Corning Reveals Gorilla Glass 4, Promises No More Broken IPhones 203
An anonymous reader writes "Corning introduced next-generation Gorilla Glass, which it said is ten times tougher than any competitive cover glass now in the market. The company says that the Gorilla Glass 4 so launched is to address the No.1 problem among the smartphones users- screen breakage due to everyday drops."
"Two" times, not ten times (Score:3, Insightful)
The article says "two times tougher than any competitive cover glass now in the market". The post reads "ten".
Re:"Two" times, not ten times (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:"Two" times, not ten times (Score:5, Informative)
Toughness is a perfectly good engineering term with a defined meaning. Look it up. Wikipedia is a decent start [wikipedia.org]. "In materials science and metallurgy, toughness is the ability of a material to absorb energy and plastically deform without fracturing."
It's typically measured by an impact test.
Re: (Score:2)
"In materials science and metallurgy, toughness is the ability of a material to absorb energy and plastically deform without fracturing."
That includes bending.
Re:"Two" times, not ten times (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, even the Wikpedia article you linked gives multiple definitions for toughness, depending on application. Which one is used here remains poorly specified and opens up the possibility of ambiguous marketing platitudes. Now, if they said shear strength was improved overall by a certain percentage, that would be information.
Re: "Two" times, not ten times (Score:2)
... Again, this is a defined term.
It would look the same or very close to the exact same as before it deformed.
Exactly what you want it to do, bend instead of break, then go back to its original state
Re: (Score:2)
Bent.
I was having to clarify with a drilling engineer just a few hours ago whether he was talking about a material that is tough to drill, when he said that it was hard to drill. Because I knew perfectly well that the material he was talking about isn't particularly hard, but is tough. Even professionals get slippery about using the terms in their fields of professional competence.
Re: (Score:2)
What, actual physical properties? These are meaningless for marketing!
Re:"Two" times, not ten times (Score:5, Funny)
News for nerds, remember? Ten is simply the base-2 representation of the same number that two represents in base-10. It's exactly the same statement.
Re: (Score:2)
News for nerds, remember? Ten is simply the base-2 representation of the same number that two represents in base-10. It's exactly the same statement.
So is that base two too? I can understand a reference to seeing "2" in a binary datastream when talking about bending strength, but I could never really get past second base myself.
Re: (Score:2)
No. Ten is ten. 10 in base 2 is not ten.
Re: (Score:2)
Was that a whooshing sound I just heard? Ugh :)
Re: (Score:2)
So is it two or ten times tougher? (Score:2)
First article says:
Apple supplier Corning on Thursday introduced its next-generation Gorilla Glass, which it said is two times tougher than any competitive cover glass now in the market.
Second article says:
Apple supplier Corning on Thursday introduced next-generation Gorilla Glass, which it said is ten times tougher than any competitive cover glass now in the market.
Re:So is it two or ten times tougher? (Score:5, Funny)
One is in base 10, the other in base 2.
Re: (Score:2)
One is in base 10, the other in base 2.
Which bases have you given the numbers of the bases in?
Re: (Score:2)
One is in base 10, the other in base 2.
Which bases have you given the numbers of the bases in?
base bases are always in base 10.
Re: (Score:2)
not true at all, a few languages in this world use base 5
Re: (Score:2)
GP is correct.
He wrote 10 as in 1*base+0*1, not as "how many fingers you have".
two is written 10 in binary, ten is written 10 in decimal, and sixteen is written 10 in hexadecimal.
If your pseudo is any indication, you might understand :
(2..36).map{|base| base.to_s(base)}
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting, I didn't realize Fixnum supported a base argument for to_s. Something new, everyday :)
Re: (Score:2)
It goes both way :
"07de".to_i(16) => 2014
Re: (Score:2)
in the ear?
Re: (Score:3)
all 'bout that base
'bout that base
'bout that base....
Re: (Score:3)
... no mantissa?
She's the CEO of Yahoo.
Re: (Score:2)
Same AC as above, I take it. It's "All your *base* are belong to us"
Re: (Score:3)
What's a factor of five between friends? Just book the difference as 'goodwill'.
Re: (Score:2)
It depends on whether you consider the gorilla glass version previously used by iPhones as a competitor or not. Generally the reading "competitive cover glass now in the market" would be a comparison against only glass made by OTHER COMPANIES', not previous versions of your own product which are now deprecated.
Re: (Score:2)
Per the Corning website:
"In lab tests, Gorilla Glass 4 withstood such drops up to 2X better than competitive glass designs."
(http://www.corninggorillaglass.com/en/glass-types/gorilla-glass-4)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, great: the infamous "up to X times..." . So what's the mean and standard deviation of the relative break strength?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
First article says: Apple supplier Corning on Thursday introduced its next-generation Gorilla Glass, which it said is two times tougher than any competitive cover glass now in the market.
Second article says: Apple supplier Corning on Thursday introduced next-generation Gorilla Glass, which it said is ten times tougher than any competitive cover glass now in the market.
These are not contradictory. "Up to two times" just means "not more than two times", and similarly "up to ten times" just means "not more than ten times". This means that if it is not more than two times then it is automatically not more than ten times
Its like if I say "there are no men in the room who are over six feet tall" you could also say "there are no men in the room who are over 100 feet tall", obviously true given the first statement but rather pointless. Of course marketing people might prefer "u
Cutting back on features (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So, it is hard and flexible? (Score:3)
Please tell us how they achieved this feat or materials engineering.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hard refers to scratch resistance. Its antonym is soft.
Flexible refers to being able to bend. Its antonym is rigid.
Re:So, it is hard and flexible? (Score:5, Funny)
Please tell us how they achieved this feat or materials engineering.
Oh you silly slashdotter. Sure, you may have studied materials science and engineering, but do you have the real world experience? In the modern corporation it's all about teamwork. Well-managed teams can do more than any one person possibly could. In this case, the engineers make the glass hard. Then marketing adds the flexibility. See? Teamwork. Oh yeah, and management makes it all happen and does extra janatorial tasks like mopping up the excess bucks.
(Actually, cynicism aside, it's simply that hardness and flexibility are orthogonal axes in materials science).
Re: (Score:2)
> it's simply that hardness and flexibility are orthogonal axes
I'm afraid they're not orthogonal: they're negatively correlated. The harder a a substance, typically the less flexible it is likely to be.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, you're quite right that I overstated it by saying they are orthogonal. They are coupled (diamond is not particularly flexible) but not 100% correlated. Different manifestations of the underlying structure.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, because it's not a single material. It's strengthened glass with a thin layer over the top that is highly scratch resistant. Thus it is both very hard in terms of resisting scratches and very flexible (for glass) so that it doesn't shatter.
This technique is used on many high performance parts these days, for example helicopter rotor blades.
Think of the job market! (Score:2)
I'm only half-kidding. over the past year or two, there's been a nifty cottage industry of small storefronts that perform screen replacements on cell phones. If that number gets cut in half, things are going to get interesting for these store owners. Also, if the phones are not only more shatter resistant but scratch resistant as well, I wonder if it would (forgive the pun) make a dent in sales of Otterbox and other impact resistant cases. Not only would this impact Otter Products, but also many retailers,
Re: (Score:2)
I'm only half-kidding. over the past year or two, there's been a nifty cottage industry of small storefronts that perform screen replacements on cell phones. If that number gets cut in half, things are going to get interesting for these store owners.
Firstly; I think the old phones will still be widely used for a few more years, as long as the price of a screen replacement is low comparable to the cost of a new phone, I think they will be okay for at least another year, they were always a market of lim
Re: (Score:2)
While this particular development doesn't affect it waterproofing is something that major phone vendors have been working on and they seem to have managed to make phones with a high degree of waterproofing (at least when new, I do wonder how the seals will age) without making them clunky as hell.
http://www.digitaltrends.com/m... [digitaltrends.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Insurance over things you can afford to replace is never worth it.
For insurance to work, the insurance company needs to charge you a cost that is greater than the annualized cost of loss-- that is, the risk that a loss will happen times the cost of that loss. That can make sense with things like medical bills where the risk is extremely low, but the cost is extremely high and could bankrupt you.
Doing it with a phone is just costing you more money over the long haul than simply replacing the phone when a lo
Re: (Score:2)
Example: on modern Mac laptops it costs $700 to fix a broken key, because the keyboard is bonded to the underside of the top plate around which the entire laptop is built and which is not available as a new DIY repair part
Pretty sure thats not correct, last time I got a quote for trackpad repair it was $125.
. If the insurance company mispredicts risk it can be better for you
They dont predict it, they source that to actuaries who provide them with statically backed risk figures. Good luck predicting risk better than them.
AppleCare is less than half that amount and lasts 3 years.
Thats because statistically the product is unlikely to fail in that time. Its likely to fail AFTER that time, which is why warranties typically top out at 3 years for laptops.
But if it makes you feel better, you keep buying it.
Re: (Score:2)
Somebody needs to go study the broken window fallacy [wikipedia.org].
If they can only make the GLUE 10x weaker (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For instance: iPhone 6 teardown [ifixit.com]
80% is not 100% (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
midget smart phone users of the world now finally have a solution to their screen break problems.
then rest of us, not so much...
*less* broken phones would be more like it. (Score:2)
from the PC Mag article:
"They found that Gorilla Glass 4 is up to two times tougher than competitive glass. The company said it survives drops up to 80 percent of the time."
Problem solved (Score:2)
Flip phone.
Misleading (Score:2)
Why not polycarbonate? (Score:4, Interesting)
.
Re: (Score:3)
It needs to be glass for the touch screen to work. Things with plastic screens have resistive touch screen input which sucks, so almost all phones use glass and capacitative touch screen input.
Re: (Score:2)
Not that I expect many to read this, since it's a day later, but polycarbonate is much more scratch-prone than glass, even with the scratch-resistant coating on it.
It wouldn't work on a phone, because the coating would rub off in fairly short order.
The problem isn't so much that the glass is fragle (Score:3)
This just an iphone issue or Android phones too? (Score:2)
I have an old T-mobile Galaxy II (989) that supposedly has gorilla glass on the screen. I've dropped it numerous times and it's never once broken or shattered, and it's now an ancient phone by internet standards. Yet I've seen countless iphones with broken glass. Perhaps the more flimsy, plasticy Android phones actually have an advantage here by flexing instead of shattering? Or is there some other reason this is an Apple problem?
Re: (Score:2)
Timing is everything...dust settled. (Score:3)
The collapse of a competitive advantage crystal lens product in GT Advanced which was summarily driven into the ground, bankrupted and which failure narily caused a single Apple iPhone shipment delay.
Any problems connecting dots, seeing the landscape and strategy now?
Re:OH GOODY (Score:4, Insightful)
Now I can upgrade to the next iPhone.
Then when they announce Gorilla Glass x+1 I can upgrade to the next iPhone!
and Repeat...
News just in! Products get better incrementally, somehow only controversial when Apple does it. Film at 11.
Re: OH GOODY (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong. [dailytech.com] Apple are outdone on that front by Samsung, MS... You really should check your facts before showing the rest of /. how wrong you are. Some of us actually RTFA, read relevant info, and post knowingly. Hater.
Seems you need to take your own advice.
You should know that the $14 billion is for all Samsung Electronics products, everything from TV's to speakers to DVD players to car audio. It also covers things like sports team sponsorships (local and national). Of that $14 billion, only $401 Million was spent on phone advertising, Apple spent $333 Million in the same period whilst Samsung sells more phones, more models and across more segments. So on a phone to advertising dollar ratio, Apple spends a lot more.
Re: (Score:2)
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
A signature like that is strongly suggestive of someone prone to be an asshole in public, then.
Re: (Score:2)
You should know that the $14 billion is for all Samsung Electronics products, everything from TV's to speakers to DVD players to car audio. It also covers things like sports team sponsorships (local and national). Of that $14 billion, only $401 Million was spent on phone advertising,
Way to prove your point by mixing world wide spending with US spending, deliberately or not.
Re: (Score:2)
Cause nobody hypes their shit as much as apple and its legion of zombies.
1. Apple isn't hyping this. Corning is. Apple has a policy of not hyping what they aren't selling. They don't pre-announce features.
2. Nearly all companies hype their products. But if it involves Apple, more people pay attention.
Re: (Score:3)
Getting a bit defensive, are we? Vested interest? Gorilla Glass is made by Corning not Apple, so I'm not sure what you're babbling about.
What do you mean? I was directly replying to a brave coward who went for a cheap apple bash.
Is replying to that comment with an opposing opinion "getting defensive"? Isn't this a discussion forum?
Oh, right. I understand.
Re: (Score:3)
Defensive, defensive, defensive. Why would you be so protective of some corporation? Do you work for Apple or are you a stockholder?
Today I learned that people with opinions counter to anonymous cowards are Apple employees or stockholders of Apple. Man, there must be a lot of them!
Re: (Score:3)
Why would you assume they were bashing Apple instead of Corning though? That makes no sense.
Ah yes, that well known Corning-hate on slashdot, with the frequent trope of being excited to upgrade your corning product on a short, repeating cycle like sheep.
I hardly think the original coward's target was non-obvious.
Re: (Score:3)
The sapphire was for their iWatch and sapphire or ruby crystals are commonly used in high-end watches. I'm not sure if it is too brittle for a phone screen, but it is probably too expensive.
Re: (Score:2)
An article I read about the sapphire producer claimed that the primary reason it wasn't used for the iPhone was that they simply couldn't get the yields needed to support the volume.
http://online.wsj.com/articles... [wsj.com]
There's a paywall, but googling the title in a private window might get you a good link (worked for me).
Re: (Score:2)
Yep - you can go look it up on any number of articles for confirmation, but the current state of sapphire screens is that they are heavier/thicker, more brittle, require more power due to lower transmission of light, and are much more expensive.
The *only* advantage right now is sapphire is almost impossible to scratch with normal use (assuming you don't routinely carry piles of loose diamonds around in your front pocket). Hence it's used for lenses, the new fingerprint-recognition, home button, and the iWa
Re: (Score:3)
I can thoroughly recommend The New Science of Strong Materials or Why You Don't Fall through the Floor [princeton.edu]by J.E. Gordon [wikipedia.org], which even has a positive review by Bill Gates [gatesnotes.com].
Finding something that is:
is challenging. Sapphire gets a pass for Hard and a (mostly) Transparent.
Re: (Score:2)
Sony is real proud of their laminated glass. The use it on the back of the phone too.
Re: (Score:2)
At least most studies show it is more shatterproof glass than scratch resistant, which is Gorilla’s forte it seems.
That's too bad, I was about to complain about Corning worrying about drop tests when scratches are a far bigger problem for most people. It's easy enough not to drop your phone, it's difficult to avoid scratches from everyday wear without resorting to crappy screen protectors and the like.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Every time I've seen someone with broken screen, it was an iPhone. It's about time Apple did this, but then they do profit by making phones that need repairs/ replacing.
About time Apple did what? Made their phones deliberately out of the best material available at the time and now out of a subsequently even better material made by a third party supplier that they don't control?
What did you think they are "about timing"? Making new phones out of a material that has only just been announced?
I'm not following.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
About time Apple did what? Made their phones deliberately out of the best material available at the time and now out of a subsequently even better material made by a third party supplier that they don't control?
Made phones which don't have glass faces that run all the way to the edges.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
If you have a naked phone, what do you expect?
Fuck, I drop mine at least one a month onto something solid. Of course if it hits a stone, or the edge of a rough surface, it's going to scratch or shatter.
Put it in the most basic of cases so the force (not the sharpness) goes to the screen and it's fine. I have never, in my life, broken or scratched an electronic device like that.
And, honestly, yes, I've had some doozies! When you phone cartwheels down a set of marble staircases in a hotel, and smashes so h
Re: (Score:2)
Fuck, I drop mine at least one a month onto something solid.
I guess the problem is you... I've had my iPhone for almost 4 years now, cracked the screen once from hitting a stone floor but I don't blame it and a case adds annoyingly much bulk, I tried it and stopped. It's different from back when the screen was a small auxiliary to a phone, using the screen is now the main purpose of a smartphone. That means it needs to be way bigger and more exposed, Apple or not.
Re: (Score:2)
If you have a naked phone, what do you expect?
I expect it to survive an accidental drop.
I've never had a phone cover, they've all survived trips to the floor without shattering... then again I buy phones that are built properly.
Also, I tend to be a little bit careful with my things. I'd be lucky if I drop my phone every six months.
Re: (Score:2)
then again I buy phones that are built properly
I can see you with a jewelers monocle going over the phone in the store. "This isn't going to do..." you declare as the Genius hands you another one to look at.
I am curious to how you determine a properly built phone.
First step is to leave the Apple store and go to a manufacturer that knows what "durable" is.
Seriously, I've had HTC, Samsung, Motorola and now an LG... All of them have been able to take a drop without cracking or warping.
BTW, I'm much more eloquent than that. I'd say "no, no, no good sir, this simply isn't going to suffice".
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps a good way to protect the screen is to put it "inside", open the phone like a laptop when you want to use it like a computer, else it looks and works like a dumbphone when folded. The first smartphone was like that (Nokia 9000, 1996)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Android owners aren't stupid enough to constantly drop their phones.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: No more broken iPhones.. (Score:2, Funny)
Who do you think we are, iPhone users?
Re: No more broken iPhones.. (Score:5, Funny)
Sorry to disappoint you, but everybody knows that Slashdot has exactly 8 actual users, 3,564,372 sockpuppet accounts, and an AI at the U of Illinois Champaign/Urbana that makes all of the AC posts as a way to blow off steam after dealing with grad students all day.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe the AI found a friend.
Re: (Score:3)
"UP TO two times tougher than competitive glass"
"survives drops UP TO 80 percent of the time"
Just meaningless weasel words.
Re:No more broken iPhones.. (Score:4, Funny)
"UP TO two times tougher than competitive glass" "survives drops UP TO 80 percent of the time"
Just meaningless weasel words.
It's not meaningless at all. It means exactly what it says: The glass is somewhere between negative infinity times and 2 times tougher than competitive glass. And it survives drops somewhere between 0 percent and 80 percent of the time.
So be sure and take those figures into consideration when considering buying the product.
Re: (Score:3)
"UP TO two times tougher than competitive glass" "survives drops UP TO 80 percent of the time"
Just meaningless weasel words.
It's not meaningless at all. It means exactly what it says: The glass is somewhere between negative infinity times and 2 times tougher than competitive glass. And it survives drops somewhere between 0 percent and 80 percent of the time. So be sure and take those figures into consideration when considering buying the product.
This post is up to twice as informative as the original article
Re: (Score:2)
that way, they can also get a phone that is only one version behind the latest one from Google.
Re: (Score:2)
They're so cheap, it's better to replace them?
No broken is broken.
If you want to replace one that is all well and good.
I have found that the the old phone makes a handy media
player. With Chromecast and youtube, netflix or whatever a
little phone can be happy serving up music or streaming video
via WiFi.
But broken is broken... not good for anything worth doing.
Oh and BTW this second life is the biggest reason all my
phones must have a replaceable battery. AND on the sad
day that a phone goes swimming or a run through the laundry
a short visit to the phone
It was Perkin-Elmer's mistake. (Score:2)
That was NASA's mistake. The mirror was made to spec, but NASA didn't work out how it would deform in orbit/a microgravity environment.
That's an interesting claim, but entirely fictional, as far as I can tell. I followed the story closely at the time, and in the end, every report I saw put the blame on a defective Perkin-Elmer null corrector assembly (reserving some blame for NASA's inadequate oversight of their development and testing processes).
Why are you trying to rewrite history?
Re: (Score:2)
It was Perkin-Elmers fault. The backup mirror made by Kodak was flawless. That couldn't have happened if the spec was wrong.
Re: (Score:2)