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.
Detailed Yet Sketchy Report Claims 802.11ac Wi-Fi, NFC, Improved Touch ID, but No Sapphire Display for iPhone 6
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No sapphire, actually a bit of sapphire, some with some without, no no sapphire is happening... maybe? NFC no, no chance, but actually yes but no.
Guys we have a month left just chill out.
At this point, I don't give a rat ass about iPhone 6 rumors. They're all sketchy at best. Nobody knows anything for sure this time.
And yet some members love to make condescending remarks about Tim Cook and when he said they were "doubling down on secrecy".
It amazes me that some people are putting so much emphasis on sapphire. It will make ZERO difference in terms of everyday use.
The much more likely reason for the GT Advance deal is to supply sapphire for the iWatch. Watches use sapphire.
The much more likely reason for the GT Advance deal is to supply sapphire for the iWatch. Watches use sapphire.
I had a Galaxy Nexus with NFC. It was nothing to be excited about. After the novelty wore off, I never used it. Google wallet gave everyone $10 free credit to try the tech. I ended up using it to pay for some Vitamin Waters out of a vending machine. It was cool, but that was the end of that. I turned it off when I ran out of free money to save battery.
Also, the tech was buggy. I started with $10, and got my vitamin waters. It still showed $10, so I kept using it to buy. Ended up getting way more than what I had in credit. In that case, it worked to my favor, but with such vulnerabilities, I would not trust any real money to it. I was also never sure if they would charge me for what I took out.
I actually found passbook to be much more reliable by simply using the stored barcodes. It's about the same level of convenience.
For other uses, meh. A lot of nerds like to play with little NFC things they put into the car/around the house to put your phone into different modes/settings, but I don't see the general populace using those uses.
Also, the tech was buggy. I started with $10, and got my vitamin waters. It still showed $10, so I kept using it to buy. Ended up getting way more than what I had in credit. In that case, it worked to my favor, but with such vulnerabilities, I would not trust any real money to it. I was also never sure if they would charge me for what I took out.
I actually found passbook to be much more reliable by simply using the stored barcodes. It's about the same level of convenience.
For other uses, meh. A lot of nerds like to play with little NFC things they put into the car/around the house to put your phone into different modes/settings, but I don't see the general populace using those uses.
It's signed in the end by "Samsung Electronics Inc"
Nothing suspicious!
Seriously? This is stock market manipulation.
Nothing suspicious!
Seriously? This is stock market manipulation.
It absolutely is for sale, every day. https://www.google.com/finance?q=gtat&ei=JLbiU8iyEYaligL1hIHoBg
Meh, iBeacon and NFC have been like graphene so far. Very hyped and supposedly with cool uses, but nothing uses them. 802.11ac, of course, is a welcomed upgrade.
Last edited:
People (including myself) think the screen is made of sapphire due to the fact that Apple hasn't tried at all to leak any parts, any proof, or anything at all to any rumor site or manufacturer at all to disprove these sapphire rumors. The video you showed is in no way confirmed to be the real iPhone 6 display and is made by the top Andriod blogger/YouTuber in the world, giving it a huge bias towards disproving the sapphire claims.
Apple doesn't manufacture anything. Why would they buy a manufacturing company now?
I hope this was sarcasm. Crippled? Really? I can see where it might take a year or two to develop the tech and ramp up production for tens of millions of phone screens, ON TOP OF pushing sapphire out for touchID on all the new iPhones, iPads and perhaps a wearable. Sapphire will be nice when it's ready but probably the least interesting of all leaked features. IMHO anyway.
1. Too many headphones transcode to sbc or aptx, instead of negotiating for un-compromised direct aac. They are out there, just not many.
2. Another device to charge... That can only survive limited cycles.
He's right about Apple's history of crippling products on purpose so they can release features later. First it was video recording, then it was Siri, then it was LTE, and I probably missed a lot.
----------
How is the Lightning connector for headphones a good idea, other than for thinness? Headphone connectors provide all the same features, two analog audio lines, a mic, and music controls. If iPhones only allowed users to use Beats headphones, Apple would lose very many customers.
The reason sapphire is used on watches is to protect the watch from scratches.
The reason sapphire would be used on the iPhone is to protect it from scratches.
Explain how that would make no difference when sapphire is already used on the iPhone for the camera lens and home button to prevent scratches.
No, it doesn't clearly show it. The type of sandpaper used in the video is known to contain some amount of aluminum oxide, which is as hard as sapphire and can scratch it. Commercial sandpaper is not meant to be used for scientific experiments, and their Mohs scale ratings are not guaranteed.
And while the guy wasn't able to scratch the sapphire home button on the 5S, the video doesn't show him press hard enough for the sandpaper to firmly enter the small cavity of the home button. Sandpaper is usually not very flexible, making it hard to apply pressure inside such a small concave area.
I'm not saying that it proves anything either way, just that it's not as clear as you imply.
Now, if the guy had used the tip of a simple quartz crystal, the difference would've been much clearer. Not sure why he didn't do that.
The reason sapphire is used on watches is to protect the watch from scratches.
The reason sapphire would be used on the iPhone is to protect it from scratches.
Explain how that would make no difference when sapphire is already used on the iPhone for the camera lens and home button to prevent scratches.
1. I don't think I ever said there would be no difference in terms of scratch resistance. I said that for everyday use, there wouldn't be enough of a difference for the end user to get excited about. People saying they won't buy the next iphone if it isn't sapphire is just absurd.
2. Your iphone screen likely has not scratched at all. The Gorilla Glass is more than capable. The problem is that the oleophobic coating probably scratched, if you do show any damage at all. In all my years of owning an iphone, I've never seen one scratch and I don't use screen protectors. That oleophobic coating is likely going onto the sapphire as well, and will likely be just as prone to the same scratching.
3. Cost difference. If there is one, it's not worth it on all fronts (user perspective, company perspective). This is a completely silly feature to make the crux of your purchase/manufacturing decision.
Would sapphire be nice if it was no extra cost to anyone (users, Apple, etc.)? Yes. I would welcome it.
Do I care, and should you care, about its incorporation? Nope.
In fact, the only reason anyone cares at all is because that is all some finance/tech guys has to write about at the time. Finance because of the deal with GT Advance, and tech just because it is a nerd spec to talk about.
For 99%+ of users, no difference.
because they wanted it to be secure and touchID is the way to do that. I suppose they could have done it with the 5S however I think they wanted to prove the concept before they tried to convince people to link payments to it
----------
no sapphire in the iPhone can only mean one thing. The iWatch is going to blow peoples minds and they are expecting to sell 200 million of them next year...either that or these analysts are just taking wild guesses (far more likely)