Dr. Drang:
Apple’s patent application is for a method that allows them to make 18k gold that has, on a volume basis, less gold than regular 18k gold.
How can this be? It’s because Apple’s gold is a metal matrix composite, not a standard alloy. Instead of mixing the gold with silver, copper, or other metals to make it harder, Apple is mixing it with low-density ceramic particles. The ceramic makes Apple’s gold harder and more scratch-resistant—which Tim Cook touted during the September announcement—and it also makes it less dense overall.
The media is going to have a field day with this. They’ll get it wrong but they’ll still lose their collective minds over it.
“They” will get it wrong? Aren’t you part of the media too? 😉
Nope. As Groucho Marx said, “I refuse to be part of a club that would have me as a member.”
Hubolt Watch has a similar Gold/Carbon process, video below.
Thanks for cutting me out, asshole.
Not sure who or what you are referring to but the name calling isn’t necessary.
I’m referring to me, Sumocat, being cited at the start of Dr. Drang’s post and me, Sumocat, telling you three days ago about this aspect of the patent.
http://www.loopinsight.com/2015/03/06/the-apple-watch-bet/#comment-1892044506
You, Shawn King, replied to my comment and blew it off. Spin that however you want, but you know how I’m interpreting it.
I didn’t blow anything off but spin away.
Regardless, name calling is neither appreciated or allowed on The Loop.
You don’t have to appreciate it for it to be accurate. It’s there for everyone to judge for themselves.
Or, it could be that The Loop can only quote a certain percentage of an article before it becomes more than a reference link and could be construed as copyright infringement. So, you likely get to enjoy the link to the original article and the mention in the original article. A simple, “Cool! I’m in the original article, too, by the way, so go read it!” would have sufficed.
If The Loop had written it’s own take and left you out, I’d say you have a better argument.
One more thing…
http://www.loopinsight.com/2014/09/29/youre-an-asshole/
http://www.loopinsight.com/2012/09/27/asshole/
Dr. Drang quoted 100% of my tweet without trouble.
You’re under the mistaken impression that you have the same posting rights as the guy who runs this site.
And the Loop is linking to Dr. Drang, and therefore cannot quote him 100% without legal ramifications. If it ran with you instead of his recount of you, then they could have done your stuff 100%.
I was under the impression you would see the hypocrisy in claiming name calling is not allowed on The Loop when you mean calling “us” names is not allowed.
Quoting my tweet or mentioning the source wouldn’t count against that, nor would citing the comment I handed to them.
So you say. I say the other. The only real decision makers would be The Loop and Dr. Drang, so we’re just blathering on, basically. Enjoy!
Here – let me make it clear for you.
Commentors on The Loop are not allowed to call anyone names.
The Publisher of The Loop can do whatever he damn well pleases because he owns the site.
Better?
No, dude, I fully understand your rules are “Do as we say, not as we do.” I just don’t agree that makes it better.
The gold content has not changed. One set of impurities have been swapped out for another set of impurities that enhance basic hardness and strength. This is just controlled metalurgy.
My masters was based on this 20 years ago. I took basic mild carbon steel and worked out a method to harden the first few atoms at the surface level to allow a cheap material to be used in a very high volume high work enviroment.
I came up with a NiC process for mild carbon steel for rollers that is used in milling ane frabric production.
ps. In the world of Materials Science or Metalurgy, a ceramic is not a decorative plate or a crock-pot. Its a non metallic, or non polymer additive.
Reaction to the details surrounding Apple’s gold manufacturing process nicely captures how profoundly this company and its products are so misunderstood. BTW, Apple’s not the only company making high quality products subject to general criticisms, but Apple does seem to generate the most outrage.
There is obvious value in providing the customer with a gold watch with a cast that’s “twice as hard as standard gold”*, and creating this ceramic and gold formulation likely cost Apple millions to develop (or license), yet the takeaway is not the value in a more durable, longer-lasting product. The message is focused on the sausage-making side of the story.
*http://www.apple.com/watch/apple-watch-edition/