Huh? You can't use the Watch without an iPhone so why did you buy it in the first place?
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.
Why have a sapphire screen if the coating gets scratched?
- Thread starter gusping
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Huh? You can't use the Watch without an iPhone so why did you buy it in the first place?
It's a joke... Why even bother asking that question. Of course I have an iPhone.
----------
I highly doubt that, doesn't sound very Apple like plus some probably ordered them the normal way us consumers do?
I'm as confused as everyone. It doesn't make sense.
What if some of these watches "accidentally" shipped with Ion-X glass? I'd be curious to see how the scratched sapphire watches respond to a diamond tester.
What if some of these watches "accidentally" shipped with Ion-X glass? I'd be curious to see how the scratched sapphire watches respond to a diamond tester.
I just don't understand why apple would put something that can scratch/be removed (the coating) on top of a material that is resistant to pretty much everything (sapphire). It makes absolutely no sense at all.
So why do you think it's a defect if you're inducing the exact same microscratches as on the iPhone, unless you have a film on the latter?
I'm not necessarily saying it's a defect I'm just saying it doesn't make sense, putting something that will scratch on top of something that doesn't.
Last edited:
If the scratches you observed are irrelevant, which most of us would probably agree, do you think it was appropriate to initiate this thread in the first place?
Last edited:
Just wait for the complaints when Apple release a phone with Sapphire glass that has a scratchable coating
Just wait for the complaints when Apple release a phone with Sapphire glass that has a scratchable coating
Yep, exactly, and some will be like the OP and return the new sapphire iPhone to go back to their iPhone 6/6s
The point is, why is a supposedly sapphire screen scratching. And if it is the coating why put something that scratches on top of something that doesn't. If this doesn't affect you, don't post. Simple as that. No one is forcing you to post here.
----------
Yep, exactly, and some will be like the OP and return the new sapphire iPhone to go back to their iPhone 6/6s
I said i'm not returning it because the scratch. LEARN TO READ!
? But you're returning it for some reason. If not because the oleophobic coating scratches, then why?
So what you are saying is that anyone that doesn't agree with you shouldn't post on your thread? You made an issue out of something you later called irrelevant, so I don't think it is strange that I wonder why you made an issue of it in the first place. I don't think your bashing of Apple's design regarding the sapphire watch face have any merit whatsoever and I have a feeling I am not alone in that opinion. Goodbye and have a great day!
You know I did some soul searching and you do have a valid point, and the thread is valid.
Apple has always applied to coating...to ion-x or gorilla glass.
So Apple created a watch line specifically created with sapphire to prevent scratching. So that regular users and OCD users alike can be appeased.
But yours scratched, right? A scratch is a scratch. Coating or not. This is a valid argument.
My question is - is it possible to polish, buff, or perhaps reapply this coating?
If it can be done easily at home, then of course sapphire is better even with the coating - it's just a quick fix at home.
If it's not a quick fix at home, perhaps Apple can offer a free service for watch owners to refinish their watch. I would still consider a sapphire screen if this service was available.
Or...yours could be defective?
Aha! An intelligent soul after all. Hard to come by these days, especially on internet forums.
----------
I don't feel I need it. It's a great gadget but for £600 it's not worth it. The software is another problem. It is super slow, especially loading up anything that requires the internet (my internet is very fast before you lot complain about that). And the screen problem is possibly the icing on the cake.
----------
The thread is about the coating and why they bothered putting it over the sapphire screen as much as it is about my scratch. I'm curious as to why they put something that can be scratched/removed over a scratch resistant material. A 5 year old could give a good answer as to why that makes NO sense at all. Very unlike Apple. I know it's on phones but gorilla glass scratches anyway, it's not like the watch screen which shouldn't.
reminds me of these stupid people i know who put a screen protector on their iPhone and use said screen protector for the length they own the iPhone because they are to cheap to buy a new screen protector after its all scratched up like why even use a screen protector if you just live with a scratched up screen protector for 2 years??? makes no sense at all either.
The oleophobic coating can only last so long, but it's designed to help with fingerprint smudges for most of the Watch's useful life. Would you rather have a crystal that is full of scratches or has absolutely no scratches once the coating has worn away? If it bothers you so much, you can always remove the coating right off with the appropriate chemical. People would be complaining left and right about fingerprint smudges if it wasn't for the coating. You're the one who's not thinking "Apple-like."
Finally a sapphire scratch test straight from the box.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EE_3QT_3C94
SPOILER: The sapphire did scratch very slightly (was it the coating?).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EE_3QT_3C94
SPOILER: The sapphire did scratch very slightly (was it the coating?).
Once he polished it up with that cloth, you really couldn't see any scratches in the Sapphire. He later said "This one isn't scratching at all!!"
You should watch the video on the consumer reports thread. They did a test with a level 9 pick from the Mohs scale and couldn't scratch it!!
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1878989/
Wow.
Apple put in the coating to reduce smudging. That is why. It's been said. They put it over the sapphire because it would not work underneath.
Over time, the coating will wear from exposure and usage and those micro scratches will go from less noticeable, especially with your fingering, to gone. If you're that obsessive compulsive about it, wipe it well and often because the coating is mailable, which will round out the harsh edges faster than nature - that's what I do with my iPhone.
The display will keep, just as Apple said.
Apple put in the coating to reduce smudging. That is why. It's been said. They put it over the sapphire because it would not work underneath.
Over time, the coating will wear from exposure and usage and those micro scratches will go from less noticeable, especially with your fingering, to gone. If you're that obsessive compulsive about it, wipe it well and often because the coating is mailable, which will round out the harsh edges faster than nature - that's what I do with my iPhone.
The display will keep, just as Apple said.
Yes, it's an extremely impressive result from the sapphire. I was only able to make out a near invisible horizontal mark. The Consumer Reports video essentially confirms this also.
Some folks had wondered if CR perhaps received a watch without the oleophobic coating, but this video shows it coming right out of the box and not scratching either.
So it still doesn't quite answer the question of how OP's watch got scratched so soon. I wonder if it may have scratched during manufacturing...