InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 0
Posts 353
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/24/2012

Re: jeffshir post# 16012

Thursday, 08/16/2012 7:30:10 PM

Thursday, August 16, 2012 7:30:10 PM

Post# of 232864
Hrrrm, after further digesting and understanding the patent application's wording even more, it's really looking to me that even going to just a metallic coating is not compatible with their current design due to RF-signal problems. In the paragraphs I quoted, they're describing the use of some of the elements of our IP, but also saying directly that metallic elements would not be useful because of their inherent properties of being poor RF transmitters when the signal must pass through the metal. I think this ACE may not be in their deck. Take that how you want, but according to Apple's own patent application, even a limited collector's edition as you're suggesting would induce another "Antenna Gate" with this iPhone's design.

Various materials can be used in such a thermal spray process, including metals, ceramics and cermets. Because metals and cermets tend to be poor transmitters for RF communications, it is preferable that the thermally sprayed material for use with the present invention be a ceramic powder material. Such a ceramic can be, for example, an aluminum based powder, a chromium oxide based powder, a titania based powder or a zirconium oxide based powder, among other suitable materials.



And then looking at the patent application with the company they listed as a vendor for spraying on the ceramic coating, their application states the use of just zirconium and hafnia, with other stabilizing materials of a non-significant percentage.
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent LQMT News