How Apple's Billion Dollar Sapphire Bet Will Pay Off

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

How Apple's Billion Dollar Sapphire Bet Will Pay Off

Posted by Soulskill on Tuesday April 22, 2014 @12:12PM from the sapphires-now-require-proprietary-connectors dept.

alphadogg writes: "Apple is making a billion dollar bet on sapphire as a strategic material for mobile devices such as the iPhone, iPad and perhaps an iWatch. Exactly what the company plans to do with the scratch-resistant crystal – and when – is still the subject of debate. Apple is creating its own supply chain devoted to producing and finishing synthetic sapphire crystal in unprecedented quantities. The new Mesa, Arizona plant, in a partnership with sapphire furnace maker GT Advanced Technologies, will make Apple one of the world's largest sapphire producers when it reaches full capacity, probably in late 2014. By doing so, Apple is assured of a very large amount of sapphire and insulates itself from the ups and downs of sapphire material pricing in the global market."

195 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Well. by Psyko · 2014-04-22 12:21 · Score: 2

The only thing it's hurting is the other people looking for sapphire display covers like was mentioned a couple months back.
Personally, I'm on the Gorilla Glass bandwagon.
It's:
Stronger
Stronger
Cheaper & faster to produce
apple can pretty much do what it wants and they have plenty of money so it's not like it's a gamble at this point. $1bn is not going to dent their bank.
I own a couple of their devices, but I've personally relegated them down to be things I don't even carry around, and the interface always makes me feel like I'm using one of those kid's toy computers that has like 6 buttons with pictures on them (the cow says Mooooo).

--
01:36AM up 426 days, 2:46, 1 user, load average: 0.14, 0.11, 0.05
1. Re:Well. by Psyko · 2014-04-22 12:24 · Score: 1
  
  Stronger
  Stronger
  Should have been
  Stronger
  Lighter
  Guess I'm tired.
  
  --
  01:36AM up 426 days, 2:46, 1 user, load average: 0.14, 0.11, 0.05
2. Re:Well. by catmistake · 2014-04-22 12:27 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  The only thing it's hurting is the other people looking for sapphire display covers like was mentioned a couple months back.
  Personally, I'm on the Gorilla Glass bandwagon. It's: Stronger Stronger Cheaper & faster to produce
  apple can pretty much do what it wants and they have plenty of money so it's not like it's a gamble at this point. $1bn is not going to dent their bank.
  I own a couple of their devices, but I've personally relegated them down to be things I don't even carry around, and the interface always makes me feel like I'm using one of those kid's toy computers that has like 6 buttons with pictures on them (the cow says Mooooo).
  I to am on the Gorilla Glass bandwagon as well, and a big big fan of Corning. But Gorilla Glass is under patent. Synthetic Sapphire has been around since 1902, and it was cheap back then. Sapphire is hard... 9 on the Mohs scale, and the only substance harder is natural and synthetic diamond. I find it difficult to believe... so...do you have any references that says Gorilla Glass is cheaper and harder than Sapphire?
  
  --
  The Admin and the Engineer
3. Re:Well. by nitehawk214 · 2014-04-22 12:36 · Score: 2
  
  Should have been
  Stronger
  Lighter
  Guess I'm tired.
  Should have been
  Stronger
  Harder
  Faster
  
  --
  I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
4. Re:Well. by NoKaOi · 2014-04-22 12:49 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  I find it difficult to believe... so...do you have any references that says Gorilla Glass is cheaper and harder than Sapphire?
  Even Corning's own website doesn't say outright that Gorilla Glass is stronger. Only that:
  
  Sapphire's performance as a cover for high-end watches probably leads to the current speculation. But those covers are much smaller than a mobile phone and are two to three times thicker than Gorilla Glass. In one of our commonly accepted strength tests, sapphire breaks more easily than Gorilla Glass after the same simulated use. Additionally, sapphire’s cost and environmental hit are huge issues.
  Notice how they totally weasel around and, and only in "one of our commonly accepted strength tests" did Gorilla Glass outperform sapphire? So do they only have one test, or did sapphire outperform Gorilla Glass in all the others?
  The real question is: Which is more likely to break in real life? That probably depends on how you test it. The best test would be to give a bunch of iPhones to a statistically significant set of teenagers and see how many screens of each are still intact after a while.
  Also, there is some speculation on several different sites that Apple may not intend to use sapphire for the screen, but instead for the camera lens. They currently use it on the camera lens and the home button. I wonder if it's something they could use in other things that don't currently use Gorilla Glass, like macbook screens?
5. Re:Well. by Seraphim1982 · 2014-04-22 12:49 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Sapphire is hard... 9 on the Mohs scale, and the only substance harder is natural and synthetic diamond.
  Lots of things are harder then Sapphire, particularly carbides and borides. Examples include silicon carbide, titanium carbide, boron (the hardest element) boron carbide, and boron nitride.
  
  I find it difficult to believe... so...do you have any references that says Gorilla Glass is cheaper and harder than Sapphire?
  No one ever said it was harder, they said it was stronger.
6. Re:Well. by arth1 · 2014-04-22 12:50 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  I to am on the Gorilla Glass bandwagon as well, and a big big fan of Corning. But Gorilla Glass is under patent. Synthetic Sapphire has been around since 1902, and it was cheap back then. Sapphire is hard... 9 on the Mohs scale, and the only substance harder is natural and synthetic diamond. I find it difficult to believe... so...do you have any references that says Gorilla Glass is cheaper and harder than Sapphire?
  I'm not the parent poster, but here's a ref claiming that Gorilla Glass is indeed both cheaper and far weaker than sapphire.
7. Re:Well. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 12:51 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Sapphire is indeed harder than Gorilla Glass, whether you are talking about scratch hardness (the Mohs scale) or indentation hardness (the Vickers scale). There isn't an exact value for the scratch hardness of Gorilla Glass but it seems that people are easily able to scratch it with sandpaper, granite, or whatever, whereas you really cannot scratch sapphire with anything less than corundum/diamond.
8. Re:Well. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 12:53 · Score: 1
  
  Impact resistance and breakage resistance are not necessarily the same thing as hardness. Something which is flexible and can absorb impacts by elastic deformation can be far more 'tough' in real-world circumstances than something which is as hard as possible. Of course geometry and loading are relevant as well, especially if the material is anisotropic. But still, the area under the stress strain curve is typically a good first indicator of toughness, and that area is a product of both the forces required AND the deformation produced - something which can't deform much at all before fracture will be far less tough then something that can deform a lot.
9. Re:Well. by R3d+M3rcury · 2014-04-22 12:58 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  silicon carbide, titanium carbide, boron (the hardest element) boron carbide, and boron nitride.
  All of which would make a really crappy screen cover.
10. Re:Well. by Guspaz · 2014-04-22 12:59 · Score: 2
  
  From TFA, Gorilla Glass reportedly costs about $10 per display when Apple first started using it (on the original iPhone), with prices eventually dropping to about $3 today. Sapphire is expected to cost about $20 after all is said and done. It'll come down, certainly, but it's definitely not cheaper.
  As for being tougher, my understanding is that it's far more scratch resistant than gorilla glass, but not necessarily as shatter resistant.
11. Re:Well. by Arkh89 · 2014-04-22 12:59 · Score: 1
  
  Should have been :
  Harder,
  Better,
  Faster,
  Sronger
  tutututut...
12. Re:Well. by catmistake · 2014-04-22 13:08 · Score: 2
  
  Also, there is some speculation on several different sites that Apple may not intend to use sapphire for the screen, but instead for the camera lens. They currently use it on the camera lens and the home button.
  That (external) speculation sounds kind if silly... considering there are lots of other teeny tiny parts in iOS devices that the cost of which probably is more volitile and fluctuates more than the price of synthetic sapphire. So for a billion dollars, it seems like an investment that would take decades to pay for itself.
  
  I wonder if it's something they could use in other things that don't currently use Gorilla Glass, like macbook screens?
  That is interesting, and would absolutely justify a billion dollar investment if that is their intention, because they would need a metric shitton of sapphire to pull that off. My guess is its just for the iPhone/iTouch screens, because the idea is already out there and being used for mobile device screens, and Apple sells a lot of iPhones, which I think would amount to enough sapphire needed to make it worth it to the Apple bean counters.
  
  --
  The Admin and the Engineer
13. Re:Well. by catmistake · 2014-04-22 13:12 · Score: 1
  
  As for being tougher, my understanding is that it's far more scratch resistant than gorilla glass, but not necessarily as shatter resistant.
  fyi, scratch resistence is also a measure of shatter resistence, so if a substance is more scratch resistant than another, it is also more shatter resistant, at least that's what I just read in an articled about sapphire linked from somewhere else in this thread.
  
  --
  The Admin and the Engineer
14. Re:Well. by zippthorne · 2014-04-22 13:17 · Score: 1
  
  So.. vapor deposit a layer of sapphire on top of the gorilla glass and call it a day....
  
  --
  Can you be Even More Awesome?!
15. Re:Well. by viperidaenz · 2014-04-22 13:23 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  a metric shitton of sapphire
  Exactly. Not one of those ill-defined imperial long shit tons and short shit tons.
16. Re:Well. by plover · 2014-04-22 13:34 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Make it harder sells it better
  Work 'em faster Apple's stronger
  More than ever iPhone after
  iPod works the Android over
  
  --
  John
17. Re:Well. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 13:36 · Score: 0
  
  No scratch resistance is not a measure of shatter resistance. The sapphire is extremely hard, but also very thin. Very hard thin things tend to shatter when force is applied. The gorilla glass screens are actually plastic, so while they are softer and susceptible to scratches, have some give, and will require more force to shatter them. Which is better will depend on how the user treats the device.
  I honestly don't know what you people do to your phones, my GS4 has never had a screen protector, ive dropped it, sat on it, fished it out of recliners, etc and there is nary a scratch on it.
  Oh, and the article in the summary notes:
  
  Secondly, it means overcoming a surprising problem: despite its hardness, synthetic sapphire can be prone to fracturing, at almost any point in this finishing process, due to impurities or to the presence of unresolved strains in the crystalline structure.
  
  Even the slightest impurity can cause it to fail. That certainly does not sound shatter resistance
18. Re:Well. by Guspaz · 2014-04-22 13:38 · Score: 2
  
  Corning owns Gorilla Glass, though, so that wouldn't help Apple increase their vertical integration. TFA does mention that there is work in that direction going on, though.
19. Re:Well. by Mr0bvious · 2014-04-22 13:45 · Score: 2
  
  I'm certainly no materials expert but anecdotal evidence does not support your hypothesis.
  Most plastic is less scratch resistant than most glass. Most glass is less shatter resistant than most plastics.
  Therefore I conclude that: scratch resistance != measure of shatter resistence.
  
  --
  Never happened. True story.
20. Re:Well. by viperidaenz · 2014-04-22 13:51 · Score: 2
  
  Looks like scratch resistence != shatter resistence.
  
  Secondly, it means overcoming a surprising problem: despite its hardness, synthetic sapphire can be prone to fracturing, at almost any point in this finishing process, due to impurities or to the presence of unresolved strains in the crystalline structure.
  “That’s something that’s being very carefully measured and tested,” says Stone-Sunderberg. “Fracturing is probably of the highest concern. If a product is released with a more expensive touch screen [cover] and consumers experience fracturing, they’re going to be highly disappointed. It would be devastating to the sapphire industry.”
  
  Also, the tensile strength of regular glass (which varies considerably however) can match that of synthetic sapphire. Sapphire has very good compression stength though.
  This is the reason for steel reinforced concrete. You can't easily compress concrete but you can pull it apart pretty easily. If you add steel with its good tensile strength, you get a strong material that excels in both areas.
  Apple will need to do something with the sapphire or it will shatter with the slighest bend. Watch faces don't have this problem because they're relitively thick. You can't piss away millimetres in thickness and weight when it comes to the next gen smart phone.
21. Re:Well. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 13:56 · Score: 0
  
  ...Sapphire is hard... 9 on the Mohs scale, and the only substance harder is natural and synthetic diamond.
  Don't make yourself our to be stupid now:
  silicon, tungsten and titanium carbide are all above sapphire on the "moh" scale..
  Boron and several biproducts, etc is even harder.
  And let's not get into nanocrystalline crystals here(above 10)
22. Re:Well. by sensei+moreh · 2014-04-22 14:05 · Score: 1
  
  and the only substance harder is natural and synthetic diamond.
  I hate to be the one to break the news to you, but there are substances haeder than corundum yet softer than diamond. SiC and BN come to mind
  
  --
  Geology - it's not rocket science; it's rock science
23. Re:Well. by lgw · 2014-04-22 14:05 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Gorilla glass cracks anyway. First time I drop a phone, there goes the glass. But it also scratches. It's far softer than sand, so in arid areas the grit that gets everywhere can scratch your phone in your pocket. Sapphire at least has that going for it - there's little in everyday life that can scratch it.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
24. Re:Well. by lgw · 2014-04-22 14:09 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Why do expensive watches have sapphire crystals? Well, sapphire has advantages, but mostly because those watches are jewelry that happen to tell time.
  Why will iPhones have sapphire screens? Because they are jewelry that happen to make phone calls. If you see Apple products as fashion accessories first, then sapphire screens are a brilliant idea.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
25. Re:Well. by maliqua · 2014-04-22 14:28 · Score: 1
  
  Sapphire is hard... 9 on the Mohs scale, and the only substance harder is natural and synthetic diamond. I find it difficult to believe... so...do you have any references that says Gorilla Glass is cheaper and harder than Sapphire?
  he said it was stronger not harder, very different things. things that are harder on the Mohs scale are more likely to shatter than things lower on the scale, hardness is not the only factor that determines the durability of a material .
26. Re:Well. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 14:29 · Score: 0
  
  Doesn't matter how good of a screen cover they make in a sense, as if they are around in an environment they can still scratch your screen. Carbide dust can come up any place that uses abrasives, even sand paper. If the only harder substance was diamond, you wouldn't come across dust as often, even in tool environments considering how little is needed on diamond based tools.
27. Re:Well. by ceoyoyo · 2014-04-22 14:57 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Sapphire is almost certainly more scratch resistant, because it's harder. Gorilla glass may well be less likely to break, since it's not as hard. Scratch and break resistance are usually difficult to get together. You're right, the real question is, in the real world, which is the more important property? Are scratches or breaks more common? Can other design features mitigate scratches or breaks more effectively?
  I would think some rubber buffer around the glass could be used to add a lot of break resistance. Other than putting a film over the screen, scratches are pretty hard to prevent without making the surface itself more resistant.
28. Re:Well. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 15:01 · Score: 0
  
  Wait
  Don't stop
  Keep going
  Almost there
  goaallllllllllllllll
29. Re:Well. by ceoyoyo · 2014-04-22 15:03 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Really? You got modded up for that?
  Expensive watches have sapphire faces because sapphire is one of the hardest materials that can be made into a thin, transparent sheet for a reasonable price. That makes it very scratch resistant. It's not bling, it's very practical.
30. Re:Well. by catmistake · 2014-04-22 15:04 · Score: 1
  
  Fair enough! It didn't sound right to me either... but I was sure I had just read something to that effect minutes before I posted.
  
  --
  The Admin and the Engineer
31. Re:Well. by ColdWetDog · 2014-04-22 15:15 · Score: 1
  
  Even the slightest impurity can cause it to fail. That certainly does not sound shatter resistance
  The slightest impurity? On an Apple device?
  Not on your life.
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
32. Re:Well. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 15:18 · Score: 0
  
  i have dropped my droid4 like 7-8 times now from waist height, no scratches, no cracks. and it only has gorilla glass. i have also dropped my kindle ereader several times, and there is nothing wrong with it. my tablet goes in a backpack and does my mp3s from a 32gb sd card, so that doesn't get dropped.
33. Re:Well. by flyingfsck · 2014-04-22 15:21 · Score: 1
  
  Uhmmm, saphire is harder than glass.
  
  --
  Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
34. Re:Well. by crakbone · 2014-04-22 15:32 · Score: 1
  
  I don't really care but if my phone can go through the same thing as this monitor I'll be very happy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
35. Re:Well. by Khyber · 2014-04-22 15:57 · Score: 1
  
  "Sapphire is hard... 9 on the Mohs scale, and the only substance harder is natural and synthetic diamond"
  Not even close. Boron is harder. Tungsten is harder with a Vicker's maximum of 2400, Sapphire 2300. Sapphires won't scratch my pure tungsten ring.
  "and the only substance harder is natural and synthetic diamond. I find it difficult to believe..."
  Well, given your lacking education on material hardness, not a surprise you can't believe.
  
  --
  Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
36. Re:Well. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 16:02 · Score: 0
  
  Keep in mind that Apple has a patent on making composite gorilla/sapphire glass with the strength of gorilla glass, and the scratch resistance of sapphire.
37. Re:Well. by AlphaWolf_HK · 2014-04-22 17:41 · Score: 1
  
  Remember slashdot is a US based website, that should be spelled "tsktsktsktsk"
  
  --
  Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
38. Re:Well. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 18:10 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  I have a $150 watch that has a sapphire crystal and titanium case. The watch case is significantly scratched and the crystal is not scratched at all. Definitely not bling and definitely practical. And not expensive (the replacement cost of the crystal is $50).
39. Re:Well. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 18:14 · Score: 0
  
  I've only scratched gorilla glass before with corundum powder, and carborundum powder.
40. Re:Well. by davester666 · 2014-04-22 18:28 · Score: 1
  
  Yes. One Library of Congress.
  
  --
  Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
41. Re:Well. by vux984 · 2014-04-22 19:46 · Score: 1
  
  I would think some rubber buffer around the glass could be used to add a lot of break resistance.
  rubber doesn't really go with apple's metal and glass stylistic sensibilities.
  Are scratches or breaks more common?
  I've seen tons of broken screens even as recently as last week. I can't honestly say I've seen any scratched ones in the last few yers.
42. Re:Well. by Noughmad · 2014-04-22 20:12 · Score: 1
  
  i have dropped my droid4 like 7-8 times now from waist height, no scratches, no cracks.
  just this terrible pain in all the diods down his left side...
  
  --
  PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
43. Re:Well. by stasike · 2014-04-22 20:49 · Score: 1
  
  The gorilla glass screens are actually plastic,
  
  Gorilla glass is NOT plastic.
  It is a regular high quality glass that is tempered in a molten salt.
  
  Quote from Wikipedia:
  
  During its manufacture, Gorilla Glass is toughened by ion exchange. The material is submersed in molten potassium salt at a temperature of approximately 400 degrees C (750 degrees F), whereby smaller sodium ions leave the glass to be replaced by larger potassium ions from the salt bath. The larger ions occupy more space and are pressed together when the glass cools, causing potassium ions to diffuse far into the surface, thereby creating a 'surface' layer of high compressive stress deep into the glass, a layer more resistant to damage from everyday use.
44. Re:Well. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 21:01 · Score: 0
  
  But not Gorilla Glass.
45. Re:Well. by Bing+Tsher+E · 2014-04-22 21:17 · Score: 1
  
  Additionally, sapphireâ(TM)s cost and environmental hit are huge issues.
  Can someone expand on this point more for me? It's thus far not been discussed. Is synthetic sapphire production environmentally nasty?
46. Re:Well. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 21:31 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  You realize sandpaper grit *is* corundum, right?
47. Re:Well. by SoulNibbler · 2014-04-22 21:48 · Score: 1
  
  I think the OP is refering to plastic as in the adjective
  plastic
  1632, "capable of shaping or molding," from L. plasticus, from Gk. plastikos "able to be molded, pertaining to molding," from plastos "molded," from plassein "to mold" (see plasma). Surgical sense of "remedying a deficiency of structure" is first recorded 1839. The noun
48. Re:Well. by SoulNibbler · 2014-04-22 22:01 · Score: 1
  
  I'm pretty sure the interesting metric is the fracture toughness.
  Interestingly enough there is a NIST page on it:
  http://www.ceramics.nist.gov/s...
  which ranges from 1.89 to 4.45 MPam1/2
  and a nice paper on anealed borosilicate glass fracture toughness:
  http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ph...
  which ranges from 1.5 to 1.7 MPam1/2 depending on loading.
  Of course Gorilla glass might have slightly higher values.
49. Re:Well. by gnupun · 2014-04-22 22:02 · Score: 5, Informative
  Sapphire is second hardest material (1st is diamond) known and much more scratch resistant than gorilla glass. This is the best feature of sapphire glass. Check out the youtube video in this article -- even a concrete block can't scratch the sapphire glass. However, sapphire glass has many disadvantages:
  
  *10x more expensive than gorilla glass
  *1.6 times heavier than gorilla glass
  *Higher refractive index so it's dimmer and therefore consumes more battery power to get same brightness as gorilla glass. A phone user is very interested in this property.
  *Not environmentally friendly (energy consumption very high to produce glass)
50. Re:Well. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 22:33 · Score: 0
  
  I don't remember seeing no Gorilla Glass in Mortal Kombat!
51. Re:Well. by MrNemesis · 2014-04-22 22:48 · Score: 2
  
  Silicon carbide at least has potential; there's a synthetic polymorph of it called Moissanite that's transparent, harder (9.5 vs. 9) and stronger than sapphire/corundum. I imagine it costs a shedload more to make than sapphire glass however.
  
  --
  Moderation Total: -1 Troll, +3 Goat
52. Re:Well. by gnupun · 2014-04-22 22:59 · Score: 1
  
  Sapphire glass requires 100 times more energy than glass.
53. Re:Well. by newcastlejon · 2014-04-22 23:26 · Score: 1
  
  There's already a thin rubber buffer between the glass and the case. It was there in the original iPhone and as far as I can see it's still there in the 5.
  
  --
  If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
54. Re:Well. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 23:47 · Score: 0
  
  It's not that hardness and toughness are "not necessarily the same thing"; they are fundamentally different.
  Also:
  
  But still, the area under the stress strain curve is typically a good first indicator of toughness, and that area is a product of both the forces required AND the deformation produced - something which can't deform much at all before fracture will be far less tough then something that can deform a lot.
  It's not a good first indicator, it's the definition of toughness. If you mean something is brittle, just say it's brittle. The word has a well-defined meaning in the field and as a pleasant change from the norm this meaning is commonly understood by the lay community. Something that is brittle can also be very tough if Young's modulus is sufficiently large for the material in question.
55. Re:Well. by dbIII · 2014-04-22 23:58 · Score: 1
  
  Close but not quite.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohs_scale_of_mineral_hardness
56. Re:Well. by O('_')O_Bush · 2014-04-23 00:39 · Score: 1
  
  Yea, besides the fact that these displays are notorious for breaking easily (in comparison to Gorilla Glass displays on Android phones), in gen 4, Apple had the brilliant idea of putting glass on the back of the phone as well, doubling your chance of breaking something if you dropped your phone.
  
  I don't know anyone who didn't have their iPhone wrapped in a case, just for that reason. In comparison, my RAZR Maxx has never needed a case because the backing is rubberized composite and there is a durable bevel around the screen.
  
  --
  while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
57. Re:Well. by Plumpaquatsch · 2014-04-23 00:49 · Score: 1
  
  Close but not quite. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...
  
  In case you only complain because you can't find sapphire on that list - corundum in all colors but red is known as sapphire, red is ruby.
  
  --
  Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
58. Re:Well. by drainbramage · 2014-04-23 00:52 · Score: 1
  
  However their lack of transparency would certainly improve security.
  
  --
  No brain, no pain.
59. Re:Well. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 00:55 · Score: 0
  
  Whoever modded parent down, maybe check Wikipedia next time:
  
  Because of corundum's hardness (pure corundum is defined to have 9.0 Mohs), it can scratch almost every other mineral. It is commonly used as an abrasive on everything from sandpaper to large machines used in machining metals, plastics, and wood.
60. Re:Well. by MachineShedFred · 2014-04-23 00:58 · Score: 2
  
  It requires a shload of heat, which takes energy. The environmental claim is regarding the production of this energy, which Apple has no problem building large solar arrays to get around that.
  
  --
  Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
61. Re:Well. by DigiShaman · 2014-04-23 01:04 · Score: 1
  
  Or maybe some future version of the iPhone's case and screen will be made entirely of sapphire glass??
  
  --
  Life is not for the lazy.
62. Re:Well. by wezelboy · 2014-04-23 01:05 · Score: 1
  
  boochiboochiboochiboochi is acceptable as well here in the states.
63. Re:Well. by fnj · 2014-04-23 01:13 · Score: 1
  
  fyi, scratch resistence is also a measure of shatter resistence, so if a substance is more scratch resistant than another, it is also more shatter resistant, at least that's what I just read
  Nope. Sorry. Read better sources. Scratch resistance is governed by surface hardness. Shatter resistance is governed by toughness. Hardness and toughness are the classic opposed desirables in materials science. Sure, you can play games in certain materials with surface hardness, so the surface is very hard and the underlying material is still tough, which is ideal for things like drill bits, and would be ideal for transparent covers. You can also temper and anneal certain materials to tune the tradeoff between hardness and toughness.
  But no, fundamentally scratch resistance is not a measure of shatter resistance. To a great degree, scratch resistance is an INVERSE measure of shatter resistance.
64. Re:Well. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 01:21 · Score: 0
  
  even a concrete block can't scratch the sapphire glass.
  That's not true at all. I just had to have a titanium watch fixed - the upper case and sapphire replaced. How did it happen? Little bit of asphalt. Granted I was sliding on said asphalt at like 20km/h, but the sapphire was ground almost completely through.
65. Re:Well. by fnj · 2014-04-23 01:30 · Score: 1
  
  This is just speculation, but the source might have been referring to fracture mechanics. Fracture begins more easily when there is a surface imperfection. That's why you can cut glass with precision by scoring the surface and tapping it in such a way as to put the scored face under tension. And if you have a pit or scratch on the surface of either glass or sapphire, that will become a stress concentration when you put it under strain, and that is where the fracture will begin.
  That's also incidentally why cracks in airplanes start at rivet holes. Here the aluminum alloy material itself is purposely selected to have good toughness, so frequent and capable inspections will find the cracks before they reach a critical length. Even so, cutouts that have corners with sharp radii are avoided following the lesson of the bursting Comet airliner fuselages.
  If a material (sapphire) has high hardness (resistance to pitting and scratching), that certainly helps to minimize opportunistic fracture. But it is not the only factor. Plainly you can fracture even perfect, unpitted, unscratched glass or sapphire by bending it. Sapphire has a niche in high end LED flashlights, but if they are well engineered the sapphire is seated around the edge in elastomer and also recessed so no normal force is likely to ever be applied, which would act to bend it.
66. Re:Well. by fnj · 2014-04-23 01:31 · Score: 1
  
  I doubt it.
67. Re:Well. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 01:59 · Score: 0
  
  Silicon-carbide would be ideal. I work at Cree which is famous for their silicon-carbide substrates for LEDs, diodes, FETs, and RF devices. The wafers appear as clear as glass, except you can heat them to 1800C for hours with no melting or crystal-plane slip, dip them in nitric/HF etch chemistries all day to no effect, etc. If you could affort an SIC phone screen I think that would be pretty good.
68. Re:Well. by rogoshen1 · 2014-04-23 02:25 · Score: 1
  
  this factory is in mesa AZ (east phoenix metro) , i'd guess the electricity would come from nuclear at the very least (palo verde) -- but supposedly that region of the country is also a prime location for solar (300+ days of sunshine per yer and cheap shitty land)
69. Re:Well. by rogoshen1 · 2014-04-23 02:28 · Score: 1
  
  "A moissanite is an artificial diamond, Lincoln. It's Mickey Mouse, mate. Spurious. Not genuine. And it's worth... Fuck all."
  No Sol, you're wrong.
70. Re:Well. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 02:41 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  I would think some rubber buffer around the glass could be used to add a lot of break resistance.
  rubber doesn't really go with apple's metal and glass stylistic sensibilities.
  You just don't get the same sensation with that rubber buffer around your...oh wait, sorry, wrong forum.
71. Re:Well. by ceoyoyo · 2014-04-23 02:49 · Score: 1
  
  Sure it does. The rubber doesn't have to be exposed. IIRC the 3 and 3G did have a rubber buffer between the case and the class. The metal antenna/bezel on the 4 and 4s wee an okay shock absorber but the glass stuck out too far on either side. On the 5 and 5s the glass is lower profile and more protected.
  I got a scratch on my phone the first day I had it. Then I dropped it (quite a few times, the last time cracked the glass when it fell face down on gravel) and got it replaced under warranty. So I guess my experience has been even. A quick survey shows a few scratches and a few smashed screens on the phones near me - it looks pretty even. But the smashed screens are much more noticeable, of course.
  Apple has used gorilla glass to this point. They're investing in sapphire, presumably to make screen covers with. They're not stupid. Presumably they know something.
72. Re:Well. by ceoyoyo · 2014-04-23 02:53 · Score: 1
  
  Yes. And both my phone and my iPad have lots of evidence of being dropped on their sides and corners. They're really quite resistant to it. It's tough to design scratch resistance into something that has to have a big, flat screen though.
73. Re:Well. by Russ1642 · 2014-04-23 03:02 · Score: 1
  
  Handing phones to teenagers to test screens is probably the worst test you could come up with.
74. Re:Well. by MrNemesis · 2014-04-23 03:05 · Score: 1
  
  Ha, I was hoping someone would post that quote (I think the only pop culture reference to Moissanite anywhere) - I work within a stone's throw (pun not intended) of Hatton Gardens where Doug the Head's shop is, and his pub Ye Olde Mitre. Which reminds me, rather a nice day for a pint...
  
  --
  Moderation Total: -1 Troll, +3 Goat
75. Re:Well. by gstoddart · 2014-04-23 03:24 · Score: 0
  
  Should have been
  Stronger
  Harder
  Faster
  Deeper.
  A little to the left.
  Ohhhh.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
76. Re:Well. by BasilBrush · 2014-04-23 04:02 · Score: 1
  
  No, Sapphire is certainly stronger than Gorilla Glass. It's the next best thing to diamond. That's the reason it's pretty unscratchable. And that's why it's used for lenses and watch glasses.
  Sapphire may be more brittle than Gorilla Glass. But that's a different thing.
77. Re:Well. by BasilBrush · 2014-04-23 04:06 · Score: 2
  
  I can't believe the "dimmer" argument has an real validity given that sapphire is widely used for camera lenses, where any significant dimming would be a problem.
78. Re:Well. by durrr · 2014-04-23 04:53 · Score: 1
  
  Presumably they'll use it as a marketing ploy "EXCLUSIVE sAPPhire ultra hard display![pictures of brilliant blue sapphire gems] It's like functional jewlery for the low price of $999.99(32 gb version for $1999.99)"
  What they won't tell the user that hard doesn't equal shatterproof.
79. Re:Well. by phorm · 2014-04-23 05:03 · Score: 1
  
  Other than putting a film over the screen
  The films you can get these days deal with scratches/fingerprints and don't detract much from the brightness of the display, I'd rather have a screen that doesn't crack ($100 replacement or a big PITA for the owner to replace) and swap the film ($8-10 replaced) if needed for scratches.
80. Re:Well. by ImprovOmega · 2014-04-23 05:20 · Score: 1
  
  Honestly, I would just look forward to geeking out about my phone screen being made of transparent aluminum.
81. Re:Well. by Hodr · 2014-04-23 05:53 · Score: 1
  
  $50 for enough material to cover a watch face sounds expensive. If it were the same price for a 7" phone screen you would be looking at thousands of dollars.
82. Re:Well. by Nom+du+Keyboard · 2014-04-23 06:44 · Score: 1
  
  If Gorilla Glass is so superior to sapphire, then why is Apple going to such expense for an inferior material?
  Is it just that people will buy sapphire iPhones over GG iPhones? I doubt that.
  I expect that there are advantages to sapphire that you're missing.
  I know of a lot of GG iPhones with cracked/shattered displays, so there must be some room for improvement.
  
  --
  "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
83. Re:Well. by Nom+du+Keyboard · 2014-04-23 06:49 · Score: 1
  
  Also, there is some speculation on several different sites that Apple may not intend to use sapphire for the screen, but instead for the camera lens. They currently use it on the camera lens and the home button. I wonder if it's something they could use in other things that don't currently use Gorilla Glass, like macbook screens?
  That's an awful lot of sapphire that they'll be making if it's just for camera lenses and the Home button.
  And if the MacBook isn't already using GG, then why does it need sapphire?
  Not making sense here.
  
  --
  "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
84. Re:Well. by Nom+du+Keyboard · 2014-04-23 06:50 · Score: 1
  
  It requires a shload of heat, which takes energy. The environmental claim is regarding the production of this energy, which Apple has no problem building large solar arrays to get around that.
  They're making it in Arizona.
  Arizona has heat.
  
  --
  "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
85. Re:Well. by viperidaenz · 2014-04-23 08:16 · Score: 1
  
  Sapphire has a niche in high end LED flashlights, but if they are well engineered the sapphire is seated around the edge in elastomer and also recessed so no normal force is likely to ever be applied, which would act to bend it.
  That's the problem with using it for cellphone screens, every mm counts. It needs to be thin, flat and large. It also needs to look good. When was the last time you saw an Apple product with a recessed screen?
86. Re:Well. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 08:43 · Score: 0
  
  The problem with screen protectors is that they introduce an uncomfortable level of friction. It's much easier to slide your finger across glass than a piece of plastic.
87. Re:Well. by cerberusss · 2014-04-23 18:45 · Score: 1
  
  ROTFL! I'd mod you up if I had points :D
  
  --
  8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
88. Re:Well. by arth1 · 2014-04-24 04:41 · Score: 1
  
  $50 for enough material to cover a watch face sounds expensive. If it were the same price for a 7" phone screen you would be looking at thousands of dollars.
  $50 for a watch crystal is due to its special shape, and a small production number. Glass ones don't cost much less.
  Phone screens which don't need the domed shape of a watch crystal are far cheaper to produce, compared to its size. And the production volume will also bring the price down.
89. Re:Well. by catmistake · 2014-04-24 20:04 · Score: 1
  
  Sapphire has a niche in high end LED flashlights,.
  Holy expensive, Batman!. You weren't kidding.
  
  --
  The Admin and the Engineer
Sapphire and Steel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 12:22 · Score: 0

All irregularities will be handled by the forces controlling each dimension. Transuranic, heavy elements may not be used where there is life. Medium atomic weights are available: Gold, Lead, Copper, Jet, Diamond, Radium, Sapphire, Silver and Steel. Sapphire and Steel have been assigned....
saw Sapphire on YouTube with Amos 'n Andy by turkeydance · 2014-04-22 12:24 · Score: 1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...
Should have gone with ruby.... by BenJeremy · 2014-04-22 12:24 · Score: 2

...transparent aluminum! Clearly, Apple hates Star Trek.
1. Re:Should have gone with ruby.... by zifnabxar · 2014-04-22 12:29 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Rubies are sapphires, just with higher levels of chromium which makes them appear red. Maybe that's why Apple doesn't like them.
2. Re:Should have gone with ruby.... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2014-04-22 12:36 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Obviously, Apple doesn't want any of that Chromium stuff in their app store.
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
3. Re:Should have gone with ruby.... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 12:38 · Score: 1
  
  I love rubies... that color!
  But as a platform, I don't understand all the hype about Ruby. Maybe when it was new it was easy to deal with, but now, Ruby has so many versions (i.e. point versions), and some devs only support the bleeding edge... so you take the time to install the platform, gem thisorthat, and crap, won't install, wrong version. Its a total pain in the ass running multiple versions of any platform, and I find it has zero support compared to what I am used to with other platfoms. Its just a mess now, IMO. No wonder Apple hates it.
  Fuck Ruby. Bring me one of those chickens.
4. Re:Should have gone with ruby.... by arth1 · 2014-04-22 12:39 · Score: 1
  
  Scotty used an Apple Macintosh to enter the formula.
  What struck me watching it was that
  (a) My watch already had a transparent alumina crystal - sapphire.
  (b) No real Scotsman would say aluminum, but aluminium.
5. Re:Should have gone with ruby.... by catmistake · 2014-04-22 12:41 · Score: 2
  
  (b) No true Scotsman would say aluminum, but aluminium.
  FTFY.
  I guess you forgot where you were.
  
  --
  The Admin and the Engineer
6. Re:Should have gone with ruby.... by Guspaz · 2014-04-22 13:01 · Score: 1
  
  Errm, sapphire *IS* transparent aluminum. It's aluminum oxide (Al2O3).
7. Re:Should have gone with ruby.... by flyingfsck · 2014-04-22 15:28 · Score: 1
  
  Yup, sapphire goes by many names, depending on its colour. Long ago when they were named, no-one knew it was the same crystal. Today, most people still don't.
  
  --
  Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
8. Re:Should have gone with ruby.... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 23:59 · Score: 0
  
  (b) No real Scotsman would say aluminum, but aluminium.
  
  Cut the guy some slack... he traveled millions of miles... I mean thousands of miles...
9. Re:Should have gone with ruby.... by fnj · 2014-04-23 01:36 · Score: 1
  
  Aluminum oxide is not aluminum. Water is not hydrogen. You wouldn't call water "wet hydrogen".
Googled "Sapphire Death Ray" by RevWaldo · 2014-04-22 12:52 · Score: 0

I don't like the looks of this:

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl...

.

--
Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
here is the video by veci · 2014-04-22 12:54 · Score: 1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Anyone else notice by rsilvergun · 2014-04-22 13:01 · Score: 5, Interesting

that you can go from jack squat to worlds largest producer in a few years? I'm not saying they aren't gonna do it, I'm just saying it's crazy how fast their doing it. 50 years ago this would be a massive undertaking with a whole town built up around it. Now? I think the factory's gonna have a couple hundred employees. It's just nuts how few people you need in manufacturing anymore...

--
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
1. Re:Anyone else notice by viperidaenz · 2014-04-22 13:38 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  You can go from jack squat to anything with a billion dollars.
  Especially when the rest of the industry isn't all that large.
2. Re:Anyone else notice by rsilvergun · 2014-04-22 15:37 · Score: 1
  
  I guess my point is, 50 years ago you couldn't. The logistics alone would be too much, let alone setting up the manufacturing...
  
  --
  Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
3. Re:Anyone else notice by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 20:18 · Score: 0
  
  They're not setting up the manufacturing. They bought a First Solar plant and are retooling it to do their thing.
  Intel's Fab 42 plant took several years to go from dirt to mothballed factory. Apple didn't have to wait for the build, they just need to fill it with what I would assume is the right equipment(as I'm gonna guess not all of the solar panel stuff was able to swap over).
4. Re:Anyone else notice by gnasher719 · 2014-04-22 20:39 · Score: 1
  
  I guess my point is, 50 years ago you couldn't. The logistics alone would be too much, let alone setting up the manufacturing...
  Of course you could. Just a matter of pouring money into it.
5. Re:Anyone else notice by Bing+Tsher+E · 2014-04-22 21:26 · Score: 1
  
  People often forget that in the past there were people like Howard Hughes. He poured huge amounts of money into things like his giant wooden plane project (google 'spruce goose'). He was sort of an older Elon Musk.
6. Re:Anyone else notice by gtall · 2014-04-22 23:06 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, 'cause science and tech hasn't advanced in 50 years.
OMG by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 13:06 · Score: 0

Which 3D printer are they going to use and which asteroid will they be mining for the materials! O Brave New World that has such technologies in it!
You've all missed the obvious by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 13:09 · Score: 0

When the screen is a custom job made out of artificial sapphire how is anyone going to get the correct replacement screens. Perhaps Apple is thinking that people will buy a new device or send it back to Apple to replaced a cracked screen instead of using one of a million cheap places that will do glass replacements on i devices. I'm sure that there will be all sorts of FUD by Apple about how glass is well glass and sapphire is better.
1. Re:You've all missed the obvious by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 14:32 · Score: 1
  
  I'm sure you can just replace it with 'lesser' materials of the same dimensions.
  No one missed this because it is stupid.
It's a design problem, not materials. by aXis100 · 2014-04-22 13:26 · Score: 4, Interesting

How about they just design a phone that doesn't shatter when you drop it? Having the glass right to the edges might look nice but it's completely unpractical from a robustness point of view. Apple are just fashion victims.
My motorola Defy+ has a thin plastic bezel that doesnt degrade its appearance yet absorbs those nasty corner shocks. Simple design to solve a common problem and doesnt require building an expensive saphire factory.
1. Re:It's a design problem, not materials. by plover · 2014-04-22 13:40 · Score: 2
  
  But it's ... it's not ... cool.
  Apparently what is cool is to buy a gaudy plastic band to wrap around the edge to make up for this design defect, then bedazzle the shit out of it.
  
  --
  John
2. Re:It's a design problem, not materials. by ebno-10db · 2014-04-22 14:00 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Hear, hear!
  It seems like most of the IPhones I see have broken screens, but other phones only rarely. It's just a shitty design. Excuse me, I now have to go underground before the Apple fanboys catch up with me.
3. Re:It's a design problem, not materials. by GrahamCox · 2014-04-22 14:05 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  How about they just design a phone that doesn't shatter when you drop it?
  
  Yeah, they could, I dunno, make a harder kind of glass that doesn't shatter. Sounds familiar.
  
  The point is that the Motorola design might be a cheaper solution, bit the phone simply looks shittier. Some people, presumably yourself, don't care about that, but plenty of others do. It's the sort of thing that makes a Mercedes a Mercedes, and a Lexus a not-quite-right knock off of the same thing.
4. Re:It's a design problem, not materials. by ceoyoyo · 2014-04-22 15:25 · Score: 2
  
  That's because the other phones don't continue to function after their screens get broken. :P
  I've actually broken a couple of iPhone screens. They seem to survive the corner and edge drops just fine, but the face down drops onto concrete or an uneven stone floor breaks the screen. Still works fine though, which is impressive.
5. Re:It's a design problem, not materials. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 15:57 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  iPhone glass doesn't go all the way to the edge. The metal ring around the iPhone is the edge, and it absorbs nasty corner shocks just fine. SquareTrade, whose job it is to keep up on this shit (since they pay out the insurance claims) consistently rates the iPhone as less breakable than its Android counterparts.
6. Re:It's a design problem, not materials. by iroll · 2014-04-22 16:02 · Score: 2
  
  My NexusS has a plastic bezel and it shattered from a 2-ft drop onto a faux-wood (read: not that hard) surface.
  Because our anti-anecdotes would annihilate each other in a flash of light, you're going to have to come up with a better line of reasoning.
  
  --
  Repetition does not transform a lie into the truth. - FDR
7. Re:It's a design problem, not materials. by aXis100 · 2014-04-22 17:04 · Score: 2
  
  Supposedly the NexusS doesnt use gorilla glass, so it is much weaker anyway.
8. Re:It's a design problem, not materials. by Cyberax · 2014-04-22 17:29 · Score: 1
  
  They do. I once cracked a Galaxy S3 - it fell from about 2 meters. Screen was cracked and a couple of pieces fell out, yet it worked just fine.
9. Re:It's a design problem, not materials. by ceoyoyo · 2014-04-22 19:08 · Score: 1
  
  I was kidding. But I'm happy your phone still worked.
10. Re:It's a design problem, not materials. by GauteL · 2014-04-22 19:32 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  It seems like most of the IPhones I see have broken screens, but other phones only rarely.
  I'll counter your anecdote with one of my own. I've seen dozens of iPhones in the hands of friends and co-workers. Only one of them ever had broken glass (the back panel) and that was in the hands of one of the biggest drunks I've ever known.
  You simply only notice what you want to notice.
11. Re:It's a design problem, not materials. by Solandri · 2014-04-22 20:26 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Funny that you should bring up a car analogy. In the 1940s and 1950s, as cars began to get faster, more people started dying in accidents. As a result, manufacturers started building the car bodies to be stronger and more rigid. Of course when we started doing systematic crash testing in the 1960s and 1970s, we found out that this was absolutely the worst possible thing they could have done. With a rigid body, the entire force the impact is transferred to the occupants. The car stops immediately, while the passengers keep going... until they hit the front of the car at full speed. The better solution was to design a strong passenger compartment and belt the occupants to it, while the rest of the car was designed to deform and shatter to lengthen deceleration times (decreasing peak acceleration forces) and dissipate energy. Which is actually what a phone with a plastic body and a metal internal frame does.
  
  Anyhow, I think Samsung and LG are on the right track here. The electronics inside a phone can survive several hundred Gs (you can literally shoot them out of a cannon with little ill effect). The only fragile part is the glass screen. So both companies are working hard to develop flexible screens. The only remaining issue would then be scratching the screen; but most people seem content to put a cheap plastic protector on their screen to ward off scratches.
12. Re:It's a design problem, not materials. by gnasher719 · 2014-04-22 20:44 · Score: 1
  
  It seems like most of the IPhones I see have broken screens, but other phones only rarely. It's just a shitty design. Excuse me, I now have to go underground before the Apple fanboys catch up with me.
  So here is the meme that iPhones often have broken screens. There is the other meme that people throw away their iPhones for the slightest reason and buy a new one. Clearly, both memes are contradicting each other. If people keep iPhones with broken screens, then clearly these iPhones haven't been thrown away.
  
  What actually seems to happen is that iPhone screens sometimes break, just like other screens, but you'll always find someone who is happy taking an iPhone with a broken screen. Which indicates to me that the rest of the phone must be bloody good.
13. Re:It's a design problem, not materials. by Electricity+Likes+Me · 2014-04-22 20:58 · Score: 1
  
  A flexible screen would let you get away from gluing the touch sensor and panel together, which would let you replace the touch sensor (which is cheap) whenever it got damaged.
14. Re:It's a design problem, not materials. by phorm · 2014-04-23 05:16 · Score: 1
  
  The point is that the Motorola design might be a cheaper solution, bit the phone simply looks shittier
  Yes, because this looks MUCH better than this.
  But yeah, keep comparing your iPhone to a Mercedes if it makes you feel better.
15. Re:It's a design problem, not materials. by Plumpaquatsch · 2014-04-23 06:57 · Score: 1
  
  The point is that the Motorola design might be a cheaper solution, bit the phone simply looks shittier
  Yes, because this looks MUCH better than this.
  Maybe, but this looks better than this. Coincidently, that picture comes from a whole site dedicated to cracked Moto defy screens.
  
  --
  Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
16. Re:It's a design problem, not materials. by AmiMoJo · 2014-04-24 00:31 · Score: 1
  
  What percentage of them had an ugly rubber protector on them? Again, just anecdotal, but it seems that hardly anyone uses an iPhone without some kind of protection.
  I used my old GS with only a strap (arthritis makes me prone to dropping stuff). My GS3 didn't have a strap hole so I added the thinnest case with, until I found a little widget that goes into the headphone jack and allows you to attach one. Both phones were in near mint condition when I moved on after a couple of years, having lived in my pocket most of the time.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
17. Re:It's a design problem, not materials. by Plumpaquatsch · 2014-04-24 06:19 · Score: 1
  
  The only reason why most Androids don't have covers available is their low production number and/or high production variances in dimensions that makes production of cases unprofitable. The fact that on the current Amazon best-seller list for Cell Phone Accessories the best selling case on #38 is for the Galaxy S5 is telling.
  
  --
  Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
Silicon on Sapphire by blinkenlights1 · 2014-04-22 13:45 · Score: 2

Sapphire has a lot of uses besides the purely cosmetic - Perhaps the worlds biggest electronics innovator actually is targeting a future electronics requirement - Better RF, better sensors
1. Re:Silicon on Sapphire by Number42 · 2014-04-22 22:19 · Score: 0
  
  Did you just refer to Apple as an innovator here, out of all places? Run before the swarm of rabid Slashdotters can find you!
2. Re:Silicon on Sapphire by fisted · 2014-04-22 23:41 · Score: 1
  
  You can't be serious.
  
  --
  CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
oops by slashmydots · 2014-04-22 13:57 · Score: 1

Oops, it reflect purple beams of light in a different direction. There goes a billion. Maybe they should have tried a prototype. Oh well, they can always lie about it and blame the user.
1. Re:oops by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 03:14 · Score: 0
  
  You're a fucking idiot.
  Because Apple hasn't had software color correction that actually works built into their operating system since 1993, which happens to also be the same color management system that Microsoft used for Windows. Oh, and they co-founded the International Color Consortium.
  Having some sapphire over a camera lens where you're capturing incoming light is completely different than having it over a display, where you can control the light being output, and correct for known variances.
The big secret? by fustakrakich · 2014-04-22 14:03 · Score: 2

They're making phonograph needles...

--
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
It's about time by Animats · 2014-04-22 14:40 · Score: 5, Interesting

It's surprising that Apple didn't do this a long time ago. Checkout scanners have had sapphire-coated glass for a decade or more. I pointed this out a few years ago, and the Apple fanboys immediately replied that Gorilla Glass was good enough and sapphire was unnecessary.
It's embarassing how fragile Apple's mobile products are. But this, at least, will stop screens from being scratched by coins and keys. You can drag canned goods across a sapphire coated supermarket checkout scanner glass for a decade without much effect. Home Depot self-checkout scanners have sapphire coated glass, and they get everything in the tool department dragged across them.
1. Re:It's about time by gnasher719 · 2014-04-22 20:54 · Score: 1
  
  It's surprising that Apple didn't do this a long time ago. Checkout scanners have had sapphire-coated glass for a decade or more. I pointed this out a few years ago, and the Apple fanboys immediately replied that Gorilla Glass was good enough and sapphire was unnecessary.
  Here's another example how Apple is often accused of two exactly diametrical faults. You accuse them of using cheap Gorilla Glass which isn't good enough according to you and say they should have switched to Sapphire glass ages ago, while the whole thread started with others saying how stupid it is of Apple to use Sapphire glass, when Gorilla glass is much better.
  
  Guys, can you make up your minds, please?
2. Re:It's about time by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 00:11 · Score: 0
  
  Checkout scanners have had sapphire-coated glass for a decade or more.
  
  Go check the cost of a good commercial grade scanner and get back to me. I can tell you for a fact that a lot of the cost isn't in the "ZoMG!!! It'z teh lazers1!!!111!!"
  
  I can think of hundreds of material engineering solutions that would make a product better right until you get up to the price it would bear just to be somewhat profitable.
  
  I pointed this out a few years ago, and the Apple fanboys immediately replied that Gorilla Glass was good enough and sapphire was unnecessary.
  
  Fair enough. Tell me about all these Android, Blackberry or Windows phones with Sapphire screens.
  
  It's embarassing how fragile Apple's mobile products are.
  
  And Samsung, Motorola, HTC, LG...
  
  Home Depot self-checkout scanners have sapphire coated glass, and they get everything in the tool department dragged across them.
  
  Right... because every screwdriver and nail they sell is drug across the scanner, point down with the weight of the cashier behind it.
  
  Give me a break. You entire post reeks of sour-grapes-fanboyism in the ugliest of fashions. You're not changing anyone's mind here either way. If this had been about Samsung doing the same thing as Apple is you'd have been modded troll with a dozen posts detracting your so-called logic.
  
  You know how to karma whore but that's about as insightful as you get.
3. Re:It's about time by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 03:58 · Score: 0
  
  interesting I haven't found my iphone 5 to be fragile at all. I don't use a case & I've dropped it ~5ft onto hard concrete at least 4 times. Its got a few scuffs on the sides but the screen is near perfect and functionality is 100%.
  I swear my friends galaxy 3 cracked when he looked at it wrong.
iWatch Sapphire clearly by aralin · 2014-04-22 14:48 · Score: 1

iWatch anyone?

--
If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
1. Re:iWatch Sapphire clearly by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 15:16 · Score: 1
  
  No. I know the supplier in China. They are grinding glass for the iWatch.
tonnes by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 14:50 · Score: 0

nuf said
1. Re:tonnes by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 15:02 · Score: 0
  
  Almost. Mod up GP! That's fucking hilarious.
mesa? by meeotch · 2014-04-22 14:53 · Score: 1

Mesa facility, you say? I think it's clear they plan to use the synthetic sapphires to open a dimensional rift to an alien plane of existence, and destroy us all.
Substrates by grrrl · 2014-04-22 15:05 · Score: 4, Interesting

Sapphire is not just for external materials, it is also a commonly used substrate for growth of various semiconductors for a range of devices (main substrate for GaN (blue LEDs), silicon on sapphire (SOS) tech). There are many reasons to use it as a substrate (transparent, radiation resistant, excellent thermal conductivity but low electrical conductivity) though some disadvantages which have largely been accounted for (poor lattice match to Si, GaN).
We used to get GaN grown on piddly little 2" sapphire wafers, which were themselves to start with hideously expensive. Growing on larger sapphire wafers is very interesting (think of how most production fabs are geared for 12" Si wafers).
Before you know it you may also find internal components made from material grown on sapphire made by Apple in Apple products.
1. Re:Substrates by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 16:11 · Score: 0
  
  Sapphire is not just for external materials, it is also a commonly used substrate for growth of various semiconductors for a range of devices (main substrate for GaN (blue LEDs), silicon on sapphire (SOS) tech). There are many reasons to use it as a substrate (transparent, radiation resistant, excellent thermal conductivity but low electrical conductivity) though some disadvantages which have largely been accounted for (poor lattice match to Si, GaN).
  We used to get GaN grown on piddly little 2" sapphire wafers, which were themselves to start with hideously expensive. Growing on larger sapphire wafers is very interesting (think of how most production fabs are geared for 12" Si wafers).
  Before you know it you may also find internal components made from material grown on sapphire made by Apple in Apple products.
  This is the first thought that hit my mind. Keep in mind that a steady supply of good sapphire wafers may give a fab a significant competitive advantage. So Apply can trade wafers for something significant...not just low prices, but maybe preferred delivery, exclusive access to some technology. It might be better than offering cash.
  The second thought is that Corning now has to change how much they charge for Gorilla glass. Apple can threaten to use sapphire in it place. Or, even worse (for Corning) Apple can threaten to sell cheap sapphire windows to all and sundry unless Corning offers a nice deal for Apple to cancel the project.
2. Re:Substrates by grrrl · 2014-04-22 16:25 · Score: 1
  
  They will be in a position to strong arm if they get manufacturing cranking, however I don't think the Apple of today would use something like this simply as extreme leverage against a supplier (though some pressure will of course be inevitable).
  If they're smart (and don't for a second think they are not) then they really will move forward with this as another development in the American jobs and fabs and labs that they've started with the Made in USA Mac Pro (I'm not even American but I support smart manufacturing to keep an ever-changing creation industry local).
3. Re:Substrates by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 17:10 · Score: 0
  
  I don't know that you'll ever see 12" sapphire wafers. You can get 8" ones and last I heard they were almost 2mm thick--the bowing (and stress) is pretty intense. (And that thickness does not just drop into your 300 mm Si line.) Sapphire's kind of stuck at 6" and everyone growing GaN on 8" is doing it on Silicon wafers.
  I'm not sure how the sapphire wafer marker is these days. There was basically a shortage when LED TVs became all the rage, but I imagine that's become an over-supply now that demand is somewhat down (unless it was all 2" and can't be converted). Not enough to feed Apple's demand, but probably plenty to prevent Apple from muscling in on the sapphire-substrate business.
4. Re:Substrates by grrrl · 2014-04-22 17:45 · Score: 1
  
  Thanks for the info, it has been a while since I talked to anyone who knew anything about commercial growth.
  If 8" wafers have those issues then do you think it is then feasible to expect an iPhone screen out of sapphire any time soon?
  Or will iPhone screens be thicker and thus can absorb more issues seen in thinner wafers, or do screen-grade sheets simply have a higher tolerance for fault densities and not need to be substrate grade?
5. Re:Substrates by Ed_1024 · 2014-04-23 03:20 · Score: 1
  
  Substrate is the first thing that came to mind when I heard Apple were going to be producing vast quantities of sapphire. The OP has pointed out most of the advantages but taking it to the extreme, you could have the major part of the phone as a solid piece of sapphire with the electronics grown on it, or a sandwich-type construction with the screen bonded on later.
  
  It would be pretty cool having a totally transparent phone with just a few parts that were visible. Knowing Apple, they would dope the crystal to make the iPhone 6C in ruby, pink, blue, yellow, etc. just like a gigantic gemstone... Ultimate bling or what?
Are you all seriously missing this? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 15:20 · Score: 1

Sapphire is used in the manufacture of electronics. It's a good electrical insulator while being a decent thermal conductor. It's used as a substrate for ICs.
It's called Wikipedia. It has information.
You'd have to be kind of retarded to think they would be making screens out of synthetic sapphire. This is Apple going deeper into electronics manufacturing.
1. Re:Are you all seriously missing this? by UnknowingFool · 2014-04-23 01:24 · Score: 1
  
  Yes sapphire has been used in ICs however for very specific ones. If you think Apple is going deeper in electronics manufacturing then you'd have to believe Apple is manufacturing for other companies and not merely for themselves. This flies in the face of what Apple does; they don't manufacture for others. They'll spend billions to make things for themselves. Case in point, Apple spent $750M to buy PA Semi and Intrinsity. These companies designed and licensed chip technology for others before Apple bought them. While they support previous clients and products, both of them ceased to work for others.
  If Apple bought a sapphire company, they are not manufacturing for others. So what will this company manufacture? On the one hand, they could make other electronics; however, they could make it for electronics like ICs. But how many ICs will Apple make? The billion dollars suggested the number made would far exceed what Apple would put in their own devices. Screens are another story.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
The glass on top is not the selling point... by NotQuiteReal · 2014-04-22 15:30 · Score: 1

What happens when I poke at the device beneath? [Full disclosure, I won an iPad and used it long enough for it to piss me off, but realize a tablet was cool. I gave the iPad to someone who appreciated it, and bought an Android tablet...]

--
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
dont be a retarded pedant by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 15:54 · Score: 0

Are carbides and borides transparent. Are there patents involved in their manufacturing process? Are they as scratch resistant?
Whales by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 16:11 · Score: 0

What struck me was why TF did the tank need to be transparent anyway. They were just going to carry them in the ship to the future, not show them off to the public.
Gorilla Glass is pretty strong by SuperKendall · 2014-04-22 17:36 · Score: 2

It's surprising that Apple didn't do this a long time ago.
It's not if you read the article and know more about the costs Sapphire have traditionally added.
It's embarassing how fragile Apple's mobile products are.
You mean, the ones that use the same Gorilla Glass everyone else is using?
Sapphire does sound nice, but you are selling Gorilla Glass way short. It can take a lot of pounding, and I haven't had keys (or anything else) be able to scratch the display in years. I recall a model of the iPhone a few years ago where a YouTube review showed things like shaking the phone in a bag of keys, and the screen was untouched.
I have no doubt whatever comes next will be better, but I wouldn't say mobile devices suffer from overly delicate screens anymore.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
1. Re:Gorilla Glass is pretty strong by Archimonde · 2014-04-22 20:07 · Score: 1
  
  Now thinking about it, I don't recall seeing an iphone (or gorilla glass equipped phone) with screen scratches. Yes, there most probably are there, but they are not visible in day to day operation which I think is all that matters.
  Of course, what everyone sees is a lot of phones with cracked glass.
  And as we all know, sapphire crystal glass on watches is more fragile than on the ones with mineral glass. Sapphire is more clear so the dials look nicer and it is less scratched though. But I haven't seen a watch with gorilla glass though.
  
  --
  Trolls are like broken clocks. They show the truth two times a day. The rest of the day they talk nonsense.
2. Re:Gorilla Glass is pretty strong by SuperKendall · 2014-04-23 04:58 · Score: 1
  
  Like I said, I've not had a phone scratched in any way for the last few iPhone models - I keep it in an pocket with keys and sometimes other things, and never use a screen protector. I'm sure sapphire is even more durable, but Gorilla Glass is already quite impressive as far as scratch resistance.
  You're right that screens cracking is a real issue, but possibly they have figured out how to treat the sapphire so it's even better in that regard. It may also feel better though that's totally speculation.
  
  --
  "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
That new plant in Mesa, Arizona... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 18:38 · Score: 1

...it wouldn't happen to be black, would it?
Next iPhone testimonials will be... by havana9 · 2014-04-22 19:10 · Score: 1

Joanna Lumley and David McCallum. Yes the new iPhone 6 will have a steel case too.
Isn't this obvious? by joh · 2014-04-22 19:22 · Score: 1

Apple is caught between their high-margin strategy and falling market share. The 5s/5c was a first try to do something but those were too similar to each other. Making the 5c cheaper would have eaten into the margins too much and making it crappier would have made it too crappy. So they have to make the "premium" version more premium and the budget version more different so it isn't just a cheaper iPhone.
I guess the 6s will have a sapphire screen, a 4.7" display with minimal bezels, an aluminum/ceramic case, the fingerprint sensor, a better camera and a faster SoC. The 6c will have a glass screen, a 5.x" display, larger bezels, a thicker plastic case, no sensor, a cheaper camera and a slower SoC (making it more of a phablet than a smartphone). This way they can charge a premium for the 6s, with more than healthy margins and the 6c will be sufficiently different from (and cheaper than) the 6s without one being just a slightly cheaper or more expensive version of the other. Those who want the 6s won't just buy the cheaper 6c because it is a very different beast and there'll be lots of people buying the 6c who wouldn't have considered an iPhone at all before.
It's one of the very few things Apple can do without cutting deeply into the margins. Up the margin for the premium version and make a version with tighter margins that is so different that you don't just switch to that for the price and can draw in new customers.
Well, as far as the sapphire goes: It's just there to justify higher prices and up the "premium" notion. It also may have some practical value, but honestly: My iPhone 4 is now more than three years old and there's not one scratch on the screen.
(And I also think that with smartphones becoming just "normal" products instead of "small computers for nerds" having more options in all directions is a good thing. In most normal products you have much larger price spans than even that. Go and buy furniture, clothes, houses... there's easily an order of magnitude between the cheapest and the most expensive even without going into the most outrageous luxury offers.)
laminated glass by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 19:29 · Score: 0

maybe they will laminate gorilla glass with a thin piece of sapphire. A scratch resistant surface on top of strong bendable glass.
Not sure if thin sapphire is bendable when it is thin.
But it isn't by dutchwhizzman · 2014-04-22 20:21 · Score: 1

It may be stronger, it could very well be faster, it's almost certainly cheaper, but it's not harder. Sapphire is the 2nd hardest (translucent?) material known to man, next to diamond. Hardened glass, like gorilla glass can be scratched a whole lot easier than sapphire.

--
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
1. Re:But it isn't by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 21:03 · Score: 0
  
  Bullshit. Gorilla Glass rates as a 9 on the Mohs scale, the same as sapphire. Gorilla Glass also has the benefits of being more shatter proof and thinner.
2. Re:But it isn't by cygnwolf · 2014-04-23 04:00 · Score: 1
  
  According to some half-assed googling, it looks like a Mohs hardness of 9 (Sapphire) roughly corrosponds to a vicker's scale rating of 2035.
  Contrast that to Gorilla Glass's listed 622 - 701, and there's a drastic difference in hardness that actually places gorilla glass around a 5-6 on the Mohs scale.
  Interestingly, Gorilla glass 3 even lists a LOWER Vicker's rating, citing only 534-639.
  Hardness does not always = scratch resistance apparently. The Gorilla glass 3 resists scratches a very different way.....
  citations
  http://www.cidraprecisionservi... - Mohs conversions
  http://www.corning.com/docs/sp... - gorilla glass info sheet
  http://317d462d97c0f60cc4a8-f8... = gorilla glass 3 info sheet
  
  --
  Free Pie! The Pie is Also Evil!
3. Re:But it isn't by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 05:06 · Score: 0
  
  And here is a reputable link from a reputable scientist saying you and your random, nobody links are wrong:
  http://chemistry.about.com/od/howthingswork/f/What-Is-Gorilla-Glass.htm
4. Re:But it isn't by cygnwolf · 2014-04-23 07:19 · Score: 1
  
  They're not nobody links. ok, maybe the first one is, but the first two are directly FROM THE MANUFACTURER. hardly a nobody if you ask me.
  
  --
  Free Pie! The Pie is Also Evil!
5. Re:But it isn't by cygnwolf · 2014-04-23 07:33 · Score: 1
  
  Further follow up, I have seen around the internet numerous times the claim that Gorilla Glass has an hardness of 9. Most of those claims, however, just like the page you link to, do not cite any references for this information.
  However, nowhere in Corning's official literature do they ever indicate ANY Mohs rating for it. They only give the Vicker's rating, and they give it well below what other sources besides the one I linked to give for sapphire
  
  I did some more digging for more places that site the vicker's rating of sapphire, all of them give the Vicker's hardness rating of 2000 for sapphire, still well over the manufacturer's specs for gorilla glass.
  http://www.kevingalloway.co.uk...
  http://americas.kyocera.com/ki...
  
  --
  Free Pie! The Pie is Also Evil!
6. Re:But it isn't by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 08:24 · Score: 0
  
  The reference is the person who wrote the article.
7. Re:But it isn't by cygnwolf · 2014-04-23 13:15 · Score: 1
  
  Just because someone has a docorate degree doesn't mean they are an absolute authority. Scholarly papters demand a lot of citations and evidence to be excepted, not someone with a degree saying it is so.
  
  and a doctorate of philosophy in biomedical sciences is such an expert on geology and material sciences.
  Just saying, I've seen enough from other sources, the only thing that will convince me that gorilla glass is hardness 9 would be something FROM corning, or from soneone that says 'hey, we tested it, here are the results'. Otherwise it's regurgitated information who's accuracy is suspect.
  
  --
  Free Pie! The Pie is Also Evil!
8. Re: But it isn't by astar · 2014-04-24 14:45 · Score: 1
  
  I followed your link and it becomes self-referencing. Further the precision of equality is "about". And the Mohr scale is extremely non-linear. But the Mohr scale is also an operationally defined scale. So there is little need to argue. What scratches what? So why is there not a good cite? Probably because the operation is not reliable on these materials. Thus the equality is ambiguous. Now i do not know anything. All i did was follow your link a bit and be a little thoughtful. I am sure you being a thoughtful person have already consider all this and found it to be dismissable.
9. Re:But it isn't by RockDoctor · 2014-04-24 23:18 · Score: 1
  
  However, nowhere in Corning's official literature do they ever indicate ANY Mohs rating for it.
  Moh's scale was designed as a quick and dirty estimate of hardness which could be carried out in the field. That's why it uses common minerals (talc, gypsum, calcite, fluorite/ fluorspar, apatite, feldspar, quartz, topaz, corundum, diamond) which any mineral collector or geologist should be able to acquire pretty rapidly.
  Vickers hardness testing is a precisely defined engineering test, requiring substantial equipment to perform. (Brinell hardness is a similar test, though less common.)
  "Gorilla glass" is an engineered material, so the Vickers test is the appropriate one.
  What most people don't realise about hardness is that it varies with crystallographic orientation. For a glass, that shouldn't be a problem - they should be isotropic (unless they're strained during manufacture). But for crystalline materials it can be an issue. There is a mineral called disthene from the Greek di- (for "two) and sthenos (for "strength") which has a Mohs hardness of 5 on it's long crystallographic axis and 7 perpendicular to that axis. (It's better known as kyanite, on account of it's typical sky-blue colour. It's actually very pretty.) The difference in (Vickers) hardness between (IIRC) the {111} and {001} directions of diamond is comparable to the difference between corundum and talc.
  
  --
  Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
Scratches look bad whereas breaking makes $$ by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-22 21:02 · Score: 0

It makes sense to me... Apple wants you iDevice to look nice so they don't like scratches.
If the screen breaks it's just another opportunity to sell you a new iDevice!
Double win.... for Apple.
Bullshit - don't believe marketing materials by Wdi · 2014-04-22 23:02 · Score: 4, Informative

Sapphire is *not* the second hardest material known. Yes, it's written in the linked article, but it is also definitely wrong. It is hard, and it is harder than glass. That is all there is. Besides diamond. many other materials, such as some forms of boronnitride, rhenium and osmium borides, and a collection of carbon/boron/nitrogen mixed compounds are all far harder than sapphire.
1. Re:Bullshit - don't believe marketing materials by Plumpaquatsch · 2014-04-23 00:35 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Sapphire is *not* the second hardest material known. Yes, it's written in the linked article, but it is also definitely wrong.
  
  Maybe they mean second hardest transparent material - which is kind of important for displays.
  
  --
  Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
2. Re:Bullshit - don't believe marketing materials by Gr8Apes · 2014-04-23 02:20 · Score: 0
  
  Sapphire is *not* the second hardest material known. Yes, it's written in the linked article, but it is also definitely wrong. It is hard, and it is harder than glass. That is all there is. Besides diamond. many other materials, such as some forms of boronnitride, rhenium and osmium borides, and a collection of carbon/boron/nitrogen mixed compounds are all far harder than sapphire.
  But how many of those are transparent?
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
3. Re:Bullshit - don't believe marketing materials by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 04:55 · Score: 0
  
  Still wrong though Moissanite is harder.
Transparent aluminum by wiredlogic · 2014-04-23 00:57 · Score: 1

I wish they'd start calling it transparent aluminum. Then we could all be living in a world with technology from the future.

--
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
1. Re:Transparent aluminum by BasilBrush · 2014-04-23 04:28 · Score: 1
  
  Apple already uses transparent aluminium on their MacBook Pro cased for where the power LED is.
  (Well it's actually a line of laser cut holes, so small you have to look very closely to see them - until the light comes on.)
Not just jewelry by AlKaMo · 2014-04-23 01:24 · Score: 3, Informative

One of the largest uses for artificial sapphire is supermarket barcode scanners. No one's putting it there because they feel a need to bling-out the supermarket. It's there because any surface that has stuff dragged across it all day, every day either needs to be incredible scratch-resistant or replaced way too often.
1. Re:Not just jewelry by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 01:54 · Score: 0
  
  Please, your facts, however interesting and pertinent only slow down GP's Apple bashing.
2. Re:Not just jewelry by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2014-04-23 03:08 · Score: 1
  
  Please, nobody tell him fancy watches also have ruby-jeweled movement.
  
  --
  (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
3. Re:Not just jewelry by lgw · 2014-04-23 05:52 · Score: 1
  
  Please, nobody tell Apple. :) I'm sure they can find an excuse for rubies in iBling.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Supply of the Alumina to make the product? by Torontoman · 2014-04-23 02:15 · Score: 1

Where are they going to get all that high purity raw material to make that much Sapphire Crystal? Alumina in that purity and volume isn't really readily available?
Corrudum = Sapphire & Ruby by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 02:39 · Score: 0

It's the next gen of Pokemon from Apple that's being developed
Gee, maybe some form of glass? by gstoddart · 2014-04-23 03:22 · Score: 1

Exactly what the company plans to do with the scratch-resistant crystal - and when - is still the subject of debate. Apple is creating its own supply chain devoted to producing and finishing synthetic sapphire crystal in unprecedented quantities
Gee, maybe they need something transparent and durable?
Modern watches use synthetic sapphire for the crystal because it's durable as hell. My wife has a Citizen watch which is several years old which looks brand new, because that stuff is pretty sturdy. Contrast that with her old watch in which the crystal (actually plastic from the looks of it) got scratched and eventually became tough to see the watch through.
So, synthetic sapphire is useful wherever you need a transparent and durable material.
Nope, can't think of anything Apple would be doing which would require that. Besides ... watches, phones, monitors, laptop screens, and darned near anything involving modern technology.
Maybe they can see they are going to need a steady supply of this, and don't want to be beholden to someone else for it?

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Wang Chung theme song by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 04:04 · Score: 0

"in her eyes two sapphires blue" - Dance Hall Days is at least better than Start Me Up.
They Might Be Giants thought of it first... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 07:20 · Score: 0

They also bet on sapphire as a strategic material for mobile devices. Does anyone else remember sapphire bullets of pure love?