[hrjet]

Only the cost reason makes sense to me. Surely the other reasons (such as transmitivity of Saphire) would have been investigated before putting down .5 billion dollars on the counter. The cost, on the other hand, can be passed down to the consumer, when in leading position.

[quarterto]

It's not that they're not making any use of sapphire. The screen on the Watch and the Touch ID sensors on iPhones are still sapphire.

[philjohn]

And the camera lens cover.

[aet]

"Manufacturers know that consumers are starting to care a lot more about the impact that the products they buy are having on the environment. Sapphire requires 100 times more energy to produce than glass. The energy requirements alone make sapphire problematic as a viable material to use on a smartphone. None of the folks I talked to had any idea how they could solve this problem given the nature of the material itself."