MacBook Pro Retina display teardown shows off 'engineering marvel' - Page 2

 

Grind it up and melt it down, same as everything else.

 

So how many of these things do you think will require recycling before they figure it out?

 

Keep jumping on those sour grapes, they release a lot of whine.

They do have different needs, Pros need to be able to customise something to their needs and also have it be reliable.

 

But the fulfilment of these needs is different for desktops and notebooks. For the desktop, customisation is achieved through lots of slots, drive bays etc, but for the notebook it's typically done at purchase time, because notebooks don't really have a central expansion bus. And Apple still have several models and BTO options to choose from.

 

For reliability, laptops have the problem of bumps and drops that desktops don't have, so the most reliable (and therefore Pro) laptop will be fully solid state. And the quality of that screen, surely great for doing professional graphics work? And a quad-core processor?

They did. They make their products so desirable and well made that are "recycled" to new users generation after generation and their original machines are sold at Sotheby's for hundreds of thousands of dollars.

You want machines that can be disassembled by users into each constituent element (which simply isn't possible) but what about machines that have a much longer shelf life before ever seeing a landfill? Can Dell, HP, Acer or any of the other CE makers that sell a lot more HW than Apple make the same claim?

There isn't a thing on this planet that will please everyone.

 

Just live with it guys.

 

Those who think Retina is a fantastic laptop, go order it online like now!

 

Those who love to modify, get the non Retina display.

 

Apple has given you all choices to choose from.......

And this is exactly why Apple's designs have been decried by hackers and other gadget loving people as being difficult to fix. Maybe I don't want 16GB maybe I want 32GB, an option not provided by Apple, but viable in the aftermarket... in some cases anyway.

 

The thing is, if the devices become cheaper and more reliable over time because of pushing the edge, then it's nothing to really complain about. But that isn't happening, and has never applied to computers. Computers built in 1986 still work, but the mechanical parts do not, and the CRT's have either screen burn-in or have faded to the point of being unusable. You can conceivably pop a ISA VGA card into a 1986 computer and plug it into a 2012 LCD monitor with a VGA connector, but you still won't be able to use use it. There comes a point where you just need to admit defeat and that you probably won't be able to fix a device, nor use it for 30 years.

 

Most electronics now, are only warrantied for at most 3 years, this is as good as saying "throw it away after 3years". The laptop battery is good for about 1000 cycles, or roughly 3 years of use if you charge it once per day. SSD's are good for about 5 years under modest use. LCD's back-lighting dims over time, just like CRT's and have a rating of around 7 years tops. The longest I've had a LCD screen last so far is 5. So based on my experience, yes most of the useable life of a laptop is finished after 3 years (you may still extend it's useful life by plugging it into the wall and using external an monitor/keyboard/mouse) until the SSD wears out. Notice that's the only part that can be replaced.

 

Desktop systems on the other hand will still be useable as long as new parts can be used in the older system. To go back to the 1986 PC analogy above, 30years from now, do you think we will be using display port monitors? I can pretty much guarantee you that whatever we use for storage currently will not be available in 2042. Look at how long each drive technology has lasted. 1986 SCSI - 2005 SAS , 1986 ST506-1994 PATA(ATA) - 2003 SATA, each technology was supplanted by smaller increments before hitting some technical limitation (504MB and 8GB barriers, 137GB, etc) So even if we're still using SATA and SAS in 2042, drives made then will certainly not work on machines made now.

 

So maybe the engineers at Apple are just engineering the devices to last longer. Who knows. I know I'd never buy a HP or Dell that used these techniques, as the build quality of their laptops ensure that they become unusable right as the warranty expires.

 

 

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1GGGE_enUS396&sugexp=chrome,mod=18&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=We+don%E2%80%99t+think+design+is+just+how+it+looks.+We+think+design+is+how+it+works.+And+we+labored+a+lot+on+this+because+our+pro+customers+want+accessibility.+There%E2%80%99s+a+lot+of+great+technology+inside%2C+but+they+want+access+to+that+technology.+To+add+memory%2C+to+add+cards%2C+to+add+drives.+And+so+we+think+we%E2%80%99ve+got+the+most+incredible+access+story+in+the+business.

I believe we need serviceability above all else.  Therefore, I recommend Vacuum tube memory be used in all future computing devices.  (http://www.columbia.edu/cu/computinghistory/701-tubes.html).  This will allow each bit to be maintained separately.  Stop gouging us on repair costs.  The technology has existed for well over half a century, just use it.

That is not a source, it is a google search.  A goggle search that does not contain the source on the first page.

It was just an attempt to teach one how to fish.  Next time, I'll hand out sushi.

The market will decide how successful a non-upgradable laptop will be in the future.  I also see them doing this with the next iMac.  I've been an Apple guy for 13 years, but I see my future in hackintosh.

Good luck with your Hackintosh laptop…

???

I don't really care about iFixit or any other repair place's business model. The point they make is still the same, even for the end user. A machine you can't fix yourself in any appreciable way is a bad deal for the owner of the machine. A machine that requires extensive assemblies to be replaced in the event of a repair, rather than just the part that's broken, is a bad deal for the owner of the machine. 

Most of the moving parts have been removed so repair is not really an option. As for upgrading the machine, perhaps its best to get used to Apple creating unupgradable machines. It would be nice if at least the battery could be replaced. I really think this is abit overkill as far as everything being welded, soldered, or unaccessable. After paying big bucks for this machine I would like to feel that I could upgrade or repair it not just trash it.

In a portable device glue is a fastener of choice to avoid any chance of vibration loosening components. There might be a story in there that they analyzed repair returns and made a change to address a reliability problem?

Appreciate the effort, but that's for the original poster to do. He knew he took that quote out of context.

Seriously, though, there's not one kind of "pro" user. The logical conclusion is that Apple did market research and designed the MBPr to hit the largest part of the market. If it doesn't meet your own needs, you are on the fringe, or rather "niche." Whoever is buying these (pros, pro-sumers, average geeks overcompensating for the size of their pocket protectors) is buying all of them.

If the RMBP proves to be have no hardware issues over time, all of the concerns about glued in components will be moot.  And certainly none of the most discussed concerns are specific to this laptop or Apple or have never been seen before.

 

The flipside is:  Having replaced TWO graphics cards (NVIDIA GeForce 8600M) and TWO batteries (the original never held a charge, the replacement developed a bulge in two months that knocked off the trackpad) in the same 2008 MBP, I'm hoping Apple quintuple checked for quirks.   These were taken care of easily back then.  The littlest issue could swamp them, even if they don't literally fail.   

 

 

 

By your (and everyone else on your side of the issue's) logic, we should have stuck with tubes instead of solid state transistors and printed circuit boards. It's the neo-Luddite view of technology you are espousing.

I like the glass panel on front because it protects the screen.  If the goal was to reduce reflection, couldn't Apple have used something like Museum Glass for the front panel?  Since these new laptops do not have a glass panel in front, do we need to worry about getting scratches or keyboard imprints on the screen?

I know a shit-ton of people with Macbook Pros, and haven't met a single fucking person in my life where they felt repairability was an important consideration, or that repaired their laptops themselves. Is this a blow to iFixit? Sure. Is iFixit, or other such companies that benefit from high repairability even a blip on the radar in terms of customer base? No. Does it even really matter in the big picture? Absolutely not. When someone bitches about something, the first think you look at are their vested interests. The pros of having such an integrated design, both in terms of cost to Apple and design/engineering goals certainly outweigh any cons for the VAST MAJORITY of people buying this laptop. Any objective individual that looks at the big picture, not just their own very specific needs/wants, would have to agree. 

Edited by Slurpy - 6/19/12 at 10:03am

 

You are incorrect.  Soldering the RAM reduces the current requirements, generating the 30 day standby time.  it also raises reliability as pins never need reseating and production tests of the motherboard assembly are complete and unchanging throughout manufacture.  With fewer parts to source/ship, the repair infrastructure become less expensive and it will take FAR fewer personnel hours to do the repairs.  So overall repair cost may be slightly more per occurrence, but overall occurrences should be far lower, reducing the average per capita repair costs.  

 

So if you want a higher chance of having an expensive repair bill rather than a much lower chance of having a slightly more expensive repair bill, have at it.  It's your money.  But please don't try to make engineering tradeoff judgements you have not thought through, nor have any appropriate background to help inform, at all. Your guess was so bad I can't even call it an analysis.

Not so much.

 

Just worked out by a conservative calculation/estimate that the two fans in my 5-year old MBP have revolved at least 2,625,000,000 times each (don't know if that's billions or trillions on your side of the pond)... should I take it in for its "half-life" service?

 

next you'll be telling us we should all be efficient at cutting out the ram thats been hardwired into the motherboard so we can install our own upgrades. 

 

SLIGHTLY more? a mutli hundred or thousand dollar motherboard is SLIGHTLY more than an 80 dollar stick of ram? Are you huffing glue?

Would you feel better if you thought about the entire motherboard as being a giant stick of RAM?
This is like people bitching about whether a Ferrari is better than a Bugatti, while driving a Pinto.
You'll never own one. You'll never drive one. So why do you care?

I saw the unboxings, and the tear downs of a whole MBPR, and now the tear downs of the MBPR display.  

 

What I really want to see is a tear down of the the boxes the MBPR comes in... 

 

What kind of paper and cardboard is Apple using?  

Is it a proprietary box design? How do they fold the corners?  

Did they copy the design from Android?  

Did they use a special glue?  

Did Steve work on the box designs for the new MBPR on his deathbed?  

How many FoxConn workers died boxing my MBPR?  

How many lawsuits will be generated by the box design and packaging?  

Did Tim Cook crackdown and make them use better paper?  

Are the packaging materials Apple uses approved by Greenpeace?  

How come Apple does not make the boxes in the United States?

 

I predicted that Apple's new MacBook's would come out in white boxes with an Apple logo on them, months before anyone else.  

I think it's also worth pointing out that most of the people here don't have any clue what they're talking about. Apple does. For example, there's a complaint here about recycling the batteries because they're glued in. I can guarantee that no matter what glue is used, you can remove the battery if you don't care about damaging it (and you don't if you're recycling). Furthermore, Apple has to repair and refurbish these things, so I'm sure there's a way to remove the batteries. I'm betting that moderate heat will do the trick.


Depends. Let's say that the motherboard is $500 and the RAM is $75. Now, let's say that the RAM failure occurs 10 times as often. Of those 10 times, 9 are simply loose RAM and reseating fixes the problem.

Now, let's say that the labor is $75 for each repair.

So, for every $575 motherboard repair, you have $750 in labor and $75 in parts (10 failures, 9 of which simply involve reseating) when using sticks of RAM. So, even if you ignore the inconvenience of having 10 times as many people lose access to their computers for a time, the motherboard is cheaper. It also doesn't factor in the fact that it's cheaper to build the soldered RAM system, so the selling price may be lower.

Of course, the actual numbers are only guesses, but the point is that reliability can often be the better choice, even if it makes things more expensive. The world is quickly evolving that way. Need to fix your TV? They don't replace components, they replace entire modules. More and more electronic devices are going the "replace the entire unit or at least a major module" route. It's more reliable and less expensive in the end.

The fishy thing about this is that Apple has previously chosen to add the front glass, which increased the glare. Now they're supposedly "removing" the front glass? I don't think that's really why the glare went down. The new surface has a nice anti-reflective treatment applied that cuts reflected light significantly.

Just Americans? I thought I saw a few stories showing that Western Civilization is getting fatter.


Right, glue, like plastic, are often maligned construction materials. When it comes down to it, it's selection, engineering, and process. The right material for the job, designed and made right, will perform superbly. The benefits and problems must be viewed in balance.


Grinding? I doubt that's necessary, and likely hurts recyclability. I would bet anything that the proper application of heat will get the glue to let go.

Consumers are not the only people who read iFixit.  If technicians continually have to deal with time consuming, wacky procedures to do even basic repairs, then customer service can suffer.  That is the "big picture" that you refer to.  Right now, the hardware designers think that since they don't have to do the repairs themselves, repairability is not their problem.  There needs to be more cooperation between hardware designers and technicians.  Better yet, make the hardware designers spend time in the repair shops and actually do some repairs themselves.

Who is dealing with repairs though? If you have AppleCare then Apple fixes your device. In many instances, Apple just replaces the device since replacement is more cost effective than hiring thousands of hardware technicians. If you don't have AppleCare then, well... You should; which I consider a shame but every company wants to sell additional products and services.

Anyone whose revenue is derived from consumer electronics repair should seriously reconsider their business model. Most of these businesses are not authorized repair agents and use cheap parts and labor.

I'm sure they hire hardware technicians, but more at centralized locations.

 

 

How can this possibly be turned around so it sounds like Apple-bashing? Phil Schiller was blatantly bragging about how recyclable the thing was, when all along he knew exactly how much he was bending the truth.

 

I love the new machine, and fair enough if it's not as recyclable... But I don't like being lied to.

 

That's so not true. My 1G MacBook originally came with 1 GB RAM and a 100 GB HD. I "maxed out" both at 2 GB and 320 GB HD at a later date. When I bought it, I couldn't afford 2 GB (especially at Apple prices), and I don't think 320 GB HDs even existed. As a result, my lovely old MB has lasted me over 6 years and is still going strong.

 

If I was to buy a rMBP, I could only afford the minimum spec and there's no way I'd want that. 8 GB sounds great now, but the OS and Apps will become bigger and better in the future, and I will need 16 GB. So I'd have to wait and save for the 16 GB upgrade. But also I'd want more than the 256 GB storage, and that's the sticking point. I can't upgrade that to 512 GB unless I choose the higher-end 2.6 GHz model, which is $400 more. Not only that, but according to the benchmark tests, there's not an awful lot more power in it than the 2.3 GHz. And the 2.3 GHz is faster than the 2.6 GHz non-retina! So the fact you can't get more storage on the lower spec rMBP strikes me as a clever ploy from Apple to get people spending more money. If they are going to make a machine that has no user-upgradeable parts, I think it's a shame they don't make the BTO options more flexible.

 

And before anyone suggests that iPhones are made like this... I get my phone on a contract, so I know that in 18-24 months time I can get a new one with better memory, better everything... And they're a hell of a lot cheaper than a new laptop. I'm afraid that I'm one of the minority(?) who can't afford to spend 3 grand on a new machine every 2 years!

This is a bit naive. There's virtually no profit in the recycling portion of it, and many people are not sure where to take them. In California it's illegal to put an old television in the dumpster, yet people do this anyway. We need a functional idiot proofed solution there, yet no one is willing to pay for it most of the time. Ideally it would be built into the retail price of the electronic device with clear instructions available online and within the documentation.

The ram isn't such a bad issue here. If 16GB does not become more common in this specific ram spec, pricing could remain where it is. Note the price to go to 8GB on a much older macbook vs 16 on a newer one. While 16 will undoubtedly be cheaper on future macbook generations, it may or may not reach that point on the current generation. Overall the upgrade cost here isn't a huge deal relative to the machine. The battery and drive should be seen as bigger issues given their nature as expendable parts.

I'm much more neutral on the ram thing. These have never been appropriate for really heavy computing. They get too hot. The other components annoy me to the point of where I may never buy one unless battery and drive technology sees some drastic improvements.

 

This is just such a silly paradigm. Apple has all of you convinced that changing a laptop battery is a "repair".

I avoid creating my own statistics. I suggest you do the same. You're just making the statement with confidence figuring that the confidence will dissuade people from fact checking it. Given the lack of credible published readily available information, I'm not going to bother.

The ram isn't a big deal to me, but don't overstate factory warranties. Some  third party ram can come with a lifetime warranty. In terms of its cost, it's a very normal markup. You're basically paying retail + brand markup and configuration charge. $40 more on a laptop in this price range is not a big deal in any way. You can defend the battery and drive all you like, but Apple has done very little to inform people of such changes. They've transformed things that were never truly "repairs" but merely replacements on expendable parts (changing an Air filter on the car if you will :D) to expensive repairs which would weigh heavily against the value of an aging device. Essentially they may eventually force earlier retirement of their machines in this way which is bad for their consumers.

Disassembling computer parts is done on a very low budget, and it's not always done correctly. Beyond that, stop comparing Ferraris to mass market products. Apple and Ferrari serve completely different markets with some overlap in demographic due to Apple's scale.

My solution would be don't buy it. If enough people follow that trend, they won't create machines like this. It's possible that I may find myself looking for another brand, but it would bother me less if the reliability is truly exceptional within these machines. I dislike the battery issue quite a lot. Their previous warranty terms do have cycle allotments for what is covered as opposed to just considered normal wear and tear. As I've mentioned they are considered expendable parts. If the machine is built perfectly, these parts will naturally degrade and fail prior to the rest of the machine. With the battery, they've always been expensive to replace. This was true even when they were swappable. It's just that requiring more complex service leading to machine downtime and increased service charges for a replacement that may become an issue after two to three years or faster if you use your machine in colder regions is an issue. They've been experimenting for years with what people will tolerate, and it's becoming truly annoying.

Your lied to. You know that for a fact?
Did you ask Apple about it, or did you react on hearsay?
If you asked Apple I'am sure they will reply that "it isn't recyclable at all because we knew that recycling is a very important design requirement and several large environmental organizations are watching our every move, not to mention the government , also, lots of people would really like it if we dropped the ball and we ourselves are really behind recycling..."
We have a saying here: "zoals de waard is vertrouwt hij zijn gasten".

J.

 

Okay, so "lied to" is a bit heavy. But if the display is welded to the glass, is it actually possible to recycle?

 

http://www.apple.com/macbook-pro/environment/

I guess you have not paid atention to any of the teardowns?   The display comes off, not in a repairable manner, but it is not in unassailable permanent bond.  The recycler will have to spend a couple minutes separating components like they already do.  They will just use a different technique to do the job.