iPhone 14 Pro Max When is Apple going to innovate looking ways to decrease weight in iPhones?

[bc 08]

I don’t know what Aluminum Samsung uses. But the e really weight of the SS caused the crack as the phone had a harder impact due to the extra weight.

The iPhone is only 11 grams heavier than the S22U and if the weight was the deciding factor at this drop height then why did front screens perform about the same?

Glass material and camera protrusion was the primary differentiating factor on the rear drop, not weight.

 

[bc 08]

Exactly. Bingo we have a winner. Finally someone gets it. It amazes me on Mac Rumors, even on this thread people are clamoring for a different material like Titanium when Apple already uses one is their very own 7000 series Aluminum. Apple marketing works very well it seems. Most on here think SS is superior to the 7000 series Aluminum which couldn’t be further from the truth.
7000 series Aluminum cost 4 times as much. They use it for Satellites and Space craft. Has a much more strength to weight ratio as SS and is a great conductor of heat. It is more scratch resistant than Surgical grade SS because it is anodized on the outside, and doesn’t get finger prints. Surgical grade SS is nothing more than SS finished without grooves or pits, but is completely smooth. This non pitted material doesn’t collect bacteria since there are no grooves or pits for them to attach to. But it is easy to scratch due to its smooth Surface. As if you own a pro model you already know this.
Your iPhone pro has the same steel as your refrigerator in your kitchen. While the base model 14 uses the same Aluminum used in space flight. Pardon the pun, but this isn’t rocket science to figure this out. The base model is better designed internally and made with a much more premium metal.
7075 Aluminum was developed for the aerospace industry to replace Titanium as it was developed as a cheaper alternative to Titanium. looking at the difference between the two 7000 series might be superior due to its better thermal conductivity. But most on here when you tell them this act like a 5 year old after they got told Santa isn’t real. 😅😂

Apple is most likely using 7005 Aluminum, it runs about $1.76 per pound.
316L stainless steel runs about the same per pound.

You will never find a refrigerator using 316L stainless steel. 😂
304 at best and they usually use 201, 409, 431 or 441.

The anodize Apple applies to their aluminum iPhone frame is far less scratch resistant than the PVD coating Apple applies to their 316L stainless steel.
Easily seen on every JerryRigEverything scratch test:

Skip to 3:21:

Skip to 3:58:

Steel has always been used sparingly in aerospace because keeping weight low is a primary design criteria.

It's all about the choosing the right material for the job -- just because aluminum is a preferred material in a Boeing 747 wing doesn't make it a better material for a Rolex Submariner watch case; because it isn't.
The same applies here with the watch example more closely paralleling material selection for a phone frame.

The Pro steel frames are undoubtedly more premium (and durable) than the non-Pro aluminum frames.

 

[iamthedudeman]

Apple is most likely using 7005 Aluminum, it runs about $1.76 per pound.
316L stainless steel runs about the same per pound.

You will never find a refrigerator using 316L stainless steel. 😂
304 at best and they usually use 201, 409, 431 or 441.

The anodize Apple applies to their aluminum iPhone frame is far less scratch resistant than the PVD coating Apple applies to their 316L stainless steel.
Easily seen on every JerryRigEverything scratch test:

Skip to 3:21:

Skip to 3:58:

Steel has always been used sparingly in aerospace because keeping weight low is a primary design criteria.

It's all about the choosing the right material for the job -- just because aluminum is a preferred material in a Boeing 747 wing doesn't make it a better material for a Rolex Submariner watch case; because it isn't.
The same applies here with the watch example more closely paralleling material selection for a phone frame.

The Pro steel frames are undoubtedly more premium (and durable) than the non-Pro aluminum frames.

Actually they use 7075 Aluminum. Which is the same as NASA. 7075 is Aerospace grade. 7005 is not. Actually I think you mean 7050 not 7005. It is more scratch resistant than Surgical grade SS due to the reasons mentioned.
The unit weight cost for 7075 is measured by volume due to to its weight. And yes it cost almost 4 times as much.

Apple uses 304 surgical stainless regardless. Not 316L. Typically 304 can be used for surgical grade, but it is not. 304 is typically food grade. Apple marketing seems to work on you very well. And yes, 304 is used in refrigerators. Of coarse SS is better for a watch as typically you don’t put a case on a watch. SS is a tougher material overall. SS isn’t the right metal for the job on a phone because of its properties. There is more factors to consider from a watch to a phone. Like heat conductivity and strength to weight ratio.

The ideal material would be a good heat conductor for the CPU and over all internals, and strong but light because you have to carry it around. 7075 Aerospace Aluminum fits those criteria perfectly. SS not so much. Poor heat conductivity and high weight but strong. The strength of the metal is its only good attribute. Given those facts, how is it the right material for the job exactly? Explain that one, please leave out no details, as I would really like to hear it. 😅

21" 304 Stainless Steel Outdoor Rated Refrigerator

All New High-Powered Updated 2018 Model!! The Sunstone Indoor/Outdoor Rated Under Counter Refrigerator is the perfect solution completing your outdoor kitchen space, or can be built into interior refreshment bars. The Interior of Fridge is 4.1 Cu. Ft. offering Three Full Depth Shelves and with...

www.sunstonerubygrill.com

SS is sparingly used in Aerospace because of its poor strength to weight ratio. Period. I guess you missed that 7075 was made to be a cheaper form of titanium.
Anyone who has owned the pro models know about the fine scratches on the SS. So Jerry rig only shows deep scratches. For surface scratches, 7075 is better.
316l is used in fine jewelry. 304 isn't.
7075 Aluminums strength to weight ratio, 7 times higher thermal conductivity make it better for a phone. You just described is the exact opposite. I don't think a heavier, less thermal conductive material is better in a phone. Nor do most people. Or most companies that make phones as they all use different grades of aluminum.
No phone company outside of Apple use it for a reason.

 

[iamthedudeman]

The iPhone is only 11 grams heavier than the S22U and if the weight was the deciding factor at this drop height then why did front screens perform about the same?

Glass material and camera protrusion was the primary differentiating factor on the rear drop, not weight.

That defys the laws of physics. The greater the weight and density the harder the impact. It's not only weight, but density. Google is your friend.

 

[bc 08]

Apple uses 304 surgical stainless regardless. Not 316L. Typically 304 can be used for surgical grade, but it is not. 304 is typically food grade. Apple marketing seems to work on you very well. And yes, 304 is used in refrigerators. Of coarse SS is better for a watch as typically you don’t put a case on a watch. SS is a tougher material overall. SS isn’t the right metal for the job on a phone because of its properties. There is more factors to consider from a watch to a phone. Like heat conductivity and strength to weight ratio.

The ideal material would be a good heat conductor for the CPU and over all internals, and strong but light because you have to carry it around. 7075 Aerospace Aluminum fits those criteria perfectly. SS not so much. Poor heat conductivity and high weight but strong. The strength of the metal is its only good attribute. Given those facts, how is it the right material for the job exactly? Explain that one, please leave out no details, as I would really like to hear it. 😅

21" 304 Stainless Steel Outdoor Rated Refrigerator

All New High-Powered Updated 2018 Model!! The Sunstone Indoor/Outdoor Rated Under Counter Refrigerator is the perfect solution completing your outdoor kitchen space, or can be built into interior refreshment bars. The Interior of Fridge is 4.1 Cu. Ft. offering Three Full Depth Shelves and with...

www.sunstonerubygrill.com

SS is sparingly used in Aerospace because of its poor strength to weight ratio. Period. I guess you missed that 7075 was made to be a cheaper form of titanium.
Anyone who has owned the pro models know about the fine scratches on the SS. So Jerry rig only shows deep scratches. For surface scratches, 7075 is better.
316l is used in fine jewelry. 304 isn't.
7075 Aluminums strength to weight ratio, 7 times higher thermal conductivity make it better for a phone. You just described is the exact opposite. I don't think a heavier, less thermal conductive material is better in a phone. Nor do most people. Or most companies that make phones as they all use different grades of aluminum.
No phone company outside of Apple use it for a reason.

No I mean specifically 7005 aluminum.
7005 is often used for bicycle frames.



7000 series aluminum as a whole is generally considered “aerospace grade” which has virtually no meaning in and of itself, just like “surgical grade stainless steel” offers no specificity in the exact verison of steel it is referring to.

Again, material selection is all about the right material for the job.
The aerospace industry does not use “only” 7075 — or even “only” 7000 series aluminum as you seemingly believe.

We do know Apple uses 7000-series aluminum based on past marketing (they’ve never publicly stated the exact alloy to the best of my knowledge).

I’d love to see the source of your claim of Apple using 7075 though.

The reality is it almost certainly ISN’T 7075:

Алюминиевые смартфоны: Apple и другие

Стив Джобс сделал алюминий модным - Алюминиевые смартфоны - Алюминиевые ноутбуки - Алюминиевые сплавы в смартфонах

aluminium-guide.com

Are you really basing your arguments on marketing terms like “aerospace grade” and “surgical grade”?

Speaking of which, 316L is “jewelry quality”?
Is that kind of like... "jewelry grade"? 😅
Is “jewelry quality” some official specification you can refer me to?

No, 316 is more corrosion resistant than 304 largely because it has roughly twice the nickel & chromium content with the addition of Moly.
316 also will hold an edge better than 304 which makes it a superior choice for surgical tools.

316L specifically is the is most common surgical steel, L meaning low-carbon.
316L is relatively biocompatible and that’s why it’s use most often for implants, piercings and…you guessed it: the vast majority of surgical equipment.



We know Apple used “surgical grade stainless steel” to refer to 316L based on older Apple Watch marketing.
My assumption is that continued for iPhone given the higher corrosion resistance 316 and the lack of surface oxidation I experienced on my silver iPhone X in spite of repeated salt water exposure.

The iPhone surface is over 90% glass, for this reason thermal conductivity of the band material would be a secondary consideration over physical durability.
The same reason why steel makes for a more premium watch case than AL (dent resistance, gouge resistance, perception of density) is the same reason why it makes for a more premium phone band.

The only stainless iPhones that have been prone to micro-scratches are the silver phones which have no “diamond like” PVD coating.

I owned a silver iPhone X, Green 11 Pro, and a Graphite 13 Pro.
The X developed micro-scratches (Apple case with open bottom) but the 11 Pro (Phone Rebel case with open sides) and 13 Pro looked like the day they came out of the box.
Zero micro-scratching with the PVD coated stainless phones.

Jerry's videos speak for themselves in regards to the performance of Apple's "surgical grade" steel and "aerospace grade" aluminum as phone bands.

 

[bc 08]

That defys the laws of physics. The greater the weight and density the harder the impact. It's not only weight, but density. Google is your friend.

L O L

I’m going to just assume you haven’t done much with finite element analysis.

 

[iamthedudeman]

No I mean specifically 7005 aluminum.
7005 is often used for bicycle frames.

View attachment 2075203

7000 series aluminum as a whole is generally considered “aerospace grade” which has virtually no meaning in and of itself, kind of like “surgical grade stainless steel” offers little specificity in the exact formulation of steel it is referring to.

Again, material selection is all about the right material for the job.
The aerospace industry does not use “only” 7075 — or even “only” 7000 series aluminum for that matter as you seemingly believe.

We do know Apple uses 7000-series aluminum based on past marketing (they’ve never publicly stated the exactly alloy to the best of my knowledge).

I’d love to see the source of your claim of Apple using 7075 though.

The reality is it almost certainly ISN’T 7075:

Алюминиевые смартфоны: Apple и другие

Стив Джобс сделал алюминий модным - Алюминиевые смартфоны - Алюминиевые ноутбуки - Алюминиевые сплавы в смартфонах

aluminium-guide.com

Don’t tell me you’re basing all of your arguments here on marketing terms like “aerospace grade” and “surgical grade”.

Speaking of which, 316L is “jewelry quality”? 😅
Is “jewelry quality” some official standard I can refer to?

No, 316 is more corrosion resistant than 304 largely because it has roughly twice the nickel & chromium content with the addition of Moly.
316 also will hold an edge better than 304 which makes it a superior choice for surgical tools.

316L specifically is the is most common surgical steel, L meaning low-carbon.
316L is relatively biocompatible and that’s why it’s use most often for implants, piercings and…you guessed it: the vast majority of surgical equipment.

View attachment 2075173

We know Apple used to refer to “surgical grade stainless steel” as 316L based on old Apple Watch marketing.
My assumption is that continued for iPhone given the higher corrosion resistance 316.

The iPhone surface is over 90% glass, for this reason thermal conductivity of the band material would be a secondary consideration over physical durability.
The same reason why steel makes for a more premium watch case than AL (dent resistance, gouge resistance, perception of density) is the same reason why it makes for a more premium phone band.

The only stainless IPhones that have been prone to microscratches are the silver phones which have no “diamond like” PVD coating.

I owned a silver IPhone X, Green 11 Pro, and a Graphite 13 Pro.
The X developed micro-scratches (Apple case with open bottom) but the 11 Pro (Phone Rebel case with open sides) and 13 Pro look like the day they came out of the box.
Zero micro-scratching with the PVD coated stainless phones.

Again you are generalizing. Aerospace grade is specifically 7050 and 7075 that is actually used in space craft. 7050 is used in wings of a plane for example. 7000 series aluminum is grades, so is SS being 304 and 316. The grade used in the iPhone is 304. 316 is used in watches and jewelry.

316 is also used mainly for surgical tools but finished differently as already explained.

Yes the Aerospace industry does use 7075 and 7050 specificly for their space craft. Other metals are used but not for actual spacecraft.

Yes Surgical Stainless is more prone to scratching. I owned too many to list to know that. Do a simple search on here and your argument falls apart.

Heat connectivity does matter in a phone. With so little space it matters more than ever. You cannot be serious.😂
Why do you think the regular 14 was redone internally with zero heat sinks or thermal pads?

So 7075 Aluminum has 7 times the strength to weight ratio, is similar to Titanium, has better heat conductivity, and is lighter.

SS is denser and stronger. Heavier, has little to zero heat conductivity and it's weight to strength is very poor and is cheaper. You are saying it's the right material for the job? 😂 Yeah. OK.

If it's the right material for the job why doesn't Samsung, One plus, Google use it?

Your argument is laughable. Totally falls apart where the facts are concerned.
Tell me again the superior benefits of SS over Aerospace grade 7075 aluminum again. Stop being a politician and answer the question.

Your dent resistance, gouge resistance, perception of density? That is your answer?

You sound like a Apple bobble head 😆

 

[iamthedudeman]

L O L

I’m going to just assume you haven’t done much with finite element analysis.

Ok. 🙄😂 No just basic science and common sense.

 

[bc 08]

Again you are generalizing. Aerospace grade is specifically 7050 and 7075. 7050 is used in wings of a plane for example. 7000 series aluminum is grades, so is SS being 304 and 316. The grade used in the iPhone is 304. 316 is used in watches and jewelry. 316 is also used for surgical tools but finished differently as already explained.

Yes the Aerospace industry does use 7075 and 7050 specificly.

Yes Surgical Stainless is more prone to scratching. I owned too many to list to know that. Do a simple search on here and your argument falls apart.

Heat connectivity does matter in a phone. With so little space it matters more than ever. You cannot be serious.😂
Why do you think the regular 14 was redone internally with zero heat sinks or thermal pads?

So 7075 Aluminum has 7 times the strength to weight ratio, is similar to Titanium, has better heat conductivity, and is lighter.

SS is denser and stronger. Heavier, has little to zero heat conductivity and it's weight to strength is very poor and is cheaper. You are saying it's the right material for the job? 😂 Yeah. OK.

If it's the right material for the job why doesn't Samsung, One plus, Google use it?

Your argument is laughable. Totally falls apart where the facts are concerned.
Tell me again the superior benefits of SS over Aerospace grade 7075 aluminum again. Stop being a politician and answer the question.

Your dent resistance, gouge resistance, perception of density? That is your answer?

You sound like a Apple bobble head 😆

"Aerospace grade" means nothing, it is not a specification.
7000 series aluminum as a whole is generally accepted to be "aerospace grade".

But you honestly believe the aerospace industry uses 7075 and 7050 specifically?
You'd be dead wrong... again:




Bare, uncoated SILVER stainless steel is more prone to micro-scratching than anodized aluminum.
PVD coated stainless (every version that ISN'T Silver) is not more prone to micro-scratching, I too have owned both and the difference is plainly seen in the videos I linked.

You do realize steel and stainless steel has a significant role in aerospace as well, right? 😄
How about that "aerospace grade" stainless steel?



It's laughable you you would accuse me of being mislead by marketing when the full extent of your materials knowledge seems to be based entirely around marketing terms like "jewelry quality", "aerospace grade" and "surgical grade".

The point is that the band makes up ~10% of the iPhone's surface area, AL's advantage in heat conduction makes little difference in the overall temperature management of the device.

 

[iamthedudeman]

"Aerospace grade" means nothing, it is not a specification.
7000 series aluminum as a whole is generally accepted to be "aerospace grade".

But you honestly believe the aerospace industry uses 7075 and 7050 specifically?
You'd be dead wrong... again:

View attachment 2075276
View attachment 2075271

Bare, uncoated SILVER stainless steel is more prone to micro-scratching than anodized aluminum.
PVD coated stainless (every version that ISN'T Silver) is not more prone to micro-scratching, I too have owned both and the difference is plainly seen in the videos I linked.

You do realize steel and stainless steel has a significant role in aerospace as well, right? 😄
How about that "aerospace grade" stainless steel?

View attachment 2075278View attachment 2075279

It's laughable you you would accuse me of being mislead by marketing when the full extent of your materials knowledge seems to be based entirely around marketing terms like "jewelry quality", "aerospace grade" and "surgical grade".

The point is that the band makes up ~10% of the iPhone's surface area, AL's advantage in heat conduction makes little difference in the overall temperature management of the device.

Yes you are confused by marketing. Simply by stating that SS is the right material for the job. Again you fail to explain why exactly with nothing to back up your claims. No answer yet?

And 7075 and 7050 are the most widely used in actual spacecraft.

From your own article.

Aluminum vs. Stainless Steel: Benefits of Both In Aviation & Aerospace

Aluminum vs stainless steel: Which is better for aviation and aerospace manufacturing? Compare the properties of stainless steel with aerospace grade aluminum.

www.marlinwire.com

They compare 6061 to 304. Not 7075.

"7075 is a combination of aluminum and zinc, and is the most commonly used alloy in aerospace applications due to its excellent mechanical properties, ductility, strength, and resistance to fatigue."

Application of Aluminum and Stainless Steel in Aircraft Industry

Aluminium and Stainless Steel might look similar, but they are actually quite different. Aluminum's lightweight and high strength-to-weight ratio make it a good choice for aircraft.

www.asapbuying.com

Am I still wrong? Or are you?

The article you provided included planes etc. Yes the specifications do mean something. Heat treated T6 for example. You don't even grasp basic concepts. No sense reasoning with you as you will manufacturer false facts to back up your claims.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/materials-science/aerospace-alloy

I know the differences between the two. Seems you do not. As shown above.
You have no idea how the SS effects the heat dissipation of the device. You have no idea how much SS is used in the device. Nor has that anything to do with the metals properties.

You sound foolish and ridiculous.
You can tell you have zero argument as you failed again to answer any of my questions. Zero actually.
Why is SS the better choice in a mobile device again? For the third time? 😂

 

[iamthedudeman]

Yes you are confused by marketing. Simply by stating that SS is the right material for the job. Again you fail to explain why exactly with nothing to back up your claims. No answer yet?

And 7075 and 7050 (7475-02) are the most widely used in actual spacecraft.

From your own article.

Aluminum vs. Stainless Steel: Benefits of Both In Aviation & Aerospace

Aluminum vs stainless steel: Which is better for aviation and aerospace manufacturing? Compare the properties of stainless steel with aerospace grade aluminum.

www.marlinwire.com

They compare 6061 to 304. Not 7075.

"7075 is a combination of aluminum and zinc, and is the most commonly used alloy in aerospace applications due to its excellent mechanical properties, ductility, strength, and resistance to fatigue."

Application of Aluminum and Stainless Steel in Aircraft Industry

Aluminium and Stainless Steel might look similar, but they are actually quite different. Aluminum's lightweight and high strength-to-weight ratio make it a good choice for aircraft.

www.asapbuying.com

Am I still wrong? Or are you?

The article you provided included planes etc. Yes the specifications do mean something. Heat treated T6 for example. You don't even grasp basic concepts. No sense reasoning with you as you will manufacturer false facts to back up your claims.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/materials-science/aerospace-alloy

I know the differences between the two. Seems you do not. As shown above.
You have no idea how the SS effects the heat dissipation of the device. You have no idea how much SS is used in the device. Nor has that anything to do with the metals properties.

You sound foolish and ridiculous.
You can tell you have zero argument as you failed again to answer any of my questions. Zero actually. Why doesn't Samsung or Google use it?
Why is SS the better choice in a mobile device again? For the third time? 😂

 

[bluespark]

My theory is that Apple underestimates the number of users that prioritize thinness and lightness in their phones, because those people are far less likely to post in forums like this than those who are more focused on features.

 

[iamthedudeman]

My theory is that Apple underestimates the number of users that prioritize thinness and lightness in their phones, because those people are far less likely to post in forums like this than those who are more focused on features.

Exactly.

 

[danniexi]

all this arguing and complaining over metals is ridiculous.

ya'll want a lighter phone? get rid of the glass. get rid of the metal bands. go polycarbonate.

we gotta go full iPhone 5C and go straight unapologetically plastic in this muthafugga.

 

[lkalliance]

You know what I find funny, is that a few years ago I thought iPhones were TOO light. The 5 series felt like a movie prop when I picked it up...felt like nothing. Way in the back of my head was a little niggle that said this doesn't feel like real technology. And really it's not even the overall weight that's the issue but the density. The 4 series was the perfect heft. It was small and thin, but felt like a solid, reassuring piece of tech. Felt like you got something for your money.

It was so disconcerting that one of the reasons I chose a 5c instead of a 5S when they came out was the weight. The 5c was just a little bit heavier, felt a little more solid. That was probably due to the stainless steel under the polycarbonate.

Though I agree now the pro line is so heavy that it affects my purchasing decisions the OTHER way. I'm never happy!

 

[iamthedudeman]

all this arguing and complaining over metals is ridiculous.

ya'll want a lighter phone? get rid of the glass. get rid of the metal bands. go polycarbonate.

we gotta go full iPhone 5C and go straight unapologetically plastic in this muthafugga.

Why when Aluminum is already light. The regular models don't have a weight problem.

 

[tomtad]

all this arguing and complaining over metals is ridiculous.

ya'll want a lighter phone? get rid of the glass. get rid of the metal bands. go polycarbonate.

we gotta go full iPhone 5C and go straight unapologetically plastic in this muthafugga.

Given the vast majority shove them in a case what would be the big deal if it was plastic anyway? But it won't happen as it would be seen as cheap.

Seriously they just need to get some aluminium in these things. Phones now have a lot of weight in bigger batteries and cameras, it's mad to then wrap all this in a material which is heavier than it needs to be.

 

[lkalliance]

all this arguing and complaining over metals is ridiculous.

ya'll want a lighter phone? get rid of the glass. get rid of the metal bands. go polycarbonate.

we gotta go full iPhone 5C and go straight unapologetically plastic in this muthafugga.

The iPhone 15c! Let us will this into existence!

 

[tomtad]

Now that we have magsafe, do we really need a full glass back? Maybe they can trim down the amount of glass. I'm not sure Apple would ever have a non-uniform back, but that might be the next evolution of the camera bump. A new way of hiding it, by intentionally making the back look like multiple panels.

I like this idea as well. Have a circular, or squriclar, area in the centre of the phone for wireless charging and have the rest metal. It's already like this if you have a clear case and could look quite interesting.

 

[bc 08]

1. Yes you are confused by marketing. Simply by stating that SS is the right material for the job. Again you fail to explain why exactly with nothing to back up your claims. No answer yet?

2. And 7075 and 7050 are the most widely used in actual spacecraft.

From your own article.

Aluminum vs. Stainless Steel: Benefits of Both In Aviation & Aerospace

Aluminum vs stainless steel: Which is better for aviation and aerospace manufacturing? Compare the properties of stainless steel with aerospace grade aluminum.

www.marlinwire.com

3. They compare 6061 to 304. Not 7075.

"7075 is a combination of aluminum and zinc, and is the most commonly used alloy in aerospace applications due to its excellent mechanical properties, ductility, strength, and resistance to fatigue."

Application of Aluminum and Stainless Steel in Aircraft Industry

Aluminium and Stainless Steel might look similar, but they are actually quite different. Aluminum's lightweight and high strength-to-weight ratio make it a good choice for aircraft.

www.asapbuying.com

4. Am I still wrong? Or are you?

The article you provided included planes etc. Yes the specifications do mean something. Heat treated T6 for example. You don't even grasp basic concepts. No sense reasoning with you as you will manufacturer false facts to back up your claims.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/materials-science/aerospace-alloy

5. I know the differences between the two. Seems you do not. As shown above.
You have no idea how the SS effects the heat dissipation of the device. You have no idea how much SS is used in the device. Nor has that anything to do with the metals properties.

You sound foolish and ridiculous.
You can tell you have zero argument as you failed again to answer any of my questions. Zero actually.
Why is SS the better choice in a mobile device again? For the third time? 😂

1. I've stated why stainless is superior to aluminum as a phone frame repeatedly.
You want to ramble on about strength to weight while not understanding the simple fact that steel provides a far superior strength to AREA ratio.

This is ONE reason why it is a superior option for a watch case AND and iPhone frame were internal space is paramount, in addition to the previously stated reasons of dent resistance, gouge resistance, and perception of quality in hand.


2. Spacecrafts are irrelevant to this discussion and irrelevant to your misinformed claim that Apples uses 7075 aluminum in their iPhone construction.

Apple claims "aerospace grade" aluminum - that's it.
You're the one that claimed "aerospace grade" as a secret code for 7075.

It seems you've lost your own script.


3. That's irrelevant to the point. The point is that stainless steel and numerous aluminum alloys are used in aerospace - debunking your claim that 7050 and 7075 are "specifically" used in aerospace applications and thus "aerospace grade" is secret code for 7075.


4. You are wrong, consistently, on every single point.

Examples:
You claim Apple is using 7075 alloy in iPhones
You claim 7075 and 7050 are the only AL alloys used in aerospace
You claim 316L is "jewelry quality" and not "surgical grade"
You claim Stainless steel scratches easier than Aluminum
You claim Apple's "aerospace-grade" aluminum is many times more expensive than their "surgical-grade" stainless steel
You claim aluminum is a superior material for a phone bezel


5. If you knew anything about the topic you wouldn't have claimed 316L isn't "surgical grade" or that 7075 is the only aluminum alloy used is aerospace applications. Both of which you did.

I'm not going to continue a tit for tat discussion with a troll who has firmly planted himself in willful ignorance.

Have a nice day

 

[Ryan1524]

I like this idea as well. Have a circular, or squriclar, area in the centre of the phone for wireless charging and have the rest metal. It's already like this if you have a clear case and could look quite interesting.

I'm actually looking for, and not finding, some sort of stick-able piece to level out the camera bump. Preferably something nicely made out of leather, wood, or other material that looks well finished.

Has anyone seen something like that? Sort of like Project Ara, but just a simple piece to level the upper back.

 

[jcp007]

It's all personal preference and subjective about those who are opposite sides of the too heavy vs not heavy. Just to put it perspective, the iPhone 14 Pro Max is 8.47 oz or just over half a pound. I get that relatively sppeking that it might be weighty relative to the competition and prior year iterations but that, in my opinion, is not heavy especially if you use or hold it with both hands. Holding it with both hands makes it seem or appear to be smaller vs single-handed use.

 

[fatTribble]

I suspect that the biggest win would be to find some way to move away from the glass back. To appreciate the possibilities does anyone remember that moment they picked up an iPhone 5 after owning a 4 or a 4s? When I did that in an Apple store it was perhaps the biggest “oh wow!” moment that I’ve ever had with an iPhone and the 5 was bigger than the 4/4s. I’m pretty sure that a big factor in that weight reduction was moving away from a glass back on the 4/4s.

Apple must have some good materials scientists of its payroll. If only Apple could come up with something, maybe a fancy plastic, that looked really good and high end like glass and didn’t interfere with wireless charging; that would be innovation that I would really like to see.

I would love to see an end to the glass back. it just adds weight and makes the phone more fragile.

 

[fatTribble]

Aluminium is not stainless steel. Titanium would double iPhone price for sure. There doesn’t seem to have many other options to reduce weight other than giving up Wireless charging and going back to iPhone 6s material. That glass back is heavy too, and nothing much can be done about it.

I loved the 6 and 6s. They had the larger screen yet felt so light. I’m actually okay with a heavier iPhone for a bigger battery. It’s the glass back that seems unnecessary. I know some swear by wireless charging though.

 

[iamthedudeman]

1. I've stated why stainless is superior to aluminum as a phone frame repeatedly.
You want to ramble on about strength to weight while not understanding the simple fact that steel provides a far superior strength to AREA ratio.

This is ONE reason why it is a superior option for a watch case AND and iPhone frame were internal space is paramount, in addition to the previously stated reasons of dent resistance, gouge resistance, and perception of quality in hand.


2. Spacecrafts are irrelevant to this discussion and irrelevant to your misinformed claim that Apples uses 7075 aluminum in their iPhone construction.

Apple claims "aerospace grade" aluminum - that's it.
You're the one that claimed "aerospace grade" as a secret code for 7075.

It seems you've lost your own script.


3. That's irrelevant to the point. The point is that stainless steel and numerous aluminum alloys are used in aerospace - debunking your claim that 7050 and 7075 are "specifically" used in aerospace applications and thus "aerospace grade" is secret code for 7075.


4. You are wrong, consistently, on every single point.

Examples:
You claim Apple is using 7075 alloy in iPhones
You claim 7075 and 7050 are the only AL alloys used in aerospace
You claim 316L is only "jewelry quality" and not "surgical grade"
You claim Stainless steel scratches easier than Aluminum
You claim Apple's "aerospace-grade" aluminum is many times more expensive than their "surgical-grade" stainless steel
You claim aluminum is a superior material for a phone bezel


5. If you knew anything about the topic you wouldn't have claimed 316L isn't "surgical grade" or that 7075 is the only aluminum alloy used is aerospace applications. Both of which you did.

I'm not going to continue a tit for tat discussion with a troll who has firmly planted himself in willful ignorance.

Have a nice day

1. No you didn't. I asked you to explain how SS is better than 7075 Aluminum You claim it provides a better strength to Area ratio? 😂 hahaha. That simply is not a metric anyone uses except maybe for you. Apple doesn't use SS that is thinner because it's stronger. You cannot be serious?😬
Look at a tear down to see if you are correct. If that was the case, then why is there added weight from the use of SS on the pro models. Common sense my friend. 🤪
You also failed to answer why if it's so great Samsung and Google have not used it yet. Again. Notice a pattern here?
You simply ignored the fact that 7075 provides a better strength to weight ratio and better thermal conductivity. Again.

2. 7075 Aluminum is in their patent for a Aluminum phone chassis. Its not a claim, it's a fact. Another fact you like to ignore.

3. I already provided a article with a excerpt from the article stating as such. You ignored that as well. Because it contradicts your silly and ridiculous claim. I said 7075 and 7050 are used in actual spacecraft specifically. Not just Aerospace. Look above to see you are wrong again. Trying to twist my words will not help you as my words are written above. You just look silly trying it.

4. You have yet to prove me wrong on anything. Zero. But as seen above I made you to look the fool. 😉

5. No I did not. Again putting words in my mouth I never said. I never said 316L isn't surgical grade. I actually said it's the mostly used metal for surgical equipment. The complete opposite of what you are claiming. Look above. You are lying again to fit your argument.
Quotes from above.

"And 7075 and 7050 (7475-02) are the most widely used in actual spacecraft."

"316 is also used mainly for surgical tools but finished differently as already explained."

Again never said 7075 was the only metal used in Aerospace. I said 7075 was the most widely used in actual space craft. Again, you lie. Anyone reading this can see your foolishness.

This is not a tit for tat situation. You are simply out of your element and you have no idea how to respond. You are the sole definition of willful ignorance.

I am done here. You have been owned into oblivion already. 😂

"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."

Mark Twain.