Let's see the GOLD!

[danniexi]

Ok great. Please point me to the place where Apple has stated that the patent "doesn't apply to" the Edition. Thank you.

https://youtu.be/dDAP9OWtQro?t=43s

The patent you are referring to is basically Apple's own MMC (metal matrix composite) where they mix gold as well as ceramic particles. Apple files for patents all the time. They do this to anything that they feel is 'patentable'. Some patents are used in their products, other's never see the light of day.

In fact, hasn't Apple been very forthright about the fact that this is a custom process? It is exclusive to Apple, creating a gold that is much denser and harder than standard gold.

https://youtu.be/dDAP9OWtQro?t=59s

This method is not exclusive to Apple. Jony Ive narrates that a price adjustment of silver, copper, and palladium is used in the alloy. There is absolutely no mentioning of the use of ceramic powders/particles whatsoever. If they did use such a method like the one described in their patent application, it would've surely been mentioned as it is one they should be proud of. MMCs are highly used in aerospace/automotive industries, rarely ever in jewelry.

However, the method of creating the watch is widely different from present-day normal manufacturing processes. Jewelry is almost always cast into its final shape. It is then buffed and polished to its final form. Apple takes it a couple of steps further (because Ive is crazy but can also take advantage of his resources).

In the video, Ive mentions that the gold alloy is poured (cast) into solid ingots, NOT poured into the shape of the watches final form. The ingots are then milled, and then compressed into a fraction of their size. It is this compression (basically forging) that forces the molecules in the alloy to come closer together, creating what is harder/stronger than what is considered to be "standard" in jewelry/watchmaking.

What Jony Ive is doing is basically bringing back the old method of hand-forged jewelry into mass-production compared to the widely used method of casting (which is more porous, contains imperfections, and less dense). However, instead of the jewelry being hand-forged, those hands are replaced by robots (forged through press, milled by Apple's thousands of CNC machines). There's a reason why he hints this during the Condé Nast International Luxury Conference. “It’s not so much about things being touched personally – there are many ways to craft something,” said Jony. “It’s easy to assume that just because you make something in small volumes, not using many tools, that there is integrity and care – that is a false assumption.”

Exclusivity, would come from either owning a patent or having an exclusive license to the patent. And it appears that the patent is for a process to create a much harder and denser gold. I suggest you read Claim 28 in the patent. The process maintains the 18 karatage by mass which is required in order to advertise it as 18 karat gold. But the volume of the gold significantly reduced according to the patent claims.

Again, Apple (as well as any other corporation) patents their ideas all the time. That does not mean that they are being used in their main product line (whether it be now or in the future). If they come up with a new or different concept, it'll go straight to paper and straight to the US patent office.

Want to talk about Apple patents? How about this one?

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=1&p=1&f=G&l=50&d=PTXT&S1=(361%2F749.CCLS.+AND+20150106.PD.)

A foldable electronic device. Apple filed for that 4 years ago. Unless, wait, you're insinuating that the iPhone 6+ was supposed to bend...

And by the way, I am not alone in thinking that the methods used in creating the Watch Edition is done without the use of MMCs.

http://leancrew.com/all-this/2015/03/old-gold/

 

[ElizabethKing]

If they had used the patent using low density ceramics in the alloy it would have resulted in a gold that was less dense than normal 18K gold.

The claim in the advertisement that I attached said that the gold they developed is "twice as hard as standard gold." The claim embodied in the patent says that the patented gold mixture creates harder gold. See attached. You are conflating hardness with volume density. And I think we both agree that Apple has not stated that the gold in the Edition is not subject to the patent.

 

[mightyjabba]

Funny thing is that a lot of people were pointing to that patent before Apple released the price of the Edition as reason to believe that they would be much cheaper than most people thought (since they would technically contain a lot less gold). That didn't exactly work out.

 

[ElizabethKing]

https://youtu.be/dDAP9OWtQro?t=43s

The patent you are referring to is basically Apple's own MMC (metal matrix composite) where they mix gold as well as ceramic particles. Apple files for patents all the time. They do this to anything that they feel is 'patentable'. Some patents are used in their products, other's never see the light of day.




https://youtu.be/dDAP9OWtQro?t=59s

This method is not exclusive to Apple. Jony Ive narrates that a price adjustment of silver, copper, and palladium is used in the alloy. There is absolutely no mentioning of the use of ceramic powders/particles whatsoever. If they did use such a method like the one described in their patent application, it would've surely been mentioned as it is one they should be proud of. MMCs are highly used in aerospace/automotive industries, rarely ever in jewelry.

However, the method of creating the watch is widely different from present-day normal manufacturing processes. Jewelry is almost always cast into its final shape. It is then buffed and polished to its final form. Apple takes it a couple of steps further (because Ive is crazy but can also take advantage of his resources).

In the video, Ive mentions that the gold alloy is poured (cast) into solid ingots, NOT poured into the shape of the watches final form. The ingots are then milled, and then compressed into a fraction of their size. It is this compression (basically forging) that forces the molecules in the alloy to come closer together, creating what is harder/stronger than what is considered to be "standard" in jewelry/watchmaking.

What Jony Ive is doing is basically bringing back the old method of hand-forged jewelry into mass-production compared to the widely used method of casting (which is more porous, contains imperfections, and less dense). However, instead of the jewelry being hand-forged, those hands are replaced by robots (forged through press, milled by Apple's thousands of CNC machines). There's a reason why he hints this during the Condé Nast International Luxury Conference. “It’s not so much about things being touched personally – there are many ways to craft something,” said Jony. “It’s easy to assume that just because you make something in small volumes, not using many tools, that there is integrity and care – that is a false assumption.”



Again, Apple (as well as any other corporation) patents their ideas all the time. That does not mean that they are being used in their main product line (whether it be now or in the future). If they come up with a new or different concept, it'll go straight to paper and straight to the US patent office.

Want to talk about Apple patents? How about this one?

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=1&p=1&f=G&l=50&d=PTXT&S1=(361%2F749.CCLS.+AND+20150106.PD.)

A foldable electronic device. Apple filed for that 4 years ago. Unless, wait, you're insinuating that the iPhone 6+ was supposed to bend...

Ha ha. That is funny. Luckily for me my iPhone 6 has not bent! I watched the video too. Just because he does not mention the ceramic particles by name does not mean that the metal wasn't made utilizing the claims outlined in the patent. He talks about a hardening process. I think it's important to look at the entire patent which is to create a harder gold with using less gold by volume. There is a claim in the patent that says the hardening process is not limited to the combination of gold and the ceramic metal matrix composite and that other suitable matrix compositions can be used. Until and unless Apple itself states that this patent does not relate to the manufacturing of the gold alloy in the Edition, all indications are that it does. And like I mentioned, you can also use your eyes when you look at the rose gold watch case. If you collect rose gold, then you can see that it looks different than typical rose gold. It's very pretty but different.

 

[danniexi]

Until and unless Apple itself states that this patent does not relate to the manufacturing of the gold alloy in the Edition, all indications are that it does.

I don't know where or how you are coming to the conclusion that Apple IS using the processes mentioned in the patent. There are NO indications of that whatsoever. All you are doing is assuming because of what you feel as "real rose gold." Again, the hardening process comes from the forging of the gold ingots, NOT from any other material composites. I don't know why you are so adamant that Apple is referring to the patent when it comes to their statement of their manufacturing of the alloy as being "twice as hard as standard gold" when I have 1. mentioned what the normal standard is and 2. how they hardened the alloy by other methods (methods of which have already been outlined by the video narrated by Jony Ive).

And like I mentioned, you can also use your eyes when you look at the rose gold watch case. If you collect rose gold, then you can see that it looks different than typical rose gold. It's very pretty but different.

Again, color is determined by the specific percentage of metals in the alloy, not by what YOUR eyes perceive as rose gold. Just because the color of the Watch Edition is different from your other rose gold jewelry doesn't mean that it isn't "solid gold" or "have less gold in it" as you think it to believe.

If I showed you two gold chains that are both stamped 14KT, and one was more noticeably yellow than the other, does that make the yellow-er chain real solid gold and the other not solid gold? Again, it doesn't matter. Both are stamped 14KT, therefore both have the same percentage of gold in the alloy by mass.


And I believe the folding feature was exclusive to the 6+ . Luckily I haven't had that feature enabled either.

 

[ElizabethKing]

I don't know where or how you are coming to the conclusion that Apple IS using the processes mentioned in the patent. There are NO indications of that whatsoever. All you are doing is assuming because of what you feel as "real rose gold." Again, the hardening process comes from the forging of the gold ingots, NOT from any other material composites. I don't know why you are so adamant that Apple is referring to the patent when it comes to their statement of their manufacturing of the alloy as being "twice as hard as standard gold" when I have 1. mentioned what the normal standard is and 2. how they hardened the alloy by other methods (methods of which have already been outlined by the video narrated by Jony Ive).



Again, color is determined by the specific percentage of metals in the alloy, not by what YOUR eyes perceive as rose gold. Just because the color of the Watch Edition is different from your other rose gold jewelry doesn't mean that it isn't "solid gold" or "have less gold in it" as you think it to believe.

If I showed you two gold chains that are both stamped 14KT, and one was more noticeably yellow than the other, does that make the yellow-er chain real solid gold and the other not solid gold? Again, it doesn't matter. Both are stamped 14KT, therefore both have the same percentage of gold in the alloy by mass.


And I believe the folding feature was exclusive to the 6+ . Luckily I haven't had that feature enabled either.

One thing that I think is that the optical appearance of almost anything can be perceived differently by different people. I have such sensitivity to gold that I can optically tell the difference from 14K and 18K. I am a bit of a jewelry nut, I must confess. We obviously cannot settle this dispute because Apple has not stated that the gold was made through the process it patented. I personally think it was. I think the heaviness of the watchcase as compared to the stainless watch case is due to gold, silver, palladium and copper all being heavier than stainless steel, all of which are mentioned in the video as being utilized to make the alloy. I do not think that it necessarily means that the watch case is comprised of solid gold at least not in the way we typically think of it. If the volume of the gold is reduced while maintaining the mass, they can legally say it is 18K gold because it maintains the karatage according to their patent claims. There are only two ways that I can think of that we will ever know: 1. Apple says, "Here is what is in the gold" or 2. Someone like Samsung comes along, makes a watchcase with the same composition as the Edition and then Apple sues them for patent infringement. If that happens, then I guess we will have a final answer because if the metal composition of the Apple Edition is not proprietary, i.e. not covered by a patent, then it's arguably in the public domain to use and copy. Do you believe that Apple would say their Edition gold isn't proprietary? I don't think so. I enjoyed discussing this with you. Let me know if you think you can come up with an argument that after I plate my stainless with rhodium it should be still be covered by the warranty. Ha ha

 

[Menel]

One thing that I think is that the optical appearance of almost anything can be perceived differently by different people. I have such sensitivity to gold that I can optically tell the difference from 14K and 18K. I am a bit of a jewelry nut, I must confess. We obviously cannot settle this dispute because Apple has not stated that the gold was made through the process it patented. I personally think it was. I think the heaviness of the watchcase as compared to the stainless watch case is due to gold, silver, palladium and copper all being heavier than stainless steel, all of which are mentioned in the video as being utilized to make the alloy. I do not think that it necessarily means that the watch case is comprised of solid gold at least not in the way we typically think of it. If the volume of the gold is reduced while maintaining the mass, they can legally say it is 18K gold because it maintains the karatage according to their patent claims. There are only two ways that I can think of that we will ever know: 1. Apple says, "Here is what is in the gold" or 2. Someone like Samsung comes along, makes a watchcase with the same composition as the Edition and then Apple sues them for patent infringement. If that happens, then I guess we will have a final answer because if the metal composition of the Apple Edition is not proprietary, i.e. not covered by a patent, then it's arguably in the public domain to use and copy. Do you believe that Apple would say their Edition gold isn't proprietary? I don't think so. I enjoyed discussing this with you. Let me know if you think you can come up with an argument that after I plate my stainless with rhodium it should be still be covered by the warranty. Ha ha

Apple did: Gold, Silver, Copper, and Palladium.
Here straight from horses mouth:
https://www.apple.com/watch/apple-watch-edition/

Solves that, standard alloy.