we may be looking at a solar charging panel on the next iPhone.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/206...logies-is-ready-to-electrify-the-mobile-world
I think he is correct!
I had a chance to interact with one of my known contacts on the Sapphire crystal for optics. He works for Saint Cobain engineering division that makes glasses. He says that optic quality vs strength is always an issue in this industry. So, if you want harder then your optic quality will be compromised (as mentioned by the Corning Gorilla Glass Chief).
Sapphire crystal is strong for watch type of gadget where dropping may not be that frequent since it is tied up in the hand mostly. Whereas, Mobile Phones may get dropped frequently and when it gets dropped, chances are very high that Sapphire crystal can break as compared with Corning Gorilla Glass.
But Sapphire Crystal is always sexy, hence it could be a great marketing gimmick.
I had a chance to interact with one of my known contacts on the Sapphire crystal for optics. He works for Saint Cobain engineering division that makes glasses. He says that optic quality vs strength is always an issue in this industry. So, if you want harder then your optic quality will be compromised (as mentioned by the Corning Gorilla Glass Chief).
Sapphire crystal is strong for watch type of gadget where dropping may not be that frequent since it is tied up in the hand mostly. Whereas, Mobile Phones may get dropped frequently and when it gets dropped, chances are very high that Sapphire crystal can break as compared with Corning Gorilla Glass.
But Sapphire Crystal is always sexy, hence it could be a great marketing gimmick.
He really isn't saying its strong...he is saying its flexible. Look at the test in the photo, they are flexing the glass. That doesn't really happen in a small panel that is supported 360 degrees around. I would hope Apple has done drop tests with actual devices which would be different than the tests he is talking about.
Sapphire isn't glass. It's a gemstone.
Also, re: Gorilla Glass 3, it seems Corning is just settling into a periodic delivery/marketing schedule like Microsoft and Intel. Every edition will be x-times "stronger" than the last. Apparently we're supposed to be stupid enough to think their research has suddenly (in the prior 6 months or whatever) figured out how to do this. Ridiculous.
Maybe that's why iOS 7 colors are so gaudy! Because the new sapphire glass will make the colors dimmer, thus normal again. Such genius!
Corning has been dead for the past 5 years. Dead in the market. The street seems to like GT a lot more than Corning, including myself. Been a shareholder of GTAT since February 2013, got out of Corning years ago. It's about time someone takes on Corning.
The only viable option right now for that kind of screen would probably be some kind of super scratch resistant plastic.
Corning already makes sapphire products for the military.
A lot of people are mixing up hardness with other properties.
The Mohs scale is about scratch resistance (hardness), not about resistance to breaking (tenacity).
Sapphire is very hard, but is also brittle.
That's what a lot of people think will happen.
Actually he makes some good points mixed with some fiction.
And many people think gorilla glass is made to be strong when in truth it's only made to be scratch resistant
And many people think gorilla glass is made to be strong when in truth it's only made to be scratch resistant
Liquid Metal needing Sapphire glass?
I was wondering about this.
Looking at recent sapphire glass patents from Apple they have one where they found a way to seamlessly fuse sapphire with injection molded casings via special grooves.
Could it perhaps be that Apple had always wanted to do this with Liquid Metal?
And for some production reason glass would not be able to fuse with Liquid Metal injection molding processes? (Heat point? Deformations?)
While Gorilla Glass might still have a lot of advantages, it might just not be fusible with Liquid Metal. Apple might have had no choice but to go with sapphire for this process...
Another point I was thinking about was curved screens.
While Gorilla (or Willow) Glass can be bent, can sapphire be cut curved?
When bending glass it might be under too much stress to be really shock proof for let's say a bracelet shaped gadget.
Would curved cut sapphire be stronger?
I was wondering about this.
Looking at recent sapphire glass patents from Apple they have one where they found a way to seamlessly fuse sapphire with injection molded casings via special grooves.
Could it perhaps be that Apple had always wanted to do this with Liquid Metal?
And for some production reason glass would not be able to fuse with Liquid Metal injection molding processes? (Heat point? Deformations?)
While Gorilla Glass might still have a lot of advantages, it might just not be fusible with Liquid Metal. Apple might have had no choice but to go with sapphire for this process...
Another point I was thinking about was curved screens.
While Gorilla (or Willow) Glass can be bent, can sapphire be cut curved?
When bending glass it might be under too much stress to be really shock proof for let's say a bracelet shaped gadget.
Would curved cut sapphire be stronger?
Last edited:
I doubt Apple would mess with the most profitable product in the world and hope on a gimmick that will have actual drawbacks in both use and expense.
I've had many Gorilla Glass products. I'm probably on about my seventh at this point. I've never had a real scratch issue. My iPhone 5 is caseless and in my pocket with keys. No material scratches on the glass. My iPhone 4 lived the same life in its second year (it was cased the first year) and both sides of glass were fine by the time it got handed down.
With Corning improving the hardness of Gorilla glass every year, I think we are at the point where scratches are a minor issue and soon will be a near non-issue. I certainly don't want any of the sacrifices Corning suggests in return for greater scratch resistance over Gorilla Glass 3.
As big as this Arizona plant is, I still think Apple wouldn't take the risk for its iPhone 6. So maybe this is for the iBand's screen. That would make a lot of sense. Especially if the iBand needs a marketing gimmick for launch purposes.
This is exactly what Apple is expected to do. They have a patten on how to use laser to cut the Sapphire to make a very thin layer and another patten on how to bind the Sapphire to another product underneath. In theory Apple could bind the Sapphire to gorilla glass and get the best of both worlds.
Anyone who's owned a really nice Swiss-made mechanical auto-winding watch (mine was a gift from the owner of my company so I'm lucky to have one of "those" watches) will already be well familiar with Sapphire glass. The whole (curved! ) watch face glass on mine is, according to the material that came with the watch, "Sapphire Crystal" It is so clear you can almost believe it's not there if you look at it dead on. Since it's more or less a dome, if you look through a chord so that the light coming through travels more through the material, then you see a slight blue tinge, but you really have to find an angle to do this. The watch face is recessed from the dome, if it was more like a "screen" this wouldn't be possible to see anyway.
I've had my watch for 5 years. I wear it almost every day, and I have hit the dome "glass" against everything, slammed into door jams, bumped against concrete corners around buildings. The watch is pretty big and I still misjudge it and bang it against things, especially if I haven't worn it for a day or two. The glass is still absolutely perfect. There is literally not a single scratch on it. The metal rotating ring has a few dents, but the glass is perfect. Keep in mind this watch is heavy (even with a titanium casing), so dropping it or banging into something on the domes glass (where the contact point is basically a tiny dot) is a lot of pressure. Still totally perfect.
Sapphire is really really cool stuff. Now I'm sure Sapphire Glass on a fancy Swiss watch may be a bit more pure than mass produced versions for something that millions of people will own, but still. Pretty damn impressive to me....
) watch face glass on mine is, according to the material that came with the watch, "Sapphire Crystal" It is so clear you can almost believe it's not there if you look at it dead on. Since it's more or less a dome, if you look through a chord so that the light coming through travels more through the material, then you see a slight blue tinge, but you really have to find an angle to do this. The watch face is recessed from the dome, if it was more like a "screen" this wouldn't be possible to see anyway.I've had my watch for 5 years. I wear it almost every day, and I have hit the dome "glass" against everything, slammed into door jams, bumped against concrete corners around buildings. The watch is pretty big and I still misjudge it and bang it against things, especially if I haven't worn it for a day or two. The glass is still absolutely perfect. There is literally not a single scratch on it. The metal rotating ring has a few dents, but the glass is perfect. Keep in mind this watch is heavy (even with a titanium casing), so dropping it or banging into something on the domes glass (where the contact point is basically a tiny dot) is a lot of pressure. Still totally perfect.
Sapphire is really really cool stuff. Now I'm sure Sapphire Glass on a fancy Swiss watch may be a bit more pure than mass produced versions for something that millions of people will own, but still. Pretty damn impressive to me....
Sorry, but Corning is getting a little corny.
You know how many people crack their iPhone glass on a daily basis? A LOT. And a lot of those people have their glass broken from a SHORT drop and sometimes WITH a case. I haven't, but know a bunch of people that have.
Obviously Apple knows what they're doing and they have the finances/resources/research ability to use Sapphire to the best of their ability.
You know how many people crack their iPhone glass on a daily basis? A LOT. And a lot of those people have their glass broken from a SHORT drop and sometimes WITH a case. I haven't, but know a bunch of people that have.
Obviously Apple knows what they're doing and they have the finances/resources/research ability to use Sapphire to the best of their ability.
Watch faces are regularly made of sapphire and almost always curved. So yes it can be cut curved, dramatically so and also with optical properties (like magnification) if desired.
That's like if the CEO of a face-unlocking tech company said:
"Fingerprint unlocking sucks. You have to swipe your whole finger from bottom to top which takes time, isn't natural and will slow down the unlock process."
My point is, previous, not-so-successful implementations mean pretty much nothing when you consider the fact that they weren't backed by Apple and their almost infinite cash pile.
Apple has the cash to make manufacturing techniques evolve significantly very quickly, and ultimately make consumer products that couldn't be done before at a reasonable cost.
Like pointed-out above, the manufacturing technique Apple/GT Advanced are developing is nothing that has been done before, and will likely produce a kind of sapphire never seen before in a consumer product. We shouldn't generalize sapphire as a whole based on experience with previous products.
If I take my fingerprint example again, that would be like saying Apple shouldn't have bought Authentec to make Touch ID based on the poor performance of the Motorola Atrix's fingerprint sensor (also made by Authentec). It turned out Touch ID had almost nothing to do with the Atrix's sensor and it would have been foolish to dismiss fingerprint unlocking as a whole based on the Atrix's implementation.
"Fingerprint unlocking sucks. You have to swipe your whole finger from bottom to top which takes time, isn't natural and will slow down the unlock process."
My point is, previous, not-so-successful implementations mean pretty much nothing when you consider the fact that they weren't backed by Apple and their almost infinite cash pile.
Apple has the cash to make manufacturing techniques evolve significantly very quickly, and ultimately make consumer products that couldn't be done before at a reasonable cost.
Like pointed-out above, the manufacturing technique Apple/GT Advanced are developing is nothing that has been done before, and will likely produce a kind of sapphire never seen before in a consumer product. We shouldn't generalize sapphire as a whole based on experience with previous products.
If I take my fingerprint example again, that would be like saying Apple shouldn't have bought Authentec to make Touch ID based on the poor performance of the Motorola Atrix's fingerprint sensor (also made by Authentec). It turned out Touch ID had almost nothing to do with the Atrix's sensor and it would have been foolish to dismiss fingerprint unlocking as a whole based on the Atrix's implementation.
Seems strange that Apple would change to sapphire glass if scratch resistance is its only advantage. Maybe Corning's Tony Tripeny is just a bit biased...