Sport Model no laminated display?

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by SR71, Apr 4, 2015.

  1. SR71 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #1
    I was reading about the watch this morning and saw someone claim that the Apple Watch Sport doesn't have a laminated display, while the Apple Watch does. Does anyone know if this is actually true?
     
  2. dedufour41 macrumors regular

    dedufour41

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2015
    Location:
    New York
    #2
    Not even sure what you're ta about, actually. ??
     
  3. scrapple macrumors regular

    scrapple

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2004
    #3
    sapphire display is not on sports watch for some reason I believe..

    funny thing is, the sports watch will be the one getting the most abuse...
     
  4. Gav2k macrumors G3

    Gav2k

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    #4
    There is no air gap between the display on any model they are all laminated.

    ----------

    Cost
     
  5. DreamPod macrumors 65816

    DreamPod

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2008
    #5
    That's been brought up here before, general consensus is a person just didn't understand Apple. When talking about what's different about the Apple Watch model compared to Sport, Apple said the screen of the Watch model is laminated to a sapphire crystal, the person assumed Apple meant the Sport wasn't laminated to its crystal. What Apple most likely meant is that it's the sapphire that was special, not the construction.

    That's actually why (plus cost). Sapphire is more brittle, apt to shattering, than Gorilla Glass, so you don't want sapphire on something that will take abuse. Sapphire is harder to scratch, Gorilla Glass is harder to break.
     
  6. bnekic macrumors 6502a

    bnekic

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2013
    Location:
    Cleveland, OH
    #6
    Both are laminated just like the new iPhones are laminated to gorilla glass.
     
  7. Defender2010 macrumors 68030

    Defender2010

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Location:
    England
    #7
    Of course it is or else Force Touch would not work! Plus the internals would have to be different and perhaps the body of the watch thicker.
     
  8. pmau macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2010
    #8
    You don't understand sapphire. It breaks more easily than glass.
    It's just scratch resistant.
     
  9. dacreativeguy macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    #9
    Prove it! Don't be so sure. The iPad mini 3 has an air gap, while the Air 2 is laminated. They could certainly save money by not laminating the cheaper model.

    On most Apple Watch models, the display is laminated to a machined and polished single crystal of sapphire. Next to diamond, it’s the hardest transparent material. On watches in the Sport collection, protection is provided by strengthened Ion-X glass.
     
  10. pmau macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2010
    #10
    I actually believe you might be right.

    Laminating a display to glass is quite time consuming and is most effective with larger displays (TV's and Laptop displays).

    It requires exact alignment, accurate appliance of ann adhesive and a vacuum de-bubbling process. You can google it for TV manufacturing.

    It might be that it's not done for a small display and that for sapphire the cost increase is justified.
     
  11. DreamPod macrumors 65816

    DreamPod

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2008
    #11
    Or maybe that's the reason for the rumored 70% Apple Watch defect rate.
     
  12. ckorhonen macrumors regular

    ckorhonen

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #12
    From the Apple site:

    "On most Apple Watch models, the display is laminated to a machined and polished single crystal of sapphire. Next to diamond, it’s the hardest transparent material. On watches in the Sport collection, protection is provided by strengthened Ion-X glass."

    No mention of laminated display on the Sport.
     
  13. Bigserver1 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2012
    #13
    There's no mention of Sapphire glass on the sport model. It's assumed that the lamination process is identical for all three watches, it's simply the glass type that is different.
     
  14. Lennyvalentin macrumors 6502a

    Lennyvalentin

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2011
    #14
    You're just making stuff up, yes?

    "Laminating" in this case simply means it's glued. Gluing is neither particularly time consuming, difficult or expensive. If the display wasn't glued to the front glass you'd get internal reflections between the different materials of the assembly, which would destroy sunlight visibility - kind of a handicap for a watch meant to be used outdoors, wouldn't you say?

    It would also requiring different manufacturing steps, which would complicate the assembly line (you would need different lines for sports model and everything else), and the result might not even fit inside the watch casing, as you'd need additional backing for the display panel if it isn't fused to the front glass, which would increase thickness.

    So no, it's not going to be separate pieces. Stop spreading silly baseless rumors.
     
  15. pmau macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2010
    #15
    Sure I don't know. Nobody does (Yet).

    But 3 minutes of YouTube searches and a few minutes more watching some videos that show lamination, would reveal that the process works better on large surfaces, requires UV light hardening of the adhesive and vacuum treatment.

    Since you cannot cut the rounded displays easily after doing so, I would assume that doing so for very small displays and sheets of glass is not cost effective.

    Since the hardware is identical, and the price difference between stainless steel and aluminum is not really that large (considering that the milling is identical), I would think that the difference is caused by the yield of the sapphire display and the extra steps for laminating.

    Of course I have no proof whatsoever, but I'm pretty sure we will hear about it.
     
  16. matrix07 macrumors 68040

    matrix07

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    #16
    Ion-X glass is durable enough.
     
  17. Lloydbm41 macrumors 68040

    Lloydbm41

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2013
    Location:
    Central California
    #17
    Yeah, I'm pretty sure Apple has done extensive testing on the display and case to ensure quite a bit of punishment before failure. If the ion-x glass was craptastic, I doubt Apple would be using it.

    Not to mention that model (marathon runner chick) that is running around with the Apple Watch hasn't mentioned any issues with dings, scratches or anything else related to damage with her watch thus far?
     
  18. bnekic macrumors 6502a

    bnekic

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2013
    Location:
    Cleveland, OH
    #18

    That runner chick is using a SS model with sport band.
     
  19. Gav2k macrumors G3

    Gav2k

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    #19
    Read your quoted passage from apple. The difference is the glass being sapphire or ion-x glass. Both are laminated.
     
  20. 2macORnot2mac macrumors regular

    2macORnot2mac

    Joined:
    May 14, 2010
    #20
    Then why does it say. "On most Apple Watch models"
     
  21. Julien macrumors G3

    Julien

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #21
    Could be because the sapphire crystal is "On most Apple Watch models" and not all.;) The wording is ambiguous.
     
  22. Newtons Apple Suspended

    Newtons Apple

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Florida
    #22
    Durable enough for what.

    We are talking about a wearable/watch. If you wear a watch, how many times have you accidentally bashed it into a door casing or other object. The iPhone 6 screen will scratch but it is not nearly exposed to the dangers of the watch.

    It will scratch, there is no doubt.
     
  23. Brian Y macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    #23
    Sapphire is less prone to scratches, but more prone to smashing/cracking when knocked.

    ion x is more prone to scratches, but less prone to smashing/cracking when knocked.

    It kinda makes sense that on the 'sports' watch, you want something which isn't going to smash if it gets a knock.
     
  24. Newtons Apple Suspended

    Newtons Apple

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Florida
    #24
    Sorry but while I agree on the sapphire being more prone to breaking, I have worn sapphire faced Rolexes most of my life and never have one break. I would much prefer the sapphire over the ion-x as it will scratch with ease compared to the sapphire. My current Rolex looks like new when the case and band is buffed out by the dealer.
     
  25. Lennyvalentin macrumors 6502a

    Lennyvalentin

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2011
    #25
    Most models have a sapphire front crystal - two out of three. Or four out of six, depending on how you see it. This is what the quote means.

    Apple says nothing about the lamination process itself, but we can confidently assume all watches have a laminated display, as there's no visible difference in quality between them in pictures of actual manufactured units (as opposed to the computer renderings on Apple's site.)
     

Share This Page