For the 18 karat gold Apple Watch Edition, Jony Ive told The Financial Times on Friday that Apple had created a process to place molecules in Apple gold closer together, consequently making it harder than standard gold.
But there’s more to it than that, with a metallurgist now explaining that Apple’s more densely packed gold atoms could reduce the amount of gold it needs to use per watch by a lot.
Dr. Drang at the Leancrew blog points out that Apple’s patented gold process actually would reduce the gold content of their 18 karat watch by half. But wouldn’t that just make it 9 karat gold? Not quite.
Leancrew explains that karats refer to the ratio of gold to other atoms in the alloy. For example, 18 karat gold is 75% gold atoms, and 25% other atoms, measured by grams. But here’s where Apple is getting clever: if they fill that other 25% with atoms that take up more volume, they can effectively “stretch” those 75 gold atoms to make the gold content of the watch itself more dense.
Leancrew summarizes:
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.
Saving the volume of gold used in production is important for Apple Watch Edition. For one thing, it will help drive the price of the Apple Watch Edition down to levels with better mass appeal. solid gold watches are expensive, that’s why your grandpa got one after he retired for the company he worked for for 50 years.
Also? Without cutting down on the “actual” amount of gold the Apple Watch Edition uses, back-of-the-envelope calculations suggest that Cupertino would need 1/3rd of the world’s available gold supply if the Apple Watch Edition is a hit. That’s a lot of gold, even for Apple.
Source: Leancrew
John Brownlee is a writer for Fast Company, and a contributing writer here at CoM. He has also written for Wired, Playboy, Boing Boing, Popular Mechanics, VentureBeat, and Gizmodo. He lives in Boston with his wife and two parakeets. You can follow him here on Twitter.
21 responses to “Why Apple needed to invent a new kind of gold for Apple Watch Edition”
I haven’t worn a wrist watch this century and it’s unlikely I will in the future, but it will be nice to see the Apple Watch take off. So many have tried, but failed.
18 Karat gold watches are not expensive, the brand thats on that watch is usually what makes them expensive.
This seems like the opposite of making the price mass market, it seems like a thing to make it more expensive for the apple tax.
It is true that i dont know how much the price of the watch is going to be, but id bet the profit margin is going to be great for the apple watch…and not to mention, the price of gold is def not high right now.
If Apple use 1 ounce/1 watch, I predict the price is $1500 or less. If only .5 oz, I’ll say $999.
I’m sure Apple is looking for a much lower cost to attract the majority. If it was Platinum or Californium the most expensive metal on the planet, then yeah $999 to $1500.
18 karat gold for a wrist watch? No thanks
Oh look, more evidence that falls right in line with my prediction that the gold Watch won’t be as expensive as everyone was thinking.
Nobody needs a gold watch. Apple are just going to create even more haters. I really don’t like the way Apple is moving away from a tech company to a fashion company. So much for Steve Jobs’ vision to change the world. It’s just sad.
I own a Rolex and a Cartier watch, and I can guarantee the names alone and the 100% markup retailers charge is why they are so expensive. Also, Rolex and Cartier are not in the mass marketing business, and they price their watches toward a finite number of units sold. They are sold in the jewelry category, which is quite different from the high tech category. The fact Apple is offering a gold model caters to those more status-seeking consumers who want a crossover. Fact is, anything from Apple, no matter how utilitarian, does have some status appeal, even without the logo (which Rolex and Cartier would be LOST without) showing prominently. Reaching back to the PC only days, Apple and Macintosh took on a more elitist image because of higher prices and exclusiveness of some features. As PCs and Macs became closer and closer in price and capabilities, that waned a bit, but the divide remains. Those who are offended by anyone offering a gold tech device should understand and appreciate that when I buy the steel Apple watch I will be more than satisfied with its appeal based on its merits, not its gold content. Therefore, I believe sales of the gold model may be substantial but will only make up a small percentage of Apple watches sold. To prove my point, how many gold iPhones have you or will you ever see? Few. It’s just not necessary for ownership satisfaction. Moreover, should Apple really stretch it and go to a platinum model, ask yourself, can you honestly distinguish platinum from highly polished steel unless you carry around a loupe? There are very few people who indulge themselves in that kind of private self-satisfaction.
Invented new gold? What the fuck? They didn’t invent “new gold”, they took 18k and added ceramics so they didn’t need as much. Stop with the idiotic headlines, makes you look stupid.
Oh what fucking bullshit this is. So now they have a patent on how to make gold better. What the fuck is this world coming to. Google, Samsung and all the other damn manufactures have already made smart watches. Now don’t get me wrong if Apple’s watch is better then ok is better but for christ sake people stop acting as though this is new. This has been around for thousands of years they just never disclosed the process because no one cares.
I’ve never hear of gold being mixed with ceramic materials before. I’d say it’s new. As for better, it probably is if it makes the material harder wearing. Gold is soft by it’s very atomic nature. If this new process makes it more durable then that is ‘better’ in terms of how it will survive in daily use. Leaps of material engineering like this take a lot of effort but they are happening all around us in lots of different arenas in lots of different companies. You want them all to stop bothering? Happy with a cast iron bicycle frame? Wooden wheels on your horseless carriage. It’s all good, calm down. And as for patents, why not? If it took them hard work to arrive at this then they are entitled to patent it.
Yeah ok. No one is saying to stop innovation what we are saying is that this is all bullshit and they are going to sucker people to pony up a nice chunk of change for something that has been around for quite sometime. And NO! Patents are the worst thing that have happened to this world. But that is a topic for another day.
Judging from your response you’d be the first or third idiot inline to buy this bullshit. But hey if you can buy it then enjoy it.
I agree to a degree, Patents can be a bad thing, not the worst though. They do protect people’s/companies investment of time and intellect. Bad patent – Cadburys in the UK protecting the colour purple. Good patent Dyson protecting the design of their vacuum cleaners. I’d argue if this new process for ‘hard gold’ is unique and has wide ranging applications and that they are the originators of the process of how to create it then they deserve to be protected for a short period of time. This is fair. I’d take this stance for any company or individual. As for the iWatch. No way , not interested in this one little bit. I have a nice 50th early ed. Rolex Sub. I bought it a s present to myself whilst I was ill some years ago and that will reman on my wrist until I can pass it on to my son one day.
Point well made sir. And yes that would be a nice thing for your kid one day.
cheers.
It’s gold…with other materials mixed in. You honestly think no-one has done this before?
read about it and yes, I think this is original. Most amalgams or alloys of gold are created by smelting and mixing different metals (silver, copper etc etc). This appears to be different by the fact it’s not a metal being added (ceramic particles) and allow for 3D transposition/printing. I’d say it’s pretty unique. Unless you can point to someone already doing this? I can only go with what I’ve read or seen but it looks pretty unique to me.
Why would anyone in their right mind purchase anything by Apple. To begin: Many seem to forget that Apple, has never really invented anything. Apple is a ” Recipe Company” That is taking already existing ideas and spicing them up.
lol you’re drunk go home, this is an apple product blog no one cares about you.
Well Ultra Orange: If this is really a Apple product blog. You should realize everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Furthermore, I am having a difficult time rationalizing your anger. What education do you possess if any? I ask this, because you are displaying that you are rather very emotional. And I have no wish to respond to any further irrationality. You have a nice day. Don’t forget your meds!!
Actually history has proven this false. Steve Wozniack is a nice guy, but hasn’t proven to push the world of technology after his original apple II work.
Jobs always had the vision. He saw that the personal computer would be more than Wozniacks geeky hobby, and that it would take over the world. You’d have to put yourself back in the 1975 to understand how incredibly revolutionary that vision really was.
Apple has always been the industries innovation leader. That doesn’t mean they do fundamental science, but rarely does that lead to real products. Cell phones were around for 30 years when apple released the iPhone. Everybody had their chance to revolutionize the industry and didn’t. Look at the phones that preceded the iPhone, clunky keyboard things with little screens that could only do WAP for limited internet. Now every phone on the market looks like the iPhone. Is any one element of the iPhone wholly new? Probably not. But real vision is knowing how to take 400 little things and making the total package that works well… and what to leave out.
Apple has led the industry for decades. First the idea of the personal computer, then the GUI computer, then the computer as an appliance, then the smart phone, then the tablet. It is not because of some fundamental market position advantage either. People forget that 10 years ago apple was a tiny struggling company with few customers. Innovation, idealism, and perfection have won the day, and I for one am glad.