In recent statements, Corning executive Tony Tripeny gave his opinion on the use of sapphire crystals. And you can imagine his conclusions. For him, sapphire crystal does not represent improvements or benefits for consumer electronics devices. A message that was to be expected if we consider that Apple could include it in its next iPhone or for that secret project that Tim Cook alluded to during the last shareholders meeting.
For Corning, sapphire glass is a less interesting option than Gorilla Glass because it is ten times more expensive to manufacture, 1.6 times heavier, less environmentally friendly because it requires more energy to manufacture and lets in less light so brighter screens are needed, something that could affect battery life. Most importantly, while acknowledging that it is a more scratch-resistant product, they claim that Gorilla Glass withstands greater pressure.
Statements that are logical, each one defends their business, but that do not stop showing a little resentment if they actually drop Apple as a customer. The fact is, the level of production is so high that a few million in revenue would be lost. Something we have already seen with other suppliers such as Samsung, which despite the disputes is one of Apple’s main component suppliers.
Still, I would like to see how and on what devices Apple uses those sapphire crystals . Especially to be able to assess with the product in hand if the improvement is really substantial or as Mr. Tripeny says, Gorrilla Glass is a better solution.