Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Handhelds Technology

Next-Gen Gorilla Glass: Smartphones Could Have Antibacterial, Anti-Glare Display 175

Posted by samzenpus
from the coming-to-a-phone-near-you dept.
MojoKid writes "It's not too often that upcoming glass technology is worth getting excited over, but leave it to Corning to pique our interest. During a recent talk at MIT's Mobile Technology Summit, Dr. Jeffrey Evenson took to the stage to reiterate what it is about Gorilla Glass that makes it such an attractive product (something well evidenced given the majority of smartphones out there today implement it), as well as to give us a preview of what's coming. Having pretty much mastered Gorilla Glass where strength, scratch-resistance and general durability are concerned, the company is now looking to improve-upon it (possibly for Gorilla Glass 4) by making it non-reflective and germ-resistant. Imagine your smartphone sporting this — you'd finally be able to see the screen regardless of how bright the sun behind you is. Unfortunately, it appears that it won't be hitting our phones or tablets that soon. The estimate is 'in the next two years.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Next-Gen Gorilla Glass: Smartphones Could Have Antibacterial, Anti-Glare Displays

Comments Filter:
  • Re:How about (Score:5, Informative)

    by jkflying (2190798) on Monday July 08, 2013 @07:06AM (#44214585)

    The new Sony Xperia Z [wikipedia.org] is waterproof to 1 meter for 30 minutes. Try again.

  • Re:How about (Score:5, Informative)

    by AmiMoJo (196126) * <(mojo) (at) (world3.net)> on Monday July 08, 2013 @07:41AM (#44214693) Homepage

    Galaxy S4 Active is waterpoof and is tested for submersion for 30 minutes.

  • Re:Phobia... (Score:5, Informative)

    by jellomizer (103300) on Monday July 08, 2013 @08:48AM (#44214927)

    Many Metals have Anti-Bacterial properties to them.

  • Re:Phobia... (Score:4, Informative)

    by Xest (935314) on Monday July 08, 2013 @09:43AM (#44215237)

    "Yes, because it's not like there have ever been problems with spread of bacteria in the past and it also doesn't seem like it will ever be a problem in the future either! Who needs to worry about bacteria! Nature wouldn't make something that could hurt me, would it?"

    So what are you saying exactly, that you believe that if we could just bacteria proof mobile phones, and ATMs and such that nature will no longer produce anything to hurt you? It's precisely that naivety that I'm pointing out the idiocy of. All it means is that we'll end up with bacteria that evolves mechanisms to defeat the anti-bacterial technologies we implement making them even more difficult to deal with.

    I didn't claim that bacteria can't be harmful, but simply that we don't need to go to absurd extremes to try and eliminate all bacteria that we may encounter because that's frankly fucking stupid and nonsensical. There will always be bacteria and there will always be some degree of chance that it will evolve into something very dangerous. Bacteria "proofing" ATMs and so forth without all also wearing masks to stop the spread of airborne bacteria and bacteria proofing our clothes, any handrails we may touch, any food we may eat and everything else isn't going to magically change that at all, there'll still be an ever present threat of a dangerous form of easily spread bacteria however you cut it, the difference is that when it does come it'll have already had to evolve to defeat the low hanging options for dealing with it that we might otherwise have had if we didn't engage in paranoid splashing of said technologies left right and centre to no practical benefit at the time.

Facts are stubborn, but statistics are more pliable.

Working...