'Ultrabook' makers squeezed by Apple's control of metal chassis supply - Page 3

Originally Posted by cloudgazer

They have a design patents on their particular case designs, but that would only cover the aesthetics - so it wouldn't stop somebody making a different looking unibody case. As for utility patents, a quick search turns up none assigned to Apple with 'unibody' or 'monocoque' in the abstract. It's quite possible that they have no patents on the manufacturing methods used and it's quite certain they have none on unibody construction in general since it had been around in automobiles and airframes for years.

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Could you elaborate on how that $10 "becomes" even $45 in savings? Would glue be cheaper to affix internal parts than screws, for instance?

Originally Posted by Tulkas

You pique my interest enough to do a quick search.
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ok_design.html

"Two years after Apple introduced its first unibody computer in the MacBook Air, the company has officially been granted ownership of its unique design and manufacturing process."

Sounds like more than aesthetics to me and instead includes the actual design and process. I guess the machinery involved might be used for designs and processes that don't violate Apple's patents.

Originally Posted by 80025

So wait, this is Apple's fault that chassis vendors are operating at capacity and are unable to retool and increase production for other PC makes/models? Or maybe it's the consumer's fault for buying so many Apple products, forcing chassis manufacturers to meet consumer demand?

Personally, it seems that based on the OS most PC ultrabooks would be using, there's already a surplus of suitable alternatives: commode shaped white porcelain.

Originally Posted by digitalclips

Yet another example of sheep having to copy Apple! Jeez will it ever end? Good luck with heat dissipation with fiberglass not to mention durability and the look and feel. BTW this reminds me, I wonder what happened to Apple's Liquid Glass venture?

Originally Posted by digitalclips

That was my comment in the first post of this thread but I'm still waiting for the physicists to weigh in

Originally Posted by cloudgazer

Are you sure that they're not coupled in the MBP and MBA? That's actually one area where they do have a patent.

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...+AND+ABST/case

Originally Posted by solipsism

This thread has gone down hill in record time. I blame the Nazis.

Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum

It is disingenuous to isolate the cost of a part then try to extrapolate the contribution to the retail price of the finished product. The COGS (Cost of Goods Sold) includes much more than parts: cost of money; manufacturing; distribution; warehousing; returns... to mention a few of the major ones.

Originally Posted by Elastic Reason

Actually the guy is right it is a mill. That said, we're not talking about great tolerances here. A Hurco or HAAS CNC machine could do the job and only about cost 50k to 70k -- and the market is flooded with them. Really, how hard could it be to find vendors?

Domestic Manufacturing had picked up recently with a lot the demand being just in time. Meaning that parts suppliers didn't have time to want for a container to ship from China. Add to that the recent issues with supplies from Japan and the market had picked up a bit. There are plenty vendors that could mill laptop case parts.

Originally Posted by ahmlco

If they do fiberglass then they'll also need to do some sort of interior metal chassis to hold the various parts, and to act as a heat sink, then attach the case to the chassis.

Originally Posted by JONOROM

and what input method would they use to put out the fires from excessive heat?

Originally Posted by Galbi

Fiberglass is used in many applications in the boating industry. Durability has already been proven. Heat dissipation is a none issue as notebooks these days dont produce as much heat as they used to.

Originally Posted by wizard69

There are probably 10,000 shops in NY that could mill such a case. Now high volume production might be a different issue but I find it absurd that these people can't find a machine shop to at least get started. A build out of a high volume line is a different story, but you wouldn't do that until you have a successful product.

Originally Posted by bsimpsen

I've been wondering this too. One of the claimed benefits of the Liquid Metal technology was the ability to injection mold it to final tolerance, complete with an attractive surface finish. Apple has an exclusive license on this technology in the CE space. If it works and works well, it would be yet another distinguishing characteristic of Apple products that's hard to copy.

Originally Posted by cloudgazer

Nope, but the bad Appleinsider reporting could easily lead you into believing it. The key passage in that article is this

' Two entitled "Portable computer" show the design of the MacBook Air, while one, called "Electronic device," apply to Apple's larger, more powerful aluminum MacBook Pro.'

The clue is in the name. Patent titles are required to be descriptive, if the patents were for manufacturing techniques then they wouldn't be titled 'portable computer', however - that's EXACTLY what the design patents would be titled.

This search shows all of Apple's patents with that title, note that all the ones titled just 'Portable Computer' all begin with a D. Any patent starting thus is a design patent and is thus limited to aesthetics.

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...ELD2=TI&d=PTXT

There are some utility patents with similar names in the list, but none of them relate to unibody construction.

Originally Posted by JeffDM

Computers have had plastic shells and metal chassis for a long time. More expensive computers had metal shells for a long time (IBM/Lenovo Thinkpads, more expensive Compaqs, Macs from TiBook on, etc.), but I've not seen one that use the metal shell as a heat sink. There is some heat dissipation through the shell but I really doubt it's a significant percentage.

Originally Posted by ahmlco

If they do fiberglass then they'll also need to do some sort of interior metal chassis to hold the various parts, and to act as a heat sink, then attach the case to the chassis.

This, in turn, means that it could be tough to do a really thin and light case that's strong enough.

It also means, parts and price-wise, that you have to manufacture not only the case, but the chassis as well, then assemble them both. Each part runs up the price and the cost of assembly. Though a stamped metal chassis isn't nearly as expensive as a CNC milled part.

Another point to consider is whether or not people will pay "Air" prices for a fiberglass notebook. It will probably be lighter, true, but I doubt it will have the fine fit and finish of the existing Air.

Originally Posted by wizard69

There are probably 10,000 shops in NY that could mill such a case. Now high volume production might be a different issue but I find it absurd that these people can't find a machine shop to at least get started. A build out of a high volume line is a different story, but you wouldn't do that until you have a successful product.



This is why I think the story is bogus. Milling machines are dime a dozen and can be had quickly on the used market and even from "inventory". These would not be lines suitable for high speed production but they could certainly handle light production with enough hands.


Yep! With a little effort they could have a high volume line up in a year or two .

Originally Posted by mesomorphicman

Do you feel better now? Flexed your knowledge now you can continue your smarter than you complex. People like you humor me, comment has no real opinion on the article, just a need to be extra particular. Reminds me of Mike Tirico (not that you know who he is as I'm sure sports are beneath your IQ), if someone says the ball went 301yards he'll correct them and say actually it went 302 - who the hell cares it's in the general area. Lastly, speaking of tools, you are one.

/ghost

Actually, it's 'CNC mill', not lathe, but carry on...

Originally Posted by Smallwheels

A new Italian sports car made by Lamborghini will have part of the chassis and body made from a new process to create carbon fiber parts. The parts will be injection molded instead of laying up layers of weave on top of one another and adding resin to bond them.

This process could be utilized by laptop makers to quickly create very strong shells for their computers and not need milling machines. It would be much faster to make parts using injection molding technology than milling huge chunks of aluminum. The parts would be just as light or even lighter than aluminum.

Originally Posted by solipsism

This thread has gone down hill in record time. .

Originally Posted by Dlux

My intent was to clarify a term that, while not vital to the article, nonetheless was repeated three times to describe one facet of Apple's manufacturing process.

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

"A segment of fiberglass is said to be between $5 and $10 cheaper than a magnesium-aluminum one, and an entire notebook could see $20 in savings on the production end with the use of fiberglass. That could equate to savings of $50 to $100 at retail, according to Taiwan fiberglass maker Mitak Precision."

I'm most definitely not a business man. So how does this work? How does $5 to $10 turn into $50 to $100?

Long known as a master of the supply chain for overseas components, Apple...

Originally Posted by acslater017

When PCs can slap together components for cheap, they are cheaper. Any old desktop with a plastic tower can go $300...

But when things like new technology, new designs, new manufacturing methods, design overhead come into play, Apple is very competitive. See iPad prices or "ultrabook" prices... Apple spent 5 years working on iPad and probably at least a few years working on MacBook Air (it debuted in 2008).

So now everyone else is trying to play catch up, but they haven't made the designs, secured the suppliers, secured the machinery, etc.

Originally Posted by akhomerun

I'm sorry, but until iPods and iPhones propelled Apple into a dominant market position for said devices, Apple was NOT AT ALL known for being a master of the supply chain!! I don't know who counts ~5-7 years as "long"

If you buy in bulk and have a lot of cash that's pretty much all it takes to become a "master of the supply chain for overseas components"

Originally Posted by akhomerun

I'm sorry, but until iPods and iPhones propelled Apple into a dominant market position for said devices, Apple was NOT AT ALL known for being a master of the supply chain!! I don't know who counts ~5-7 years as "long"

If you buy in bulk and have a lot of cash that's pretty much all it takes to become a "master of the supply chain for overseas components"

Originally Posted by cloudgazer

Actually I think it started with the very first iPods, I seem to recall reading somewhere of Apple tying up the supply of 1.8inch hard drives from early on.

Originally Posted by cloudgazer

Actually I think it started with the very first iPods, I seem to recall reading somewhere of Apple tying up the supply of 1.8inch hard drives from early on.

Originally Posted by Smallwheels

A new Italian sports car made by Lamborghini will have part of the chassis and body made from a new process to create carbon fiber parts. The parts will be injection molded instead of laying up layers of weave on top of one another and adding resin to bond them.

This process could be utilized by laptop makers to quickly create very strong shells for their computers and not need milling machines. It would be much faster to make parts using injection molding technology than milling huge chunks of aluminum. The parts would be just as light or even lighter than aluminum.

Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum

Actually, I suspect that a laptop case shaped like this would be great!



... and be very easy to produce.

Originally Posted by Dlux

Actually, it's 'CNC mill', not lathe, but carry on...

Originally Posted by sequitur

Your ID:

Join Date: Apr 2006

Posts: 23,754;

that's @ 63 months; Your posts divided by 63 and then divided by 30 days = 12.568 a day. An average of @ 12 A DAY.

I assume you read all of the other threads and posts before you post.

I am in awe of your dedication to AI. I joined a month before you, and I have posted a mere 1,503. I feel humble in your presence. This is NOT a criticism or sarcasm. I am truly in awe of your abilities.

Do you ever sleep?

Originally Posted by wizard69

There are probably 10,000 shops in NY that could mill such a case. Now high volume production might be a different issue but I find it absurd that these people can't find a machine shop to at least get started. A build out of a high volume line is a different story, but you wouldn't do that until you have a successful product.



This is why I think the story is bogus. Milling machines are dime a dozen and can be had quickly on the used market and even from "inventory". These would not be lines suitable for high speed production but they could certainly handle light production with enough hands.


Yep! With a little effort they could have a high volume line up in a year or two .

Originally Posted by Dlux

I originally wrote:


Somehow those nine words have triggered quite a response from you, including a psychological assessment and an ad hominem attack. My intent was to clarify a term that, while not vital to the article, nonetheless was repeated three times to describe one facet of Apple's manufacturing process. It's not that big of a deal, on par with mistaking 'food processor' with 'blender'. But for anyone who wishes to learn more about case manufacturing the distinction is important.

So how should I have worded my correction so as to not provoke your ire?

Originally Posted by noirdesir

I guess whoever wrote this used 'lathes' as a synonym for shape-cutting machining (as opposed to casting combined with screwing and glueing things together).

Originally Posted by jm6032

I looked around the thread and I didn't see anyone directly address your primary question: How can a $10 part equate to a $100 increase in cost. I'm not going to discuss the end price, but I can assure you that a part that arrives at your incoming dock that you pay $10 for will end up costing you more than $10.

First, someone has to pick it up, log it in as received (this also incurs IT costs...). Then it's moved to some storage location (after some kind of inspection to make sure it's what you ordered and not some shipping clerk's left over pizza and that it is painted the right color, has the right lettering, and, actually works). Even if automated conveyers, that location is most likely inside a building. The part is taking up real estate in that building and it's taking up environmental conditioning of the storage area. As long as that part sits on that real estate, it's adding cost.

As an aside, Apple is the, or one of the, grand masters in "Just in Time" manufacturing. This means that incoming raw materials spend as little time as possible taking up real estate.

When the assembly line is ready (again, that determination incurs costs some human, some IT) for the part then it's moved again. These are direct costs and controllable by smart management and design.

Now, what no one has talked about is the activity leading up to ordering that part. If it's a transformer for the power supply, it almost certainly isn't an off the shelf part. It most likely was designed by an Apple engineer. The design was shopped around. Bids were received and evaluated. Sample parts were made. And again, these parts were received and again evaluated before being released to procurement and production. I knew an engineer in Apple's QA department some years ago and he told me that Apple was the biggest stickler for quality he'd ever worked for. These are indirect costs. And, again are controllable by clever management and processes.

Lastly, every part in the finished product is subject to failure. Some value has to be added to the part to cover costs related to diagnosis and replacement. This is a big one. Every time an Apple person has to look at your computer and diagnose it, the costs start piling up. So, the goal is to build in quality so you never have to bring it back and have a physical part replaced.

So, does this make a $10 part add $100 to the price. I can't say for each part there is a 10:1 mark up, but I can assure you, a $10 part adds far more than $10 to the cost of using it.

I hope this helps.

A segment of fiberglass is said to be between $5 and $10 cheaper than a magnesium-aluminum one, and an entire notebook could see $20 in savings on the production end with the use of fiberglass. That could equate to savings of $50 to $100 at retail, according to Taiwan fiberglass maker Mitak Precision.