Skip to main content

The five reasons Apple never intended to use sapphire displays on the iPhone 6 – Time

Time is reporting that, in contrast to the many rumors (and GTAT investor claims), Apple had never planned to use sapphire displays for the iPhone 6, and the company may not use it for future iPhones.

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. My sources tell me that sapphire was never targeted for the iPhone 6 or 6 Plus and its role in future iPhones hasn’t even been decided yet.

Speculation about sapphire displays for the iPhone 6 began when Apple built a major new manufacturing facility in Arizona last November. But Time‘s Tim Bajarin says that while the scratch-resistance of the material may have made it sound superficially appealing, there were no fewer than five reasons it would not have made sense to use the material for the iPhone 6 display …

The first is that the strength of sapphire has been largely misunderstood. Yes, it’s very resistant to scratches, but it’s actually more vulnerable than Gorilla Glass to being smashed when dropped – and even the invisible scratches a phone can get when carried in pockets can lead to failure.

When you drop it, it is more likely than glass to break. Glass actually flexes and can absorb the shock of a drop more successfully than sapphire […]

Those small cracks add up like the normal wear and tear we put our phones through every day – knocking around in our purses and pockets with keys and change, or scuffing against the surface of a counter repeatedly […]

Once sapphire is exposed to a scratch or a flaw, visible or invisible, its risk of breakage and eventual failure is high.

Sapphire is also denser than glass, making it heavier, and bulkier – neither good things when your aim is to make a phone as thin and light as possible.

Battery life, surprisingly, was also a key consideration. Sapphire transmits less light than glass, requiring more powerful backlighting to deliver the same display brightness.

The all-in cost of using a sapphire display is also much higher than some had estimated. The material cost is around ten times that of Gorilla Glass, and it’s claimed associated costs could add as much as $100 to the cost of an iPhone.

Finally, for a company which prides itself on its environmental credentials, Apple may have felt some discomfort over the amount of energy required to manufacture sapphire: more than 100 times that of the same quantity of glass.

Most of these arguments would also apply to the use of sapphire in the Apple Watch, but the much smaller surface area means that cost is less of a factor – and scratch-resistance is more important than protection against drops in a device that spends most of the day securely attached to your wrist.

It does, however, lend weight to suggestions that perhaps only the more expensive models will have sapphire displays. We already know from Apple’s website that the $349 entry-level Apple Watch Sport will have a glass display, but we don’t yet know at what price-point sapphire may kick in.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

You’re reading 9to5Mac — experts who break news about Apple and its surrounding ecosystem, day after day. Be sure to check out our homepage for all the latest news, and follow 9to5Mac on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn to stay in the loop. Don’t know where to start? Check out our exclusive stories, reviews, how-tos, and subscribe to our YouTube channel

Comments

  1. Shahab 21 (@Shahab_21) - 10 years ago

    Huge Apple fan but someone said on FB something funny that seemed true to me: “They must keep a feature that they can offer next year on 6S 6+S”

    • Jonny - 10 years ago

      Yeah it’s true, I hate when new features get added to new models of stuff. I wish they’d just jam everything in this model then never have to upgrade it in the future.

    • lin2logger - 10 years ago

      AAAHahahahahahhhahahaaaaaaa…. yeah, that’s SO HILARIOUS!!!!!

      Not.

      What are you? 12? Never mid the actual and HIGHLY legitimate reasons for NOT using it, right?

      Grow the f up.

    • aphetoros - 10 years ago

      +Hybrid sapphire
      +Camera is internal now instead of protruding outwards
      +Bands are thinner
      +NFC unrestricted

  2. Cory © (@Nardes) - 10 years ago

    sapphire Apple TV displays

  3. they were leaked a year early, 6S and 6SPlus will have them faux sho

  4. More proof that the media needs to stop jumping to conclusions before anything’s been confirmed.

    With that said I’m hoping that the iPhone 6 will be more damage-proof than its predecessors. Based on the video of that kid scratching it with keys, stabbing it with a knife a bending it back to ridiculous levels I’m hoping that this is the same screen on the iPhone 6.

    I also don’t fault Apple for bringing too much attention to the glass and/or durability of the phone. We should all learn to respect the $700+ devices in our pockets. Just because it’s a device we use all day doesn’t mean we treat it like it’s a toy.

    • mpias3785 - 10 years ago

      The fact that the iPhone 6/6+ doesn’t seem to protect the edge of the screen at all worries me. I have a feeling we’ll see more problems with cracked screens, or at least chipped edges, than any previous model.

      • PMZanetti - 10 years ago

        I’ll take my chances with the glass edge as opposed to that horrific diamond cut chamfered edge on the 5/5s. So much as tap the side of a 5/5s on a table, and you will dent the cambered edge, exposing raw metal (very sharp, and in the worst location possible).

        I never dropped my 5, but rather bumped it lightly, and causing the above described. A week later, I did it again, and it made it impossible to hold without rubbing against sharp exposed metal. That one had to live in a case. My 5s has also lived in a case from day one to avoid that same issue.

      • mpias3785 - 10 years ago

        @PMZanetti, Many people despise them, but cases prevent that.

        I’m surprised Zagg or some other company never introduced a product to protect the chamfer. Their full body films always left them exposed.

  5. dragonitedd - 10 years ago

    There is no reason to stick on Sapphire… It is applicable on watch, but definitely not on phones. Actually I am gonna get an watch sports. I don’t wanna wearing something so heavy on my wrist, plus that if you don’t climb on the ground with your watch facedown towards quartz, there is few thing in our daily life that can scratch the surface of your device. I never use a film since my iPhone 3G, and never get a horrible scratch, even before iPhone began using the Gorilla Glass.

  6. OneOkami (@OneOkami) - 10 years ago

    My main concern with using sapphire has always been the light transmission. I’m one to usually have my displays bright and vibrant and that particular con really got my attention when Corning released that public statement in the wake of the sapphire rumors.

    As I’ve always said, I’ve never had a problem with Gorilla Glass. I’ve never dropped and shattered my screen, I walk and jog with my phone in my pocket, at times along with keys and the glass (along with the screen protector) has apparently never scratched, I’ve been using my 3rd generation iPad almost everyday since the day it was released WITHOUT a screen protector and the display still looks practically flawless. When there were rumors only the iPhone 6 Plus would have a sapphire display, I didn’t care. I was still set on getting the 6.

    This has always been for me a case of something not being broken and thus no need for it to be “fixed”.

  7. RP - 10 years ago

    No doubt in my mind the 6s will recieve a saphire screen. Which are thin saphire laminates over glass, not 100% saphire which alone debunks the Time debunking.

    • Ben Lovejoy - 10 years ago

      Gorilla Glass is also a laminate layer.

      • mpias3785 - 10 years ago

        Of what? I used to work with gas chromatographs that used 60m capillary glass tubes about 1mm in diameter. It was coated with a special polymer (I wish I could remember the name) that allowed the tube to be coiled onto a ~150mm diameter form without snapping. I tried tying the tube in a knot and got to about a 2cm circle before it snapped, and it took a lot of force.

    • lin2logger - 10 years ago

      SAPHIRE GLASS: When you drop it, it is more likely than glass to break. Glass actually flexes and can absorb the shock of a drop more successfully than sapphire. Those small cracks add up like the normal wear and tear we put our phones through every day – knocking around in our purses and pockets with keys and change, or scuffing against the surface of a counter repeatedly. Once sapphire is exposed to a scratch or a flaw, visible or invisible, its risk of breakage and eventual failure is high.

      Sapphire is also denser than glass, making it heavier, and bulkier – neither good things when your aim is to make a phone as thin and light as possible. Battery life is also a key consideration. Sapphire transmits less light than glass, requiring more powerful backlighting to deliver the same display brightness.

      The all-in cost of using a sapphire display is also MUCH HIGHER than some had estimated. The material cost is around ten times that of Gorilla Glass, and it’s claimed associated costs could add as much as $100 to the cost of an iPhone.

      Finally, for a company which prides itself on its environmental credentials, Apple may have felt some discomfort over the amount of energy required to manufacture sapphire: more than 100 TIMES(!!) that of the same quantity of glass.

      So maybe actually *GET INFORMED* before you start getting all horny over something FACTUALLY POINTLESS, you moron, just because you read it somewhere… or continue to expose your complete ignorance on the matter and make more of a doofus of yourself.

  8. mpias3785 - 10 years ago

    Sapphire never seemed like a good idea for a phone display because most of us are already familiar with it, and its faults, in the form of anodized aluminum. Sapphire is simply aluminum oxide and anodization is just a way of building up a thick layer for protection. Our Macs and iDevices use a type II anodized finish. Scratch resistant enough, but far from perfect. Some items (like expensive flashlights) often use the tougher (thicker) type III process, and while are far more resistant to scratching, chip easily.

    Sapphire is very hard which makes it scratch resistant, but hard usually means brittle.

  9. Overlord - 10 years ago

    One year later…
    “The five reasons Apple intended to use shappire displays on the iPhone 7 – Time”

    • jsbrock - 10 years ago

      If you’re reading the article correctly, you will understand why that 100% will not happen unless there’s a highly diluted hybrid. Stop being so fixated on sapphire.

      • krikaoli - 10 years ago

        I think he read it very well.

      • Overlord - 10 years ago

        “why that 100% will not happen”

        Are you 100% sure?
        Like you was sure about those 5.5″ screen NEVER HAPPEN?

  10. twolf - 10 years ago

    Sorry, but some of those 5 reasons don’t make sense. You state correctly that pure sapphire has less flex than glass and is, therefore, more likely to shatter. And you also state correctly that scratches make it likelier for a surface to shatter. What you don’t mention in your example of an iphone in a pocket full of keys is that sapphire will not scratch! Not even a tiny bit – unless you’re a billionaire and your keys are made from diamond and sapphire! Glass will. So, in a real world situation, one should compare pocket-weakened glass to sapphire when it comes to the likelihood of a display shattering on impact.

    And, of course, Apple’s displays don’t have to be 100% sapphire. It could be an incredibly thin layer on top of other materials (i.e. glass) and Apple may even have a few techniques to make this thin layer less shatter prone (I vaguely remember at least one patent in which sapphire can be scored in order to make it less shatter prone).

    The cost and battery arguments would be considerably weakened if Apple went the above route and used a very thin layer of sapphire on top of more traditional glass.

    The “bulkier” reason is weak at best (and further weakened by the “thin layer” approach I mentioned). These days, smart phones are already so light, nobody decides on a phone based on one extra gram. We’re at a point, actually, were phones could probably be made even lighter, but manufacturers are not going that route because these expensive devices would appear to “flimsy” or “cheap” (back in the days of landline telephones, AT&T for the longest time made phones heavier than they needed to be – because they felt more “substantial” that way).

    • lin2logger - 10 years ago

      Yeah… you’re right. YOU were the FIRST to think of all the above. DAMN! If only you were a multi-billion dollar company… you’d be AMAZING! You’re so SMART! At least much smarter than Apple or any of the quoted sources. Clearly! How could they all possibly be so STUPID, huh??!

      • twolf - 10 years ago

        I didn’t claim I thought of it “first” or that I’m “smart”. I simply described why some of the reasons given in this article weren’t very convincing. It’s called contributing to a discussion. You ought to try it sometime.

      • tidersisbeter - 10 years ago

        chill out bro.

      • jsbrock - 10 years ago

        A pro Apple troll trolling other Apple fans on an Apple website.

    • jsbrock - 10 years ago

      Interesting points. I think I could maybe see an ultra thin sapphire coat laminated to the glass in the future, but not without cost or advancements in production technology.

  11. So Ben, what did I say?

  12. Marklewood at Serenity Lodge - 10 years ago

    Sapphire glass sounds glamorous. But, if it isn’t functional, I don’t want it. I want my mobile devices to be sevicable, functional, well designed & engineered, accept software upgrades, long-lasting and well, just work — out of the box.

Author

Avatar for Ben Lovejoy Ben Lovejoy

Ben Lovejoy is a British technology writer and EU Editor for 9to5Mac. He’s known for his op-eds and diary pieces, exploring his experience of Apple products over time, for a more rounded review. He also writes fiction, with two technothriller novels, a couple of SF shorts and a rom-com!


Ben Lovejoy's favorite gear