Slashdot Mirror


60-Year-Old Glass Technology Finds Its Market

In the 1950s, Corning developed a glass product for which it has been trying to find a market ever since. What is now being called "Gorilla Glass" is currently worth $170M/yr. and is poised to quadruple (potentially) in the next year or two. Gorilla Glass is used on many smartphones including Motorola's Droid. ("Whether Apple Inc. uses the glass in its iPod is a much-discussed mystery since 'not all our customers allow us to say,' said [the] general manager of Corning's specialty materials division.") "Because Gorilla is very hard to break, dent or scratch, Corning is betting it will be the glass of choice as TV-set manufacturers dispense with protective rims or bezels for their sets, in search of an elegant look. Gorilla is two to three times stronger than chemically strengthened versions of ordinary soda-lime glass, even when just half as thick, company scientists say. Its strength also means Gorilla can be thinner than a dime, saving on weight and shipping costs. Corning is in talks with Asian manufacturers to bring Gorilla to the TV market in early 2011..." The Christian Science Monitor elaborates on the theme of job growth outside the US, as Corning plans to invest several hundred million dollars to retrofit an LCD plant in Shizuoka, Japan to manufacture the glass. The company will also expand the workforce in the Kentucky plant that now manufactures Gorilla Glass.

35 of 197 comments (clear)

  1. It's cool, isn't it? by TamCaP · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I love the general manager's remark regarding some other invention: "We're not sure what we're going to do with it, but it's cool, isn't it?" This clearly shows that people in there truly enjoy their work :D And it also seems, they can at some point turn the coolness factor into profit.

    1. Re:It's cool, isn't it? by Ice+Tiger · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't know what's more amazing, the glass or the fact a modern company invests 10% of its revenue into R&D with the patience to wait tens of years until their is a market and then quickly capitalises on that.

      Might have to buy some stock!

      --
      "Because we are not employing at entry level, offshoring will kill our industry stone dead."
    2. Re:It's cool, isn't it? by that+IT+girl · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I thought this too. The ability to see long-term is so rare these days! I hope it pays off big time for them (and I'm pretty sure it will).

      --
      10 FILL MUG WITH COFFEE
      20 DRINK COFFEE
      30 GOTO 10
    3. Re:It's cool, isn't it? by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Corning is a good company. And they're known for their long view: they came up with the first commercial 20 dB/km fibre optics too, back in the '70s.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  2. 60 years? by SpinningCone · · Score: 5, Interesting

    you would think that there would be plenty of applications for a super strong thin glass. i'm guessing it's prohibitively expensive to use compared to other products. either that or corning needs a better marketing team.

    the picture of the guy bending a small sheet in the article link is pretty cool.

    1. Re:60 years? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm not at all surprised that it hasn't show up in consumer electronics until quite recently, since LCDs were cost prohibitive until pretty recently, and touchscreens were not that big a deal(you can find examples going back at least to the 70's; but they weren't exactly mass-market items). Thin glass would have been counterproductive for CRTs, since, when your product basically involves pointing a small linear accelerator at the user's face, you want an adequate amount of leaded glass between it and them.

      I am surprised, though, that corning never managed to sell any serious quantity as a structural material. Glass-coated skyscrapers have been considered quite stylish for decades, and I'd imagine that "resists birdstrike, rocks, wind forces, and idiots leaning against the windows just as well as ordinary glass, at 20% the weight" would be a selling point.

    2. Re:60 years? by Joce640k · · Score: 2, Funny

      They needed to wait 60 years to measure the exact flow rate of this glass - you wouldn't want the bottom of your TV screen to go all wavy after a couple of years.

      --
      No sig today...
    3. Re:60 years? by Thanshin · · Score: 5, Funny

      I am surprised, though, that corning never managed to sell any serious quantity as a structural material. Glass-coated skyscrapers have been considered quite stylish for decades, and I'd imagine that "resists birdstrike, rocks, wind forces, and idiots leaning against the windows just as well as ordinary glass, at 20% the weight" would be a selling point.

      Maybe the manufacturing process grows exponentially beyond a certain, very small, size; making it only useful for the tiniest of skyscrapers, where highly paid squirrels take important decisions from their very high offices with Central Park views.

      There are not as many of such clients as you might think.

    4. Re:60 years? by natehoy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Obviously they did find a market for it, albeit a small one, since there's a plant in Kentucky that manufactures it. I think the point is that the market for it is about to expand significantly.

      Why didn't cell phone makers use it before? Simple - regular chemically-enhanced soda-lime glass is cheaper, and manufacturers used bezels to protect the edges, so it worked fine. The cost of LCDs was already high, so I doubt manufacturers felt much need to add sexy by dropping the bezel, given that many people were impressed enough with the concept of it being flat and lightweight compared to their CRT. And the cell market has, until recently, been mostly comprised of low-end feature phones that cell carriers can give away for free. Now people tend to want smart phones, and they have to look good, and they'll drop hundreds of dollars AND commit to a 3-year contract to get the latest shiny. So a few extra bucks to make 'em a little shinier will move more units, more quickly.

      Now everyone wants to go exposed-edge because bezels are apparently now the work of the devil (his other name is Bezelbub, dont'cha know), I heard it from Pope Steve so it must be true! So it's worth spending the extra on Gorilla Glass so they don't have users complaining that their cell phones shatter when gripped and cause shards of glass to fly out of the remains of the screen and slice their jugulars wide open, which might interrupt their call when the conductive blood touches the antenna. If you think sweaty hands are bad, wait until you see the signal drop from blood-covered hands.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    5. Re:60 years? by Jarik+C-Bol · · Score: 2, Informative

      BED of molten glass, not bead. not properly proofreading for the lose.

      --
      I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
    6. Re:60 years? by quacking+duck · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I am surprised, though, that corning never managed to sell any serious quantity as a structural material. Glass-coated skyscrapers have been considered quite stylish for decades, and I'd imagine that "resists birdstrike, rocks, wind forces, and idiots leaning against the windows just as well as ordinary glass, at 20% the weight" would be a selling point.

      Not to mention, if this had been around back in '86 Scotty could've used sheets of this to build the tank for those humpback whales; instead he had to reveal the formula for transparent aluminum in exchange for sheets of heavy, 6"-thick plexiglass!

    7. Re:60 years? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      He had to, he saw a 1/2-ton piece of glass falli

  3. Why can't more companies be like Corning? by mlts · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is rare these days to see companies devote 10% of their budget to R&D. Most tend to just not bother with R&D because it doesn't give ROI this quarter, and when they do, they gain the technology by buying a startup, or just copying someone else's work and improving on it.

    60 year old glass? Most enterprises can't even think past the next couple quarters or to the next FY, much less this far. Almost any other company would have long since chucked the manufacturing process for it because it wasn't immediately profitable.

    1. Re:Why can't more companies be like Corning? by Midnight's+Shadow · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Very true. It is good to see a company that plans for the long term and I applaud their R&D spending and holding onto something because it might be useful in the future. However I have to ask, if this process and glass is 60 years old shouldn't the patent have run out quite a while ago? Shouldn't we have been seeing this before now in uses that Corning couldn't think of?

      --
      "God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh. " -Voltaire
    2. Re:Why can't more companies be like Corning? by arth1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      But if this technology is now 60 years old, one would assume it is out of patent. How long before (if not already) every manufacturer is capable of making it? If it becomes profitable, then Pyrex and Co will be shipping it out at lower cost than Corning.

      Er, Pyrex is a Corning brand...

    3. Re:Why can't more companies be like Corning? by Deosyne · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Funny that you mentioned Pyrex. Corning patented Pyrex in 1915 (#1304623). So far as I can tell, there hasn't been another one issued for Pyrex, yet Corning seems to be doing just fine despite ~80 years of imitators and competition.

  4. Ha! So apple DOES use it by mary_will_grow · · Score: 3, Funny

    ("Whether Apple Inc. uses the glass in its iPod is a much-discussed mystery since 'not all our customers allow us to say,' said [the] general manager of Corning's specialty materials division.")

    Does Apple use the glass? I can't tell you. Because when they started using it they told us we couldn't tell anyone.

    muahahah

    --
    Why stick up for big business?
    1. Re:Ha! So apple DOES use it by Ogive17 · · Score: 4, Funny

      They definitely didn't use it for the iPod nanos!

      --
      "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
  5. Sounds Like an Argument for Patents by eldavojohn · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It is rare these days to see companies devote 10% of their budget to R&D. Most tend to just not bother with R&D because it doesn't give ROI this quarter, and when they do, they gain the technology by buying a startup, or just copying someone else's work and improving on it.

    Isn't that an argument for patents, though? I mean, you're saying that R&D isn't profitable in the eyes of most companies and why is that? I mean, we complain about patents but then if you look at the amount of innovation going on in countries where intellectual property is not enforced it seems to be fractions of what goes on in countries that enforce IP law. I'm not arguing for this but your complaint that not enough companies dump 10% into R&D seems, in my mind, to be heavily linked to the lack of reward. I thought patents and licensing those patents were supposed to be that reward or recoup mechanism.

    60 year old glass? Most enterprises can't even think past the next couple quarters or to the next FY, much less this far. Almost any other company would have long since chucked the manufacturing process for it because it wasn't immediately profitable.

    Well, from the article, it sounds as though they had pretty much shelved it and "In 2006, when demand surfaced for a cell phone cover glass, Corning dug out Chemcor from its database, tweaked it for manufacturing in LCD tanks, and renamed it Gorilla." Again, if you think about it, a patent is good for only ~20 years? So maybe when they 'tweaked' it they did that so they also could repatent it? They have a lot of patents related to glass composition.

    Can their competitors just fire up a plant right now and start making Chemcor? You bet. Gorilla is probably repatented though to protect them from that and that illustrates why you don't see a whole lot of companies taking the Corning path.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Sounds Like an Argument for Patents by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If it's been around for 60 years, any patents on it would have expired long ago, unless they've been keeping it "trade secret" all this time; and, given the amount of information in TFA, that doesn't seem likely. Personally, I'm wondering why other companies aren't competing on this (yet).

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
  6. Scotty, Anyone? by durnurd · · Score: 3, Funny

    How has nobody commented on the transparent-aluminum-like properties of this so-called "glass"?

    --
    --Edward Dassmesser
    1. Re:Scotty, Anyone? by Speare · · Score: 2, Informative

      How has nobody commented on the transparent-aluminum-like properties of this so-called "glass"?

      If you really wanted to polish your geek cred, you'd know that transparent aluminum exists, not just on Star Trek. Read the 2009 Science Daily article. But when I saw this, I thought of the Harrison Ford version of the movie, "Sabrina." As a CEO, in one scene he demonstrates a tough new material to some Japanese investors by taking a crowbar to the front of a large flat panel television.

      --
      [ .sig file not found ]
  7. Re:Phrasing by MiniMike · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's the reporters' interpretation. I'm guessing the original statement from the scientists was more like "The glass is two to three times stronger, so we can make it half as thick." I would be surprised if the scientists said "it's 4-6 times stronger at the same thickness" and the reporter did the math to get to 2-3 times stronger at half the thickness.

  8. wait... what? by bsDaemon · · Score: 4, Funny

    since when is 1962 in the 50s? rounding error?

    1. Re:wait... what? by Abstrackt · · Score: 2, Informative

      since when is 1962 in the 50s? rounding error?

      Drugs. Everything from 1959 to to 1970 was lost in a purple haze.

      --
      They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
    2. Re:wait... what? by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 2, Funny

      'scuse me while I kiss this guy

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
  9. The new or old Corning glass? by Marriedman · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They stopped making the original Corning glass/ceramics because people wouldn't buy new often enough. Buy it once and keep it forever. So they released a new and more fragile product. Will this be the same story?

  10. Re:thinner than a dime by need4mospd · · Score: 2, Funny

    Damn it I need precise measurements!

    It's less than 272,000 beard seconds thick.

  11. That is a myth from poor observation by dbIII · · Score: 5, Informative

    That bit is bullshit and should be removed - here's where the misconception comes from:

    Lead pipe organ pipes flow over time and get thicker at the bottom, the reason being the weight providing stress and the temperature being close enough to the melting point that the stuff can flow - just like hot glass bends only a lot slower. It's called creep and it only really happens in simple pure materials when you are at least 2/3 of the way to the melting point of the material from absolute zero. Mix other stuff in and that pushes it to higher temperatures.
    People heard about the lead pipes without understanding, saw that old windows were thicker and the bottom and thought that the glass must flow as well. The real answer is that until modern times it was very hard to make flat glass and that it was a common glaziers practice to put the thicker and stronger side of the glass at the bottom.
    The melting point of glass is too high for there to be much movement over a mere thousand years at room temperature let alone two hundred years.

  12. Christian Science Monitor by quatin · · Score: 2, Funny

    Maybe it's just their name, but anytime I see the "Christian Science Monitor" publish anything relating to science, I have to find a second source to verify they're not making it up.

    1. Re:Christian Science Monitor by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Informative

      CSM is really weird. It's actually a very good source of journalism, but it comes from a religion that basically ignores modern medicine and believes in healing through prayer alone.

  13. Re:If it was invented in 1962 patents havexpired by Abcd1234 · · Score: 3, Informative

    That age-old technology known as "trade secrets", which protected artisans for thousands of years before IP came into existence.

    Of course, there is a downside: it means no one but Corning knows the process for creating this stuff, and so no one can improve upon it, apply the same techniques to related fields, etc.

  14. Tough glass by Animats · · Score: 3, Informative

    There are several tougher variations on glass. Borosilicate glass (once called "Pyrex", but the name has been sold and "Pyrex" today is not necessarily borosilicate) is tough and very tolerant of temperature stresses. There are various laminates of plastics and glass. A common combination is a thin layer of glass, for scratch resistance, on top of polycarbonate. That won't shatter; it dents or punctures if hit hard enough.

    Cell phones should be using sapphire coated glass. Then you can put the thing in your pocket without a cover and not worry about it being scratched. The scanner glass at supermarkets is often sapphire coated, so it can handle years of canned goods being dragged across the scanner. Versace has shipped a "luxury cell phone" with this feature.

    There's also a diamond-coated glass for that application. Diamond coating is much cheaper than sapphire, but not quite as scratch-resistant.

  15. Change ONE variable at a time, bozos by Qubit · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Gorilla is two to three times stronger than chemically strengthened versions of ordinary soda-lime glass, even when just half as thick, company scientists say.

    So to put that in simpler terms, Gorilla glass is 4 to 6 times stronger than regular glass, at any given thickness.

    Why didn't they just say that in the first place?

    --

    coding is life /* the rest is */
  16. What would Zamyatin think? by Pseudonymus+Bosch · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yevgeny Zamyatin's "We":

    We is set in the future. D-503 lives in the One State,[3] an urban nation constructed almost entirely of glass, which allows the secret police/spies to inform on and supervise the public more easily. The structure of the state is analogous to the prison design concept developed by Jeremy Bentham commonly referred to as the Panopticon.

    --
    __
    Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
    GW Bu