With that said, wouldn't Steve Jobs general idea that Professional users have different needs and uses than typical consumer buyers still be appropriate, particularly to extend the life of your otherwise still functional and familiar device?
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?
Perhaps they should indeed play a role in figuring out how their products can be recycled.
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?
But those changes in cars made them last longer and run more efficiently and reliably. But soldering RAM to the motherboard, making up their own SATA interface, and gluing the battery to the case does none of those things. All it does it allow them to make it marginally smaller and drives repair costs through the roof. Personally, I'd rather have a machine that's slightly thicker and maybe even slightly heavier that I can upgrade and don't have to pay Apple prices for RAM.
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.
I don't doubt that SJ said these exact words, but if I quoted someone I would put the date and publication or event where the quote was from. That certainly gives the inclusion of the quote more legitimacy.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUZZ OF GLUEING of PARTS IS ALL ABOUT...
I've seen most of NATGEO's Ultimate Factories series and all of the exotic cars featured uses GLUE to hold the aluminum body to its chassis. We are talking about 200mph Ferraris and Porsches here how much more for a retina MACs that just sits on your lap @ 0MPH most of the time.
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?
It was just an attempt to teach one how to fish. Next time, I'll hand out sushi.
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.
But those changes in cars made them last longer and run more efficiently and reliably. But soldering RAM to the motherboard, making up their own SATA interface, and gluing the battery to the case does none of those things. All it does it allow them to make it marginally smaller and drives repair costs through the roof. Personally, I'd rather have a machine that's slightly thicker and maybe even slightly heavier that I can upgrade and don't have to pay Apple prices for RAM.
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.
But those changes in cars made them last longer and run more efficiently and reliably. But soldering RAM to the motherboard, making up their own SATA interface, and gluing the battery to the case does none of those things. All it does it allow them to make it marginally smaller and drives repair costs through the roof. Personally, I'd rather have a machine that's slightly thicker and maybe even slightly heavier that I can upgrade and don't have to pay Apple prices for RAM.
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.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
With that said, wouldn't Steve Jobs general idea that Professional users have different needs and uses than typical consumer buyers still be appropriate, particularly to extend the life of your otherwise still functional and familiar device?
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.......
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maltz
But those changes in cars made them last longer and run more efficiently and reliably. But soldering RAM to the motherboard, making up their own SATA interface, and gluing the battery to the case does none of those things. All it does it allow them to make it marginally smaller and drives repair costs through the roof. Personally, I'd rather have a machine that's slightly thicker and maybe even slightly heavier that I can upgrade and don't have to pay Apple prices for RAM.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregInPrague
I don't doubt that SJ said these exact words, but if I quoted someone I would put the date and publication or event where the quote was from. That certainly gives the inclusion of the quote more legitimacy.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerrySwitched26
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.
That is not a source, it is a google search. A goggle search that does not contain the source on the first page.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wovel
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjlcool
I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUZZ OF GLUEING of PARTS IS ALL ABOUT...
I've seen most of NATGEO's Ultimate Factories series and all of the exotic cars featured uses GLUE to hold the aluminum body to its chassis. We are talking about 200mph Ferraris and Porsches here how much more for a retina MACs that just sits on your lap @ 0MPH most of the time.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maltz
But those changes in cars made them last longer and run more efficiently and reliably. But soldering RAM to the motherboard, making up their own SATA interface, and gluing the battery to the case does none of those things. All it does it allow them to make it marginally smaller and drives repair costs through the roof. Personally, I'd rather have a machine that's slightly thicker and maybe even slightly heavier that I can upgrade and don't have to pay Apple prices for RAM.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maltz
But those changes in cars made them last longer and run more efficiently and reliably. But soldering RAM to the motherboard, making up their own SATA interface, and gluing the battery to the case does none of those things. All it does it allow them to make it marginally smaller and drives repair costs through the roof. Personally, I'd rather have a machine that's slightly thicker and maybe even slightly heavier that I can upgrade and don't have to pay Apple prices for RAM.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Junkyard Dawg
Isn't it funny that as Americans get fatter, their laptops get thinner?
Not so much.