I believe the number 1 reason is:
1- They want to test it first.
Apple always do tests, but most of the people do not realize it. For example, do people realize that before making the Ipad big screen they tested it in the magic touchpad?.
Between the Iphone and the Ipad there is a huge size gap that means lots of problems when you do things in the millions, so they added a glass screen to millions of laptops touchpads.
They got lots of useful information from service repairs, and they did hide their testing in front of their competitors eyes without them realizing.
Competitors used plastic in their touchpads. When they could connect the dots(it they did at all), it was too late, Apple was years ahead.
If they start selling their watches in the millions, and I think they will, mass producing sapphire will make cost plumb.
There will be testing early at a scale that nobody had done before. I worked for a company that manufactured sapphire glass for the military. We made very expensive SINGLE units for equipment like cameras, and it was only for the exterior side.
If a market is created, innovation will come. What we did was very expensive and we did not care about price.
We did work that was so "last century", like creating huge blocks like stones, then cutting and polishing it.
I am certain that a better method, more energy efficient like growing crystals in molds, is possible, but it needs to have demand in order to justify the investment.
I am simply glad we got past the use of glass on the backs of phones like the iPhone 4 generation had. All that did for me is have me learn how to swap the piece myself.
I think glass breakage is pretty low in the issues people have with these phones, weight and battery life are bigger issues.
I suspect, they've learned quite a bit from the sapphire cover on the camera, hence their comfort in deploying it to the higher end watch models.
> Sapphire crystal lens cover [all iPhone models]
That's the way you can be successful. The massive risk would be to create a fingerprint thing and try to bootstrap a payments platform on day 1 when 0 users have their fingerprint scanned.
Testing is a big part of apple, and I think this screen is part of that philosophy.
Personally, I'd rather have "the new iPhone 6: exactly as thick as the last one, but now it lasts 2 days on a charge"
It might also be a partial explanation for not launching the watch yet, they're simply waiting for enough yield to manufacture launch inventory.
Althought saphire is in fact stronger, it is it's lack of flexibility and absorption properties that don't make it as viable for phone use.
>On most Apple Watch models, the display is laminated to a machined and polished single crystal of sapphire.
Is there some trickery, or is gorilla glass as tough as nails like this now?
His follow up video was only a few days later, after people pointed this out to him, and fairly convincingly showed that this was just a newer generation of glass.
"By the way, some reports stated that up until a few weeks before the iPhone announcement, Apple was going to use sapphire but dropped it because of yield issues. This is not true."
When you etch the touchscreen on the back of the glass and then bond the whole thing to the LCD with optically clear adhesive, you've created one single piece that's nearly half of the phone's guts.
If people are okay with the LCD moving backwards and leaving an airgap like the first phones, then perhaps it's possible.
Most screens come with the kit of tools you need for the tiny screws and to pop off the ribbon cable connectors.
I think that is pretty quick easy and cheap. I feel bad for people who go to Genius Bar to have this done for $150.
Several plastics can do that.
I'm afraid untill somebody comes with a cheap way to manufacture diamonds, we'll have to trade impact strength off scratch resistance in every design.
The only people who took these rumors seriously were pundits who started and then perpetuated (and now, continue to discuss) the idea.
I've dropped my phone numerous times, but I have dropped it twice onto concrete, once with considerable force. So far, no cracks! Just one data point, but also demonstrating that what we have now isn't terrible.
Moissanite doesn't really occur naturally on Earth though (although it is believed to form around carbon-rich stars).
It seems misleading to call sapphire "THE" hardest next to diamond when there is another harder material that we can produce using a similar processes.
So be prepared to spend 1000+ USD if you want sapphire glass. Apple's days of pandering to peasants are over, it seems.
EDIT: Apparently it's happening to me when I zoom at all on the page in Chrome, I'm surprised no one else has complained.
Make lots of pieces claiming sources and reasons for why Apple is going to do something big and new and innovative. Endless pageviews, speculation, etc.
Apple releases a very nice, but completely traditional and incremental upgrade.
Make lots of pieces explaining why Apple not doing those things you previously said they would do is actually best, because of contrived justifications and reasons. Tonnes of pageviews and links.
Rinse repeat. This has happened with every Apple release this decade.
In both of those applications, scratch resistance is extremely important. Also, those are both small, which makes them cheaper and easier to engineer, as well as less likely to shatter.
what a tale for such a irrelevant detail. iPhone users are such a category of people of their own, talking about iPhone rumors and truths is like new ways to make conversations.
do you know you can have a smartphone that has the same functionalities, for one tenth of the price ? how is that not news ?
I really don't care much about thinness in phones, but I do care about having a forever battery and I'd happily trade 3mm of pocket space for it.
http://zerolemon.com/product/zerolemon-samsung-galaxy-note-3...
But phone becomes very bulky with it.
[1] http://www.amazon.com/Hyperion-Extended-Compatible-Internati...
can't believe this wasn't how it turned out.
Apple says the 6 plus gets 12 hours internet usage compared to the 10 hours on iPhone 5S
http://i-cdn.phonearena.com/images/articles/138994-thumb/iPh...
Also, battery life improvement was very much expected. The resolution barely increased (for the 6), the GPU is more powerful, and the battery is larger. If everything else besides the screen size stays the same or gets more efficient, and the battery increases linearly, too, then the increase in battery life should be positive.
Could it have something to do with the two of three dimensions expanding considerably?
The parts are cheap on eBay. So far the $3 battery has been a dud though.
A Note 3 with the pack you linked to could easily do 2 full days of medium to heavy usage.
They're likely to be considerably starker with this range than anything they've ever made before.
The iPhone 6 Plus (the one hellweaver666 is referring to) is the one with the much larger battery.
"critics said the iPhone 6 Plus offered slightly longer battery life"
"saying that the iPhone 6 Plus only lasted one full day of constant usage versus the iPhone 6's near two-day battery life"
What matters is sand. (For what it’s worth my iPhone has three, four scratches after a year. I’m pretty certain they are all from when I slid my phone around on some surface with a grain of sand between surface and phone – which I usually try to avoid, but oh well. That’s it.)
To be honest, though, for me personally scratches don’t matter. In normal usage they are invisible and while they do annoy me I would rather the phone be more resistant to falling down.
It's all about hardness [1], ordinary iron / metal is quite soft (4 - 5) scale on mohs scale, while gorilla glass is at least a 7. It has nothing to do with how "sharp" an object is, paper will never scratch steel and regular keys will never scratch glass. Someone on XDA [2] made quite a passionate case about this.
[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohs_scale_of_mineral_hardness
[2] http://forum.xda-developers.com/galaxy-s2/general/misconcept...
I haven't found a site that breaks out power usage by hardware features in a phone, I have seen sites on how apps can affect it. Would be interesting to know jut which parts of the phone are the worst consumers of power
EDIT: Oh, and I also listen to podcasts and music over bluetooth for hours/day. It hardly seems to make a dent.
Yes but that makes sense. Horizontal phone size 5S->6+ increased by ~69%, screen size increased by say 65%. Overall phone volume increased by ~58%. If battery was 50% of the 5S volume and volume of electronics hasn't changed in 6+, the battery volume has increased by 116%. Some of these assumptions are likely off and the volumes slightly inaccurate but the point should stand.
But yes, taking things out of context can make them amusing.
http://www.piliapp.com/actual-size/
its not perfect, you cannot simulate wrapping your hands around the device but you can actually hold an existing device up and get a good idea of what it will be like
http://www.extremetech.com/mobile/180110-how-samsung-galaxy-...
