Slashdot Mirror
Next-Gen Gorilla Glass: Smartphones Could Have Antibacterial, Anti-Glare Display
MojoKid writes "It's not too often that upcoming glass technology is worth getting excited over, but leave it to Corning to pique our interest. During a recent talk at MIT's Mobile Technology Summit, Dr. Jeffrey Evenson took to the stage to reiterate what it is about Gorilla Glass that makes it such an attractive product (something well evidenced given the majority of smartphones out there today implement it), as well as to give us a preview of what's coming. Having pretty much mastered Gorilla Glass where strength, scratch-resistance and general durability are concerned, the company is now looking to improve-upon it (possibly for Gorilla Glass 4) by making it non-reflective and germ-resistant. Imagine your smartphone sporting this — you'd finally be able to see the screen regardless of how bright the sun behind you is. Unfortunately, it appears that it won't be hitting our phones or tablets that soon. The estimate is 'in the next two years.'"
To be honest, what I'd really like is anti-shatter.
Help I am stuck in a signature factory!
Yeah that's pretty neat, now let's make it optionally reflective so it can double as a mirror (women will kill for this) & smooth enough so skin oils don't smudge.
A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
Really... anti-bacterial? I knew Americans had an obsession with bacteria but this is getting ridiculous. The do realize that the rest of the phone, yaknow the part you hold, is not going to be anti-bacterial? What would happen if the average American were to realize that his/her own body contains ten times more bacteria than cells? Ewwww, ewwww bacteria.....
Anti-reflection coatings by themselves are nothing new. AR coatings that are scratch-resistant might be more tricky. But I would be really impressed if they can make it anti-reflective even when covered with fingerprints.
AR coatings are based on thin layers with thicknesses tuned and accurate to 20 nm or less and well defined refractive indices, matched to the refractive index of the air on one side and the glass on the other side. It's hard if not impossible to make a coating that keeps working even with an undefined number of micrometers of skin grease on top.
My glasses (eyewear) have a very nice AR coating, but fingerprints turn it into a colorful reflector.
Avantslash: low-bandwidth mobile slashdot.
That'll stop people glaring at me when my phone rings during the pianissimo of Haydns Surprise Symphony.
What are we going to do with them now?
The article isn't clear on what the antimicrobial coating does, but I'd hazard a guess that it is not an antibiotic but a surface that is too slippery for bacteria to attach to. An antibiotic agent would be pretty stupid and would degrade rapidly compared to the lifetime of the device (think: ATM), as opposed to a surface where bacteria just doesn't stick.
... whatever
My Nokia 5630 had a transflective LCD. This was always readable in the sun and even when the backlight was turned off. It works by having a partially reflecting layer between the LCD matrix and the backlight.
I really miss that feature on today's phones. I think they stopped selling this kind of displays because they look less good in the light conditions that you have in shops, since the partially reflecting layer also reflects some of the backlight.
(think: ATM)
Dude, ass to mouth? What is this, mobile phones for the porn industry?
Why can't porn actors ever have nice stuff? The glass does have uses outside pop culture you know, like an ATM, or any other automated service that requires user input. Why should I suffer your germs on my fingers, just because you don't wash your hands after sodomizing your sheep?
... whatever
The article isn't clear on what the antimicrobial coating does, but I'd hazard a guess that it is not an antibiotic but a surface that is too slippery for bacteria to attach to. An antibiotic agent would be pretty stupid and would degrade rapidly compared to the lifetime of the device (think: ATM), as opposed to a surface where bacteria just doesn't stick.
This is an equally uninformed guess; but it could also be something similar to the Titanium dioxide photocatalytic coatings that they sell for, or bake into, certain classier construction materials.
Reasonably tough, and not 'used up'(except by sheer mechanical weathering/abrasion); but when sunlight hits them, anything vulnerable to oxidizers; be it living or dead, gets chewed up pretty brutally.
Maybe they're planning on imprinting the anti-reflective properties directly on the surface of the glass vs just using a coating? This has been possible with silicon for a few years now.
It is believed that we are 10 times more microbial cells on and in our bodies than there are human cells.
With a ratio of 90% microbial and 10% basically there is an estimated 100 times more microbial genes than the genes in our human genome. So, we are in essence both human and bacteria. I hope this new anti-microbial glass doesn't have any nasty side effects...
Y'know, I think that business about antibiotics breeding antibiotic resistant bacteria applies more to the antibiotics that are safe for a mammal to ingest than to cell phones, hand soap & such. Bleach has been used for antibiotic purposes for a lot of years, but I have yet to hear of a super strain of bleach resistant bacteria (although this article comes close).
...or it could include just about any heavy metal, e.g. Cu or Al. Lots of bacteria are inhibited by these, so this kind of treatment might lend itself quite well to such a broad-brush application (which is how your deodorants containing aluminium-based compounds work).
Yes, I know, I know - it has been done already. So why isn't it in the latest and greatest?
Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
What an AMAZING idea! If only somebody had thought of that before, then you wouldn't have to see the sun reflected behind you...
I think I might be in a minority in not being a big fan of reflective screens, but I would have thought Apple in particular would be grumpy about the latest/best glass not being shiny any more.
It isn't the glare that keeps me from seeing my smart phone screen in direct sunlight, it is the relatively dim backlight compared to the bright sunlight that keeps me from seeing my smart phone screen. Actually, I see the screen just fine. It's the lcd crystals that are the problem.
True, but I doubt they're going to coat something you put up to your face in something so harsh.
Antibacterial?
Finally, an iPhone screen made for the dirty-old-man in all of us!
Great. Another chance to make bacteria resistant to something else.
- Zav - Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods...
telephone sanitizers who will be put out of work?
And one unexpectedly dirty phone could doom our society....
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
I really hate seeing the oils of my skin on the screen.
Paul: Father... father, the sleeper has awakened! - Dune
They think that its more important to look at their products--than into them.
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
Unless they have some new miracle system, coatings tend to come off over time. If it's anything like glasses, you'll start to see it coming off around the edges and slowly working towards the inside. You'd certainly lose that non-reflective goodness if you had to use a screen protector to avoid this.
Because the odds of cracking screens on smart phones are so high, why don't the device makers design the phones so that they can be more easily replaced? I replaced my wife's iPhone 4 screen after she dropped the phone on its edge. My kid also cracked his iPod Touch 4 screen the same way. Replacing the iPhone screen wasn't horrible, but it could have been easier if Apple just sold a replaceable screen/button assembly that just plugged into the rest of the phone. The iPod Touch replacement seems like more of a nightmare. You need to take the motherboard out of the case to unplug the screen from the bottom of the motherboard. What a stupid, stupid design.
Do non-Apple smart phone screens crack as often as iPhone screens? The iPhones sure look cool with their screens running right up to the metallic edge; but in reality I would think that this would make them much more susceptible to cracking screens by landing on their edges. My old Moto and current Samsung GS3 phones had plastic edges that absorb shock that would otherwise be transmitted to the digitizer, cracking it.
I could have it done now. Just 'matte' the glass surface with nano-pillars of silicon dioxide. We have the tech now.
Now whether or not it stands up to the pressures that 'Gorilla Glass' can supposedly withstand is another issue entirely.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Corning's on a marketing offensive against sapphire, which is up and coming as a cover glass material. It's massively stronger than Gorilla (TM) Glass and so can offer better protection for the same thickness from impacts (although Corning will argue the opposite). The main problem has been that it's been expensive, but for some applications it's perfect (I'm looking at you smart watches) and the price is coming down, down, down.
who thought this was about Google Glass for gorillas on the first glance?
Unless there are some sick, sick bacteria that are in to that sort of thing.