Apple's 'M2' processor enters mass production for MacBook Pro

1568101115

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 291
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 9,470member
    Hubro said:
    It is true that, eventually, a machine reaches a point where its core components (mother board, etc.) just can't hack it anymore.  But I don't see the logic in hurrying that by gluing and soldering the typically upgradeable components like RAM and Harddrive.  That does not benefit the customer in any meaningful way.

    Another aspect of making the SSD upgradeable is data security:  If a machine dies (say by drowning in a Starbucks) a socketed SSD can be pulled and the data on it recovered.  That is not the case if it is soldered & glued to the motherboard.  Then your data dies with your machine.
    The mystery is: Why on earth are YOU interested in Apple products. At all?

    The data dies with my machine anyway. It's what I want. It's a feature. Company property and information? Poor business practice if it's not backed up. But this situation will never happen to me anyway. I won't be caught dead in a Starbucks joint.

    ...
    Why am I interested in Apple products?   For the same reason that Andrew is:  They make some great products.  They've also been known to screw up and make bad decisions on occasion -- and that is what this thread is about.  
    ...  But, unlike some others, I don't have an alter with picture of an Apple on it.
    .......  Steve knew that both he and Apple were fallible.  Tim does too.   That's what forms the foundation that they grow from and made Apple great.

    I'm glad to hear though that your data has no value so you don't care if you lose it.   Few others have that luxury.

    muthuk_vanalingamwilliamlondon
  • Reply 142 of 291
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 9,470member
    sdw2001 said:
    sdw2001 said:
    Wgkrueger said:
    seanj said:
    For all those defending the "Everything Glued together & soldered together" assembly of the MacBooks by saying "Nobody ever upgraded a computer", Andrew just called bull!

    His biggest (only?) complaint about his M1 MacBook Air is that it can't meet his needs because it is frozen in time with what it came with when he bought it -- versus his MacPro which grew and developed with enhancements as his needs, wants and requirements grew.

    Likewise, my 9 year old i7 Thinkpad runs perfectly well and meets all of my needs -- because it's been upgraded to a 500Gb SSD, 16Gb Ram and an internal harddrive used for ongoing, real time backups.  Without those cheap and very simple to install (5 minutes or less) upgrades the machine would have been scrap
    Only a tiny percentage of people tinker with the computers, it’s a niche market that’s similar to those that add nitrous oxide to their cars...
    Most people just want a computer they can do things with, rather than do things to, in other words a consumer product. With Apple they get that, which is why customer satisfaction is so high.

    If you have a 9 year old Thinkpad then you’re probably either running XP (good luck browsing the Internet securely) or you’re running Linux. If it’s the latter then if you happy with a limited number of professional applications then that’s fine.

    I forgot to mention that its running WIndows 10.  So, its security is a good as good as any Windows machine.   Admittedly that's a low bar. 
    But the point of the post was NOT about lengetivity but to reiterate what Andew said:   His MacPro remained functional because it could be upgraded with additional RAM & Storage -- while his MacBook AIr could not meet his needs because it was all glued and soldered together and locked into its initial configuration when he bought it.
    If it needed to be upgraded immediately then it can be returned to Apple. If his needs exceeded the capabilities of a maxed out machine then he couldn’t upgrade it anyway (thinking memory here) and he could return it to Apple. If he used it for a period of time and his use cases changed so they exceeded the machines capabilities, which I think was part of your original point, then it’s a case of longevity. 
    ...

    The point?  Apple clearly looked at what its customers were actually doing, and found the benefits of hardwiring and gluing everything outweighed the negatives.  While I can see the other side, I agree.  I've had Macs since the Pismo PowerBook G3 (2000).   The number of issues I had with those machines (getting a new one every 3-4 years) was far, far higher than now.  The products are not as serviceable or upgradable.  But they also don't need to be.  

     
    Perhaps the question is:   Who benefited?   i don't think it was the customer.   For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit.   Can it be made a half millimeter thinner by eliminating a socket?   Perhaps.  But, even if true, that is a pretty marginal benefit.

    I think I explained my thinking on the benefits to the customer.  A thinner, lighter, more solid and perhaps longer-lasting design benefits the customer.  Speaking from a real-world and personal perspective, the benefits to me have been more than marginal.  As I said, I was a person who used to upgrade things myself.  I did RAM, HDD, SSD, battery (modular or internal), etc.  I don't care about that anymore.  Know why?  Because I don't need to do it.  The components on my 2015 (model year, actually started using in fall of 2016) MBP haven't needed to be replaced or upgraded.  I'm at the point now where I still don't need more capabilities, but I'll probably upgrade in a year or two anyway.  After all, my product is now vintage and nearly obsolete.  

    Again, all things being equal, I prefer upgradeability.  But things are not equal.  The design is better.  The feel is better.  Components last longer and are higher performance.  It's like complaining that you can't swap out your fuel injectors, when you could change your carburetor in your classic car.  

    I still fail to see how eliminating a socket makes a machine thinner (at least in any meaningful way).  Nor do I see how soldering an SSD makes it any stronger.  If the frame of the machine is that weak, it will work the opposite and break the solder joint -- at which time you lose your data when you throw away your machine.

    williamlondon
  • Reply 143 of 291
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,163member
    tmay said:
    elijahg said:
    thedba said:
    For all those defending the "Everything Glued together & soldered together" assembly of the MacBooks by saying "Nobody ever upgraded a computer", Andrew just called bull!

    His biggest (only?) complaint about his M1 MacBook Air is that it can't meet his needs because it is frozen in time with what it came with when he bought it -- versus his MacPro which grew and developed with enhancements as his needs, wants and requirements grew.

    Likewise, my 9 year old i7 Thinkpad runs perfectly well and meets all of my needs -- because it's been upgraded to a 500Gb SSD, 16Gb Ram and an internal harddrive used for ongoing, real time backups.  Without those cheap and very simple to install (5 minutes or less) upgrades the machine would have been scrap
    Statements such as this remind me of my now deceased father who used to long for the days of when he could service his car himself. 
    I sometimes wonder what he would say seeing today's Teslas or Priuses. 

    Either way, all technology will move towards this way of doing things with ARM architecture taking up more space. Apple is just ahead of the curve on this. 

    I don't see the logic behind equating an inability to service or upgrade something as synonymous with better products.
    How often do you service or upgrade your iPad? Your iPhone? Your Apple TV? Your Watch? Your TV set? etc... Yet these are clearly better products than the more-easily serviceable early-computing counter-parts, right? Side note, my grandad used to repair his vacuum-tube tele, but I have never done this nor will I. My solid-state flat panel TV lasts way longer, and by the time it fails, it won't be cost effective to try to repair its electronics. I'll dispose of it properly and get whatever newer tech is out.

    You apparently don't understand the goals of appliance computing, after all these decades. That's fine, but that doesn't mean Apple is going to conform to you. Nor will you being able to crack open your Tesla and work on the OS or CPU.
    The new Mac Pro is in some ways "clearly better" than the older Mac Pro, both of which are equally serviceable. You are making a false correlation that serviceability is mutually exclusive to how good a machine is. The lack of serviceability isn't the definition of how good a product is. What disadvantages to you would the ability to add more RAM or storage space to a desktop machine bring? I await your reply, but I doubt you will since you never concede when asked something awkward.

    Not sure who you think you're kidding when you say there are consumer advantages to non-serviceable products, the only advantage is to Apple, more repair profits and more RAM/SSD upgrade profits. Should we glue everything together in cars too such that the entire thing has to be replaced when a tyre wears out?

    Interesting point!  Especially when it is reframed to:  "Should we glue everything together in cars too such that the entire thing has to be replaced when the battery wears out?

    Are the coming EVs designed to replace the battery when it dies?   I have not seen much on that -- especially as some manufacturers are talking about making it part of "frame" of the car.   Rather, I hear auto makers say that the "battery will last for the life of the car" -- which may be another way of saying "the car will last the length of the battery".

    We, in developed countries, have normalized a disposable culture.   I do not think that speaks well for us.  Nor does it bode well for us.   You don't get rich by throwing stuff away.
    You seem to be unable to comprehend that bonding parts is a preferred method of manufacture in a number of industries, increasing structural stiffness and integrity, reliability and the product life cycle. See the aviation industry, and the great example of the Boeing 787. That Apple has been an early adopter of these methods to create a more compact, performant, and increasly reliable devices through most of its product lines will only accelerate.

    If you don't like what Apple is manufacturing, you have many choices in the PC industry to choose from, but I would note that those OEM's are also increasingly following Apple and others in building compact computing devices that are not upgradeable not user serviceable, and these have also proven very popular with their customer base.


    "You don't get rich by throwing stuff away", is an obvious falsehood.

    You get rich by increasing productivity, quite rich in fact, and "throwing stuff away" is certainly a cost, in energy and environmental waste that must be managed and recycled, but that cost pales against the productivity increases. Apple appears to be managing all of that with increasing success, as are other companies.

    Maybe you should only speak for yourself, not for the rest of the buying public, given that you aren't really looking for productivity increases in your computing.

    Ok... LOL... Throw away your MacBook and see if that makes you any richer.
    Well, for one, I don't have a Mac Book, Mac Book Air, or Mac Book Pro, as I haven't a need for a notebook. More to the point, you using a nine year old computer and accepting that as productive, leaves the question of whether you even need a modern or more performant computer at all, in which case, you are merely arguing against Apple Marketing, an argument which will be shown this afternoon to be grossly erroneous.

    But of course, I continue to use a 2014 iMac, without ever upgrading, though I will soon be updating to the large screen version this fall. Whether I will be richer for being more productive is of course open to question, but I'm certainly never any less rich for passing my older hardware on to someone else at no cost. I also will absolutely enjoy the new capabilities that I will see for photography and video, over the current iMac; I literal night and day difference, which is the essence of productivity.
    muthuk_vanalingamwilliamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 144 of 291
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 9,470member
    sdw2001 said:
    Wgkrueger said:
    seanj said:
    For all those defending the "Everything Glued together & soldered together" assembly of the MacBooks by saying "Nobody ever upgraded a computer", Andrew just called bull!

    His biggest (only?) complaint about his M1 MacBook Air is that it can't meet his needs because it is frozen in time with what it came with when he bought it -- versus his MacPro which grew and developed with enhancements as his needs, wants and requirements grew.

    Likewise, my 9 year old i7 Thinkpad runs perfectly well and meets all of my needs -- because it's been upgraded to a 500Gb SSD, 16Gb Ram and an internal harddrive used for ongoing, real time backups.  Without those cheap and very simple to install (5 minutes or less) upgrades the machine would have been scrap
    Only a tiny percentage of people tinker with the computers, it’s a niche market that’s similar to those that add nitrous oxide to their cars...
    Most people just want a computer they can do things with, rather than do things to, in other words a consumer product. With Apple they get that, which is why customer satisfaction is so high.

    If you have a 9 year old Thinkpad then you’re probably either running XP (good luck browsing the Internet securely) or you’re running Linux. If it’s the latter then if you happy with a limited number of professional applications then that’s fine.

    I forgot to mention that its running WIndows 10.  So, its security is a good as good as any Windows machine.   Admittedly that's a low bar. 
    But the point of the post was NOT about lengetivity but to reiterate what Andew said:   His MacPro remained functional because it could be upgraded with additional RAM & Storage -- while his MacBook AIr could not meet his needs because it was all glued and soldered together and locked into its initial configuration when he bought it.
    If it needed to be upgraded immediately then it can be returned to Apple. If his needs exceeded the capabilities of a maxed out machine then he couldn’t upgrade it anyway (thinking memory here) and he could return it to Apple. If he used it for a period of time and his use cases changed so they exceeded the machines capabilities, which I think was part of your original point, then it’s a case of longevity. 
    ...

    The point?  Apple clearly looked at what its customers were actually doing, and found the benefits of hardwiring and gluing everything outweighed the negatives.  While I can see the other side, I agree.  I've had Macs since the Pismo PowerBook G3 (2000).   The number of issues I had with those machines (getting a new one every 3-4 years) was far, far higher than now.  The products are not as serviceable or upgradable.  But they also don't need to be.  

     
    Perhaps the question is:   Who benefited?   i don't think it was the customer.   For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit.   Can it be made a half millimeter thinner by eliminating a socket?   Perhaps.  But, even if true, that is a pretty marginal benefit.
    "For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit"

    It offers a laptop that is lighter due it being thinner.  That may not be a benefit to you but it is benefit to many consumers.  So much so that Windows makers have started copying the MBA design in spades.  It isn't a surprise that ultrabooks like the MBA are the hottest selling segment of the laptop market.  And now with the M1 MBA, you get a laptop that's light, fast and runs cool & quiet.

    The average consumer does not care about the same things that you or other IT folk care about.  What they care about are devices that are convenient, easy to use, fast, quiet, cool and have access to web and their favorite apps. Sure, there are some consumers who care about upgradeability but they're far from the majority.  This is the mass market.  And don't get me wrong, I have nothing against computers that are upgradeable but if that's what YOU are after then you should buy a device that allows you to do that.

    You don't need to solder & glue stuff to get an ultrabook.  And, eliminating a socket might allow it to be, what? a half millimeter thinner?
    I see the real advantage goes to the manufacturer:  it's cheaper -- and promote planned obsolescence.
    ....  But, as others have pointed out:   while it keeps the economy humming, its not great for the ecology.
    muthuk_vanalingamwilliamlondonbaconstang
  • Reply 145 of 291
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,163member
    sdw2001 said:
    Wgkrueger said:
    seanj said:
    For all those defending the "Everything Glued together & soldered together" assembly of the MacBooks by saying "Nobody ever upgraded a computer", Andrew just called bull!

    His biggest (only?) complaint about his M1 MacBook Air is that it can't meet his needs because it is frozen in time with what it came with when he bought it -- versus his MacPro which grew and developed with enhancements as his needs, wants and requirements grew.

    Likewise, my 9 year old i7 Thinkpad runs perfectly well and meets all of my needs -- because it's been upgraded to a 500Gb SSD, 16Gb Ram and an internal harddrive used for ongoing, real time backups.  Without those cheap and very simple to install (5 minutes or less) upgrades the machine would have been scrap
    Only a tiny percentage of people tinker with the computers, it’s a niche market that’s similar to those that add nitrous oxide to their cars...
    Most people just want a computer they can do things with, rather than do things to, in other words a consumer product. With Apple they get that, which is why customer satisfaction is so high.

    If you have a 9 year old Thinkpad then you’re probably either running XP (good luck browsing the Internet securely) or you’re running Linux. If it’s the latter then if you happy with a limited number of professional applications then that’s fine.

    I forgot to mention that its running WIndows 10.  So, its security is a good as good as any Windows machine.   Admittedly that's a low bar. 
    But the point of the post was NOT about lengetivity but to reiterate what Andew said:   His MacPro remained functional because it could be upgraded with additional RAM & Storage -- while his MacBook AIr could not meet his needs because it was all glued and soldered together and locked into its initial configuration when he bought it.
    If it needed to be upgraded immediately then it can be returned to Apple. If his needs exceeded the capabilities of a maxed out machine then he couldn’t upgrade it anyway (thinking memory here) and he could return it to Apple. If he used it for a period of time and his use cases changed so they exceeded the machines capabilities, which I think was part of your original point, then it’s a case of longevity. 
    ...

    The point?  Apple clearly looked at what its customers were actually doing, and found the benefits of hardwiring and gluing everything outweighed the negatives.  While I can see the other side, I agree.  I've had Macs since the Pismo PowerBook G3 (2000).   The number of issues I had with those machines (getting a new one every 3-4 years) was far, far higher than now.  The products are not as serviceable or upgradable.  But they also don't need to be.  

     
    Perhaps the question is:   Who benefited?   i don't think it was the customer.   For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit.   Can it be made a half millimeter thinner by eliminating a socket?   Perhaps.  But, even if true, that is a pretty marginal benefit.
    "For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit"

    It offers a laptop that is lighter due it being thinner.  That may not be a benefit to you but it is benefit to many consumers.  So much so that Windows makers have started copying the MBA design in spades.  It isn't a surprise that ultrabooks like the MBA are the hottest selling segment of the laptop market.  And now with the M1 MBA, you get a laptop that's light, fast and runs cool & quiet.

    The average consumer does not care about the same things that you or other IT folk care about.  What they care about are devices that are convenient, easy to use, fast, quiet, cool and have access to web and their favorite apps. Sure, there are some consumers who care about upgradeability but they're far from the majority.  This is the mass market.  And don't get me wrong, I have nothing against computers that are upgradeable but if that's what YOU are after then you should buy a device that allows you to do that.

    You don't need to solder & glue stuff to get an ultrabook.  And, eliminating a socket might allow it to be, what? a half millimeter thinner?
    I see the real advantage goes to the manufacturer:  it's cheaper -- and promote planned obsolescence.
    ....  But, as others have pointed out:   while it keeps the economy humming, its not great for the ecology.
    You are perfectly okay with demanding Mac OS on the M1 iPad, a device which is absolutely not upgradable, yet you turn your nose up when you talk about the identical manufacturing techniques in a Mac Book Air or Mac Book Pro. What gives?

    You really need to reflect on the the world that you have created in your head, and straighten that out, because you come across as hypocritical.
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 146 of 291
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 17,540member
    sdw2001 said:
    sdw2001 said:
    Wgkrueger said:
    seanj said:
    For all those defending the "Everything Glued together & soldered together" assembly of the MacBooks by saying "Nobody ever upgraded a computer", Andrew just called bull!

    His biggest (only?) complaint about his M1 MacBook Air is that it can't meet his needs because it is frozen in time with what it came with when he bought it -- versus his MacPro which grew and developed with enhancements as his needs, wants and requirements grew.

    Likewise, my 9 year old i7 Thinkpad runs perfectly well and meets all of my needs -- because it's been upgraded to a 500Gb SSD, 16Gb Ram and an internal harddrive used for ongoing, real time backups.  Without those cheap and very simple to install (5 minutes or less) upgrades the machine would have been scrap
    Only a tiny percentage of people tinker with the computers, it’s a niche market that’s similar to those that add nitrous oxide to their cars...
    Most people just want a computer they can do things with, rather than do things to, in other words a consumer product. With Apple they get that, which is why customer satisfaction is so high.

    If you have a 9 year old Thinkpad then you’re probably either running XP (good luck browsing the Internet securely) or you’re running Linux. If it’s the latter then if you happy with a limited number of professional applications then that’s fine.

    I forgot to mention that its running WIndows 10.  So, its security is a good as good as any Windows machine.   Admittedly that's a low bar. 
    But the point of the post was NOT about lengetivity but to reiterate what Andew said:   His MacPro remained functional because it could be upgraded with additional RAM & Storage -- while his MacBook AIr could not meet his needs because it was all glued and soldered together and locked into its initial configuration when he bought it.
    If it needed to be upgraded immediately then it can be returned to Apple. If his needs exceeded the capabilities of a maxed out machine then he couldn’t upgrade it anyway (thinking memory here) and he could return it to Apple. If he used it for a period of time and his use cases changed so they exceeded the machines capabilities, which I think was part of your original point, then it’s a case of longevity. 
    ...

    The point?  Apple clearly looked at what its customers were actually doing, and found the benefits of hardwiring and gluing everything outweighed the negatives.  While I can see the other side, I agree.  I've had Macs since the Pismo PowerBook G3 (2000).   The number of issues I had with those machines (getting a new one every 3-4 years) was far, far higher than now.  The products are not as serviceable or upgradable.  But they also don't need to be.  

     
    Perhaps the question is:   Who benefited?   i don't think it was the customer.   For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit.   Can it be made a half millimeter thinner by eliminating a socket?   Perhaps.  But, even if true, that is a pretty marginal benefit.

    I think I explained my thinking on the benefits to the customer.  A thinner, lighter, more solid and perhaps longer-lasting design benefits the customer.  Speaking from a real-world and personal perspective, the benefits to me have been more than marginal.  As I said, I was a person who used to upgrade things myself.  I did RAM, HDD, SSD, battery (modular or internal), etc.  I don't care about that anymore.  Know why?  Because I don't need to do it.  The components on my 2015 (model year, actually started using in fall of 2016) MBP haven't needed to be replaced or upgraded.  I'm at the point now where I still don't need more capabilities, but I'll probably upgrade in a year or two anyway.  After all, my product is now vintage and nearly obsolete.  

    Again, all things being equal, I prefer upgradeability.  But things are not equal.  The design is better.  The feel is better.  Components last longer and are higher performance.  It's like complaining that you can't swap out your fuel injectors, when you could change your carburetor in your classic car.  

    I still fail to see how eliminating a socket makes a machine thinner (at least in any meaningful way).  Nor do I see how soldering an SSD makes it any stronger.  If the frame of the machine is that weak, it will work the opposite and break the solder joint -- at which time you lose your data when you throw away your machine.


    OK, we're beyond just a difference in philosophy or even consumer preference at this point.  Given the way you're going at it with others, I get the feeling that you are rigidly stuck in your position or perhaps just looking to debate.  I'm hoping I'm wrong, though.  

    The point is not just removing a socket, though removing anything could conceivably allow less mass and therefore a potential thinner design.  We don't even have to speculate though, because it is an established fact that Apple products are thinner and lighter.  My 2009 MBP weighs 5.5 lbs and is .95 inches thick.  My 2015 is obviously a much higher performing machine, and is 4.49 lbs and .71 inches thick.  So it's about 20% lighter and thinner.  I won't get into the performance benchmarks, but you can imagine that my current quad core machine pretty much slays the dual core 2009 machine.  

    So we've established that whatever changes Apple is making, they result in (or correlate with) faster, more powerful machines that are thinner and lighter.  So, let's now talk reliability.  As I stated, I've replaced my 2009's battery once, and it now needs it again.  I've replaced the charger.  I upgraded to an SSD (a Samsung that ended up being a problem) and then replaced the SSD again (an OWC I think).  I can't recall if I upgraded the RAM...but I think I may have.  Conversely, I'm in my 6th year of use with my 2015 MBP 2.2GHZ quad core (Retina).  I've repaired and upgraded precisely nothing.  The battery is still at least 80%.  It doesn't even have any loose screws.  The keyboard is better and quieter.  I've spilled liquids near it....no issues.  It's higher performance, thinner, lighter, more solid machine.  It's a better machine, period.  Nothing on the machine is user serviceable as far as I know.  But why does it matter to me anymore?  

    Again, if you like having user upgradable laptops, that's fine.  I'm not arguing you shouldn't.  But you are being extremely critical of Apple and anyone who has a different take.  Your comment about "throwing away your machine" is frankly ridiculous.  A broken solder joint is not going to result in permanent data loss, for a variety of reason I suspect you already know, but won't acknowledge.  People back up their data quite a bit now, thanks to the cloud.  The system IS serviceable by authorized centers, including Apple.  People aren't just going to "throw their machine away."  That's absurd.  

    You may prefer to swap out a failed SSD yourself, but at what cost does that come? Apple evaluated who actually works on their own machines, what the costs and benefits of each approach were, and decided to go with a more hardwired method.  Think what you like, but that's obviously what happened.  Again, you're entitled to your own opinion.  But you're not even considering the other side of the debate.  

     
    tmayMephisdogoleswilliamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 147 of 291
    crowleycrowley Posts: 7,881member
    sdw2001 said:
    Wgkrueger said:
    seanj said:
    For all those defending the "Everything Glued together & soldered together" assembly of the MacBooks by saying "Nobody ever upgraded a computer", Andrew just called bull!

    His biggest (only?) complaint about his M1 MacBook Air is that it can't meet his needs because it is frozen in time with what it came with when he bought it -- versus his MacPro which grew and developed with enhancements as his needs, wants and requirements grew.

    Likewise, my 9 year old i7 Thinkpad runs perfectly well and meets all of my needs -- because it's been upgraded to a 500Gb SSD, 16Gb Ram and an internal harddrive used for ongoing, real time backups.  Without those cheap and very simple to install (5 minutes or less) upgrades the machine would have been scrap
    Only a tiny percentage of people tinker with the computers, it’s a niche market that’s similar to those that add nitrous oxide to their cars...
    Most people just want a computer they can do things with, rather than do things to, in other words a consumer product. With Apple they get that, which is why customer satisfaction is so high.

    If you have a 9 year old Thinkpad then you’re probably either running XP (good luck browsing the Internet securely) or you’re running Linux. If it’s the latter then if you happy with a limited number of professional applications then that’s fine.

    I forgot to mention that its running WIndows 10.  So, its security is a good as good as any Windows machine.   Admittedly that's a low bar. 
    But the point of the post was NOT about lengetivity but to reiterate what Andew said:   His MacPro remained functional because it could be upgraded with additional RAM & Storage -- while his MacBook AIr could not meet his needs because it was all glued and soldered together and locked into its initial configuration when he bought it.
    If it needed to be upgraded immediately then it can be returned to Apple. If his needs exceeded the capabilities of a maxed out machine then he couldn’t upgrade it anyway (thinking memory here) and he could return it to Apple. If he used it for a period of time and his use cases changed so they exceeded the machines capabilities, which I think was part of your original point, then it’s a case of longevity. 
    ...

    The point?  Apple clearly looked at what its customers were actually doing, and found the benefits of hardwiring and gluing everything outweighed the negatives.  While I can see the other side, I agree.  I've had Macs since the Pismo PowerBook G3 (2000).   The number of issues I had with those machines (getting a new one every 3-4 years) was far, far higher than now.  The products are not as serviceable or upgradable.  But they also don't need to be.  

     
    Perhaps the question is:   Who benefited?   i don't think it was the customer.   For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit.   Can it be made a half millimeter thinner by eliminating a socket?   Perhaps.  But, even if true, that is a pretty marginal benefit.
    "For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit"

    It offers a laptop that is lighter due it being thinner.  That may not be a benefit to you but it is benefit to many consumers.  So much so that Windows makers have started copying the MBA design in spades.  It isn't a surprise that ultrabooks like the MBA are the hottest selling segment of the laptop market.  And now with the M1 MBA, you get a laptop that's light, fast and runs cool & quiet.

    The average consumer does not care about the same things that you or other IT folk care about.  What they care about are devices that are convenient, easy to use, fast, quiet, cool and have access to web and their favorite apps. Sure, there are some consumers who care about upgradeability but they're far from the majority.  This is the mass market.  And don't get me wrong, I have nothing against computers that are upgradeable but if that's what YOU are after then you should buy a device that allows you to do that.
    You don't need to solder & glue stuff to get an ultrabook.  And, eliminating a socket might allow it to be, what? a half millimeter thinner?
    I see the real advantage goes to the manufacturer:  it's cheaper -- and promote planned obsolescence.
    ....  But, as others have pointed out:   while it keeps the economy humming, its not great for the ecology.
    A few millimetres at least, given how RAM is mounted onto notebook logic boards.  Packaging different components onto the same chip and soldering in others creates a much more robust product, which is something you really want in a mobile device.  Plus thinner equals lighter, and you'll be hard pressed to find someone who doesn't want a lighter notebook.
    sdw2001watto_cobra
  • Reply 148 of 291
    I'm glad to hear though that your data has no value so you don't care if you lose it.   Few others have that luxury. 
    Quite a few have the luxury of encrypting their SSD, quite a few have iCloud or similar, and quite a few have the encrypted Samsung T7 or similar for backups.

    I have.

    Thus my concern if my Mac breaks down beyond recovery (it's VERY glued and soldered, pretty rugged and extremely reliable) is that I have to purchase the Mac mini M1 512/16 a bit too soon. I was hoping for a Mac mini M1x or M2 with 4x usb C and a much smaller chassis that I never will open, unless they provide it with a fan that needs dusting, which they probably will.

    There's nada, zero, zip probability for Apple changing philosophy into DYI. They will keep on soldering and gluing (thanks heaven) until they invent something they find better. But for the years to come, the batteries will be safely glued to the chassis without the Thinkpad battery rattle, and they will continue to solder everything they find sensible to solder to ONE logic board and use as few breakable internal cables as possible.

    That's the reality, and the time is probably overdue for you to get at grips with it. 

    Steve and Tim? Please.... Late Mr. Steve Jobs and Mr. Tim Cook to you. Show some dignity and respect....

  • Reply 149 of 291
    canukstormcanukstorm Posts: 2,485member
    sdw2001 said:
    sdw2001 said:
    sdw2001 said:
    Wgkrueger said:
    seanj said:
    For all those defending the "Everything Glued together & soldered together" assembly of the MacBooks by saying "Nobody ever upgraded a computer", Andrew just called bull!

    His biggest (only?) complaint about his M1 MacBook Air is that it can't meet his needs because it is frozen in time with what it came with when he bought it -- versus his MacPro which grew and developed with enhancements as his needs, wants and requirements grew.

    Likewise, my 9 year old i7 Thinkpad runs perfectly well and meets all of my needs -- because it's been upgraded to a 500Gb SSD, 16Gb Ram and an internal harddrive used for ongoing, real time backups.  Without those cheap and very simple to install (5 minutes or less) upgrades the machine would have been scrap
    Only a tiny percentage of people tinker with the computers, it’s a niche market that’s similar to those that add nitrous oxide to their cars...
    Most people just want a computer they can do things with, rather than do things to, in other words a consumer product. With Apple they get that, which is why customer satisfaction is so high.

    If you have a 9 year old Thinkpad then you’re probably either running XP (good luck browsing the Internet securely) or you’re running Linux. If it’s the latter then if you happy with a limited number of professional applications then that’s fine.

    I forgot to mention that its running WIndows 10.  So, its security is a good as good as any Windows machine.   Admittedly that's a low bar. 
    But the point of the post was NOT about lengetivity but to reiterate what Andew said:   His MacPro remained functional because it could be upgraded with additional RAM & Storage -- while his MacBook AIr could not meet his needs because it was all glued and soldered together and locked into its initial configuration when he bought it.
    If it needed to be upgraded immediately then it can be returned to Apple. If his needs exceeded the capabilities of a maxed out machine then he couldn’t upgrade it anyway (thinking memory here) and he could return it to Apple. If he used it for a period of time and his use cases changed so they exceeded the machines capabilities, which I think was part of your original point, then it’s a case of longevity. 
    ...

    The point?  Apple clearly looked at what its customers were actually doing, and found the benefits of hardwiring and gluing everything outweighed the negatives.  While I can see the other side, I agree.  I've had Macs since the Pismo PowerBook G3 (2000).   The number of issues I had with those machines (getting a new one every 3-4 years) was far, far higher than now.  The products are not as serviceable or upgradable.  But they also don't need to be.  

     
    Perhaps the question is:   Who benefited?   i don't think it was the customer.   For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit.   Can it be made a half millimeter thinner by eliminating a socket?   Perhaps.  But, even if true, that is a pretty marginal benefit.

    I think I explained my thinking on the benefits to the customer.  A thinner, lighter, more solid and perhaps longer-lasting design benefits the customer.  Speaking from a real-world and personal perspective, the benefits to me have been more than marginal.  As I said, I was a person who used to upgrade things myself.  I did RAM, HDD, SSD, battery (modular or internal), etc.  I don't care about that anymore.  Know why?  Because I don't need to do it.  The components on my 2015 (model year, actually started using in fall of 2016) MBP haven't needed to be replaced or upgraded.  I'm at the point now where I still don't need more capabilities, but I'll probably upgrade in a year or two anyway.  After all, my product is now vintage and nearly obsolete.  

    Again, all things being equal, I prefer upgradeability.  But things are not equal.  The design is better.  The feel is better.  Components last longer and are higher performance.  It's like complaining that you can't swap out your fuel injectors, when you could change your carburetor in your classic car.  

    I still fail to see how eliminating a socket makes a machine thinner (at least in any meaningful way).  Nor do I see how soldering an SSD makes it any stronger.  If the frame of the machine is that weak, it will work the opposite and break the solder joint -- at which time you lose your data when you throw away your machine.


    OK, we're beyond just a difference in philosophy or even consumer preference at this point.  Given the way you're going at it with others, I get the feeling that you are rigidly stuck in your position or perhaps just looking to debate.  I'm hoping I'm wrong, though.  

    The point is not just removing a socket, though removing anything could conceivably allow less mass and therefore a potential thinner design.  We don't even have to speculate though, because it is an established fact that Apple products are thinner and lighter.  My 2009 MBP weighs 5.5 lbs and is .95 inches thick.  My 2015 is obviously a much higher performing machine, and is 4.49 lbs and .71 inches thick.  So it's about 20% lighter and thinner.  I won't get into the performance benchmarks, but you can imagine that my current quad core machine pretty much slays the dual core 2009 machine.  

    So we've established that whatever changes Apple is making, they result in (or correlate with) faster, more powerful machines that are thinner and lighter.  So, let's now talk reliability.  As I stated, I've replaced my 2009's battery once, and it now needs it again.  I've replaced the charger.  I upgraded to an SSD (a Samsung that ended up being a problem) and then replaced the SSD again (an OWC I think).  I can't recall if I upgraded the RAM...but I think I may have.  Conversely, I'm in my 6th year of use with my 2015 MBP 2.2GHZ quad core (Retina).  I've repaired and upgraded precisely nothing.  The battery is still at least 80%.  It doesn't even have any loose screws.  The keyboard is better and quieter.  I've spilled liquids near it....no issues.  It's higher performance, thinner, lighter, more solid machine.  It's a better machine, period.  Nothing on the machine is user serviceable as far as I know.  But why does it matter to me anymore?  

    Again, if you like having user upgradable laptops, that's fine.  I'm not arguing you shouldn't.  But you are being extremely critical of Apple and anyone who has a different take.  Your comment about "throwing away your machine" is frankly ridiculous.  A broken solder joint is not going to result in permanent data loss, for a variety of reason I suspect you already know, but won't acknowledge.  People back up their data quite a bit now, thanks to the cloud.  The system IS serviceable by authorized centers, including Apple.  People aren't just going to "throw their machine away."  That's absurd.  

    You may prefer to swap out a failed SSD yourself, but at what cost does that come? Apple evaluated who actually works on their own machines, what the costs and benefits of each approach were, and decided to go with a more hardwired method.  Think what you like, but that's obviously what happened.  Again, you're entitled to your own opinion.  But you're not even considering the other side of the debate.  

     Problem is, is there' s small handful of IT guys on this site who view the tech world through their IT lens and thinks the mass market consumer should walk like them, talk like them, think like them.  And any product that isn't fit for the IT tech person is automatically not fit for the mass market even though exploding sales of smartphones, iPads, thin / light laptops say other wise.

    sdw2001watto_cobra
  • Reply 150 of 291
    danvmdanvm Posts: 1,144member
    danvm said:
    sdw2001 said:
    Wgkrueger said:
    seanj said:
    For all those defending the "Everything Glued together & soldered together" assembly of the MacBooks by saying "Nobody ever upgraded a computer", Andrew just called bull!

    His biggest (only?) complaint about his M1 MacBook Air is that it can't meet his needs because it is frozen in time with what it came with when he bought it -- versus his MacPro which grew and developed with enhancements as his needs, wants and requirements grew.

    Likewise, my 9 year old i7 Thinkpad runs perfectly well and meets all of my needs -- because it's been upgraded to a 500Gb SSD, 16Gb Ram and an internal harddrive used for ongoing, real time backups.  Without those cheap and very simple to install (5 minutes or less) upgrades the machine would have been scrap
    Only a tiny percentage of people tinker with the computers, it’s a niche market that’s similar to those that add nitrous oxide to their cars...
    Most people just want a computer they can do things with, rather than do things to, in other words a consumer product. With Apple they get that, which is why customer satisfaction is so high.

    If you have a 9 year old Thinkpad then you’re probably either running XP (good luck browsing the Internet securely) or you’re running Linux. If it’s the latter then if you happy with a limited number of professional applications then that’s fine.

    I forgot to mention that its running WIndows 10.  So, its security is a good as good as any Windows machine.   Admittedly that's a low bar. 
    But the point of the post was NOT about lengetivity but to reiterate what Andew said:   His MacPro remained functional because it could be upgraded with additional RAM & Storage -- while his MacBook AIr could not meet his needs because it was all glued and soldered together and locked into its initial configuration when he bought it.
    If it needed to be upgraded immediately then it can be returned to Apple. If his needs exceeded the capabilities of a maxed out machine then he couldn’t upgrade it anyway (thinking memory here) and he could return it to Apple. If he used it for a period of time and his use cases changed so they exceeded the machines capabilities, which I think was part of your original point, then it’s a case of longevity. 
    ...

    The point?  Apple clearly looked at what its customers were actually doing, and found the benefits of hardwiring and gluing everything outweighed the negatives.  While I can see the other side, I agree.  I've had Macs since the Pismo PowerBook G3 (2000).   The number of issues I had with those machines (getting a new one every 3-4 years) was far, far higher than now.  The products are not as serviceable or upgradable.  But they also don't need to be.  

     
    Perhaps the question is:   Who benefited?   i don't think it was the customer.   For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit.   Can it be made a half millimeter thinner by eliminating a socket?   Perhaps.  But, even if true, that is a pretty marginal benefit.
    "For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit"

    It offers a laptop that is lighter due it being thinner.  That may not be a benefit to you but it is benefit to many consumers.  So much so that Windows makers have started copying the MBA design in spades.  It isn't a surprise that ultrabooks like the MBA are the hottest selling segment of the laptop market.  And now with the M1 MBA, you get a laptop that's light, fast and runs cool & quiet.

    The average consumer does not care about the same things that you or other IT folk care about.  What they care about are devices that are convenient, easy to use, fast, quiet, cool and have access to web and their favorite apps. Sure, there are some consumers who care about upgradeability but they're far from the majority.  This is the mass market.  And don't get me wrong, I have nothing against computers that are upgradeable but if that's what YOU are after then you should buy a device that allows you to do that.
    Maybe you don't need to copy Apple to make devices thinner and lighter.  For example, the ThinkPad X1 Nano is a 2 pound notebook, smaller and lighter than any current Apple notebook, and it has a replaceable SSD and battery, among other parts.  


    X1 Nano Gen 1 Hardware Maintenance Manual (lenovo.com)

    And this not only benefits someone who later needs a larger SSD drive, but also makes possible to service the device onsite without special tools.  That could be a better design compared to Apple notebooks, where you have to send it via mail or take it to an Apple Store for service.  
    Like I said in my previous post, if that's a design that works for you then more power to you.  The vast majority of average consumers using their device for home use is not goint to go through the trouble of opening up their laptop, upgrade the SSD & reinstall the OS.  They want to buy it and forget it.
    Did you read my post?  It wasn't about upgradeability at all.  I pointed out the the X1 Nano showed that you don't need to glue or sold everything for a think / light device.  Second, I think that consumers could benefit from a device that's easy to service.  For example, if the logic board needs to be replaced, the user won't lose data since the SSD can be swapped to the new logic board.  Or after 3-4 years, the battery can be replaced extending the life of the notebook.  Is that really bad for consumers?
    muthuk_vanalingamGeorgeBMac
  • Reply 151 of 291
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,163member
    danvm said:
    danvm said:
    sdw2001 said:
    Wgkrueger said:
    seanj said:
    For all those defending the "Everything Glued together & soldered together" assembly of the MacBooks by saying "Nobody ever upgraded a computer", Andrew just called bull!

    His biggest (only?) complaint about his M1 MacBook Air is that it can't meet his needs because it is frozen in time with what it came with when he bought it -- versus his MacPro which grew and developed with enhancements as his needs, wants and requirements grew.

    Likewise, my 9 year old i7 Thinkpad runs perfectly well and meets all of my needs -- because it's been upgraded to a 500Gb SSD, 16Gb Ram and an internal harddrive used for ongoing, real time backups.  Without those cheap and very simple to install (5 minutes or less) upgrades the machine would have been scrap
    Only a tiny percentage of people tinker with the computers, it’s a niche market that’s similar to those that add nitrous oxide to their cars...
    Most people just want a computer they can do things with, rather than do things to, in other words a consumer product. With Apple they get that, which is why customer satisfaction is so high.

    If you have a 9 year old Thinkpad then you’re probably either running XP (good luck browsing the Internet securely) or you’re running Linux. If it’s the latter then if you happy with a limited number of professional applications then that’s fine.

    I forgot to mention that its running WIndows 10.  So, its security is a good as good as any Windows machine.   Admittedly that's a low bar. 
    But the point of the post was NOT about lengetivity but to reiterate what Andew said:   His MacPro remained functional because it could be upgraded with additional RAM & Storage -- while his MacBook AIr could not meet his needs because it was all glued and soldered together and locked into its initial configuration when he bought it.
    If it needed to be upgraded immediately then it can be returned to Apple. If his needs exceeded the capabilities of a maxed out machine then he couldn’t upgrade it anyway (thinking memory here) and he could return it to Apple. If he used it for a period of time and his use cases changed so they exceeded the machines capabilities, which I think was part of your original point, then it’s a case of longevity. 
    ...

    The point?  Apple clearly looked at what its customers were actually doing, and found the benefits of hardwiring and gluing everything outweighed the negatives.  While I can see the other side, I agree.  I've had Macs since the Pismo PowerBook G3 (2000).   The number of issues I had with those machines (getting a new one every 3-4 years) was far, far higher than now.  The products are not as serviceable or upgradable.  But they also don't need to be.  

     
    Perhaps the question is:   Who benefited?   i don't think it was the customer.   For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit.   Can it be made a half millimeter thinner by eliminating a socket?   Perhaps.  But, even if true, that is a pretty marginal benefit.
    "For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit"

    It offers a laptop that is lighter due it being thinner.  That may not be a benefit to you but it is benefit to many consumers.  So much so that Windows makers have started copying the MBA design in spades.  It isn't a surprise that ultrabooks like the MBA are the hottest selling segment of the laptop market.  And now with the M1 MBA, you get a laptop that's light, fast and runs cool & quiet.

    The average consumer does not care about the same things that you or other IT folk care about.  What they care about are devices that are convenient, easy to use, fast, quiet, cool and have access to web and their favorite apps. Sure, there are some consumers who care about upgradeability but they're far from the majority.  This is the mass market.  And don't get me wrong, I have nothing against computers that are upgradeable but if that's what YOU are after then you should buy a device that allows you to do that.
    Maybe you don't need to copy Apple to make devices thinner and lighter.  For example, the ThinkPad X1 Nano is a 2 pound notebook, smaller and lighter than any current Apple notebook, and it has a replaceable SSD and battery, among other parts.  


    X1 Nano Gen 1 Hardware Maintenance Manual (lenovo.com)

    And this not only benefits someone who later needs a larger SSD drive, but also makes possible to service the device onsite without special tools.  That could be a better design compared to Apple notebooks, where you have to send it via mail or take it to an Apple Store for service.  
    Like I said in my previous post, if that's a design that works for you then more power to you.  The vast majority of average consumers using their device for home use is not goint to go through the trouble of opening up their laptop, upgrade the SSD & reinstall the OS.  They want to buy it and forget it.
    Did you read my post?  It wasn't about upgradeability at all.  I pointed out the the X1 Nano showed that you don't need to glue or sold everything for a think / light device.  Second, I think that consumers could benefit from a device that's easy to service.  For example, if the logic board needs to be replaced, the user won't lose data since the SSD can be swapped to the new logic board.  Or after 3-4 years, the battery can be replaced extending the life of the notebook.  Is that really bad for consumers?
    I am of the belief that consumers want the most reliable devices, vs ease of service, so consumers have a purchase choice, same as it ever was. For the record, the X1 Nano traded battery life for lightweight and serviceability, and given that Apple has better battery life, plus better performance based on its M1 silicon, I'm not in agreement with your argument.

    One would think that the market will actually decide this, not any of our arguments, but here we are, arguing to little effect, one way or another.

    https://www.engadget.com/lenovo-thinkpad-x1-nano-review-price-specs-170059409.html

    "For a laptop that’s so light, the X1 Nano is impressively capable. Lenovo sacrificed surprisingly little to make the lightest ThinkPad yet and even managed to improve its display and speakers. Sure, battery life is a big trade-off, but if you were looking for something to throw in your book bag that wouldn’t make it too heavy and don’t need something that lasts all day, the ThinkPad X1 Nano is worth considering. Just know that at $1,399, you have quite a few other options from Samsung, Apple and Dell that might be better-looking, last longer and have superior screens at about the same price.
    edited April 28 williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 152 of 291
    canukstormcanukstorm Posts: 2,485member
    danvm said:
    danvm said:
    sdw2001 said:
    Wgkrueger said:
    seanj said:
    For all those defending the "Everything Glued together & soldered together" assembly of the MacBooks by saying "Nobody ever upgraded a computer", Andrew just called bull!

    His biggest (only?) complaint about his M1 MacBook Air is that it can't meet his needs because it is frozen in time with what it came with when he bought it -- versus his MacPro which grew and developed with enhancements as his needs, wants and requirements grew.

    Likewise, my 9 year old i7 Thinkpad runs perfectly well and meets all of my needs -- because it's been upgraded to a 500Gb SSD, 16Gb Ram and an internal harddrive used for ongoing, real time backups.  Without those cheap and very simple to install (5 minutes or less) upgrades the machine would have been scrap
    Only a tiny percentage of people tinker with the computers, it’s a niche market that’s similar to those that add nitrous oxide to their cars...
    Most people just want a computer they can do things with, rather than do things to, in other words a consumer product. With Apple they get that, which is why customer satisfaction is so high.

    If you have a 9 year old Thinkpad then you’re probably either running XP (good luck browsing the Internet securely) or you’re running Linux. If it’s the latter then if you happy with a limited number of professional applications then that’s fine.

    I forgot to mention that its running WIndows 10.  So, its security is a good as good as any Windows machine.   Admittedly that's a low bar. 
    But the point of the post was NOT about lengetivity but to reiterate what Andew said:   His MacPro remained functional because it could be upgraded with additional RAM & Storage -- while his MacBook AIr could not meet his needs because it was all glued and soldered together and locked into its initial configuration when he bought it.
    If it needed to be upgraded immediately then it can be returned to Apple. If his needs exceeded the capabilities of a maxed out machine then he couldn’t upgrade it anyway (thinking memory here) and he could return it to Apple. If he used it for a period of time and his use cases changed so they exceeded the machines capabilities, which I think was part of your original point, then it’s a case of longevity. 
    ...

    The point?  Apple clearly looked at what its customers were actually doing, and found the benefits of hardwiring and gluing everything outweighed the negatives.  While I can see the other side, I agree.  I've had Macs since the Pismo PowerBook G3 (2000).   The number of issues I had with those machines (getting a new one every 3-4 years) was far, far higher than now.  The products are not as serviceable or upgradable.  But they also don't need to be.  

     
    Perhaps the question is:   Who benefited?   i don't think it was the customer.   For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit.   Can it be made a half millimeter thinner by eliminating a socket?   Perhaps.  But, even if true, that is a pretty marginal benefit.
    "For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit"

    It offers a laptop that is lighter due it being thinner.  That may not be a benefit to you but it is benefit to many consumers.  So much so that Windows makers have started copying the MBA design in spades.  It isn't a surprise that ultrabooks like the MBA are the hottest selling segment of the laptop market.  And now with the M1 MBA, you get a laptop that's light, fast and runs cool & quiet.

    The average consumer does not care about the same things that you or other IT folk care about.  What they care about are devices that are convenient, easy to use, fast, quiet, cool and have access to web and their favorite apps. Sure, there are some consumers who care about upgradeability but they're far from the majority.  This is the mass market.  And don't get me wrong, I have nothing against computers that are upgradeable but if that's what YOU are after then you should buy a device that allows you to do that.
    Maybe you don't need to copy Apple to make devices thinner and lighter.  For example, the ThinkPad X1 Nano is a 2 pound notebook, smaller and lighter than any current Apple notebook, and it has a replaceable SSD and battery, among other parts.  


    X1 Nano Gen 1 Hardware Maintenance Manual (lenovo.com)

    And this not only benefits someone who later needs a larger SSD drive, but also makes possible to service the device onsite without special tools.  That could be a better design compared to Apple notebooks, where you have to send it via mail or take it to an Apple Store for service.  
    Like I said in my previous post, if that's a design that works for you then more power to you.  The vast majority of average consumers using their device for home use is not goint to go through the trouble of opening up their laptop, upgrade the SSD & reinstall the OS.  They want to buy it and forget it.
    Did you read my post?  It wasn't about upgradeability at all.  I pointed out the the X1 Nano showed that you don't need to glue or sold everything for a think / light device.  Second, I think that consumers could benefit from a device that's easy to service.  For example, if the logic board needs to be replaced, the user won't lose data since the SSD can be swapped to the new logic board.  Or after 3-4 years, the battery can be replaced extending the life of the notebook.  Is that really bad for consumers?
    It isn't bad for consumers. I'm just not convinced that the mass market consumer cares as much about that as you or others might.
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 153 of 291
    danvmdanvm Posts: 1,144member
    tmay said:
    danvm said:
    danvm said:
    sdw2001 said:
    Wgkrueger said:
    seanj said:
    For all those defending the "Everything Glued together & soldered together" assembly of the MacBooks by saying "Nobody ever upgraded a computer", Andrew just called bull!

    His biggest (only?) complaint about his M1 MacBook Air is that it can't meet his needs because it is frozen in time with what it came with when he bought it -- versus his MacPro which grew and developed with enhancements as his needs, wants and requirements grew.

    Likewise, my 9 year old i7 Thinkpad runs perfectly well and meets all of my needs -- because it's been upgraded to a 500Gb SSD, 16Gb Ram and an internal harddrive used for ongoing, real time backups.  Without those cheap and very simple to install (5 minutes or less) upgrades the machine would have been scrap
    Only a tiny percentage of people tinker with the computers, it’s a niche market that’s similar to those that add nitrous oxide to their cars...
    Most people just want a computer they can do things with, rather than do things to, in other words a consumer product. With Apple they get that, which is why customer satisfaction is so high.

    If you have a 9 year old Thinkpad then you’re probably either running XP (good luck browsing the Internet securely) or you’re running Linux. If it’s the latter then if you happy with a limited number of professional applications then that’s fine.

    I forgot to mention that its running WIndows 10.  So, its security is a good as good as any Windows machine.   Admittedly that's a low bar. 
    But the point of the post was NOT about lengetivity but to reiterate what Andew said:   His MacPro remained functional because it could be upgraded with additional RAM & Storage -- while his MacBook AIr could not meet his needs because it was all glued and soldered together and locked into its initial configuration when he bought it.
    If it needed to be upgraded immediately then it can be returned to Apple. If his needs exceeded the capabilities of a maxed out machine then he couldn’t upgrade it anyway (thinking memory here) and he could return it to Apple. If he used it for a period of time and his use cases changed so they exceeded the machines capabilities, which I think was part of your original point, then it’s a case of longevity. 
    ...

    The point?  Apple clearly looked at what its customers were actually doing, and found the benefits of hardwiring and gluing everything outweighed the negatives.  While I can see the other side, I agree.  I've had Macs since the Pismo PowerBook G3 (2000).   The number of issues I had with those machines (getting a new one every 3-4 years) was far, far higher than now.  The products are not as serviceable or upgradable.  But they also don't need to be.  

     
    Perhaps the question is:   Who benefited?   i don't think it was the customer.   For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit.   Can it be made a half millimeter thinner by eliminating a socket?   Perhaps.  But, even if true, that is a pretty marginal benefit.
    "For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit"

    It offers a laptop that is lighter due it being thinner.  That may not be a benefit to you but it is benefit to many consumers.  So much so that Windows makers have started copying the MBA design in spades.  It isn't a surprise that ultrabooks like the MBA are the hottest selling segment of the laptop market.  And now with the M1 MBA, you get a laptop that's light, fast and runs cool & quiet.

    The average consumer does not care about the same things that you or other IT folk care about.  What they care about are devices that are convenient, easy to use, fast, quiet, cool and have access to web and their favorite apps. Sure, there are some consumers who care about upgradeability but they're far from the majority.  This is the mass market.  And don't get me wrong, I have nothing against computers that are upgradeable but if that's what YOU are after then you should buy a device that allows you to do that.
    Maybe you don't need to copy Apple to make devices thinner and lighter.  For example, the ThinkPad X1 Nano is a 2 pound notebook, smaller and lighter than any current Apple notebook, and it has a replaceable SSD and battery, among other parts.  


    X1 Nano Gen 1 Hardware Maintenance Manual (lenovo.com)

    And this not only benefits someone who later needs a larger SSD drive, but also makes possible to service the device onsite without special tools.  That could be a better design compared to Apple notebooks, where you have to send it via mail or take it to an Apple Store for service.  
    Like I said in my previous post, if that's a design that works for you then more power to you.  The vast majority of average consumers using their device for home use is not goint to go through the trouble of opening up their laptop, upgrade the SSD & reinstall the OS.  They want to buy it and forget it.
    Did you read my post?  It wasn't about upgradeability at all.  I pointed out the the X1 Nano showed that you don't need to glue or sold everything for a think / light device.  Second, I think that consumers could benefit from a device that's easy to service.  For example, if the logic board needs to be replaced, the user won't lose data since the SSD can be swapped to the new logic board.  Or after 3-4 years, the battery can be replaced extending the life of the notebook.  Is that really bad for consumers?
    I am of the belief that consumers want the most reliable devices, vs ease of service, so consumers have a purchase choice, same as it ever was. For the record, the X1 Nano traded battery life for lightweight and serviceability, and given that Apple has better battery life, plus better performance based on its M1 silicon, I'm not in agreement with your argument.

    One would think that the market will actually decide this, not any of our arguments, but here we are, arguing to little effect, one way or another.
    Do you have proof that the X1 Nano is a less reliable device?  Most ThinkPads, including the X1 Nano, pass many durability tests.  And based on what I have seen from my customer ThinkPad, they have many advantages over my MBP, from a design and construction POV.  

    Lenovo ThinkPad | Military-tested Rugged Laptops | Lenovo US

    Second, I agree that the M1 is a better compared to the Intel processor the X1 Nano have.  But that wasn't my point.  What I'm saying is that Lenovo showed that it's possible to create a thin and light device, while keeping the device easy to service.  
    muthuk_vanalingamGeorgeBMac
  • Reply 154 of 291
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,163member
    danvm said:
    tmay said:
    danvm said:
    danvm said:
    sdw2001 said:
    Wgkrueger said:
    seanj said:
    For all those defending the "Everything Glued together & soldered together" assembly of the MacBooks by saying "Nobody ever upgraded a computer", Andrew just called bull!

    His biggest (only?) complaint about his M1 MacBook Air is that it can't meet his needs because it is frozen in time with what it came with when he bought it -- versus his MacPro which grew and developed with enhancements as his needs, wants and requirements grew.

    Likewise, my 9 year old i7 Thinkpad runs perfectly well and meets all of my needs -- because it's been upgraded to a 500Gb SSD, 16Gb Ram and an internal harddrive used for ongoing, real time backups.  Without those cheap and very simple to install (5 minutes or less) upgrades the machine would have been scrap
    Only a tiny percentage of people tinker with the computers, it’s a niche market that’s similar to those that add nitrous oxide to their cars...
    Most people just want a computer they can do things with, rather than do things to, in other words a consumer product. With Apple they get that, which is why customer satisfaction is so high.

    If you have a 9 year old Thinkpad then you’re probably either running XP (good luck browsing the Internet securely) or you’re running Linux. If it’s the latter then if you happy with a limited number of professional applications then that’s fine.

    I forgot to mention that its running WIndows 10.  So, its security is a good as good as any Windows machine.   Admittedly that's a low bar. 
    But the point of the post was NOT about lengetivity but to reiterate what Andew said:   His MacPro remained functional because it could be upgraded with additional RAM & Storage -- while his MacBook AIr could not meet his needs because it was all glued and soldered together and locked into its initial configuration when he bought it.
    If it needed to be upgraded immediately then it can be returned to Apple. If his needs exceeded the capabilities of a maxed out machine then he couldn’t upgrade it anyway (thinking memory here) and he could return it to Apple. If he used it for a period of time and his use cases changed so they exceeded the machines capabilities, which I think was part of your original point, then it’s a case of longevity. 
    ...

    The point?  Apple clearly looked at what its customers were actually doing, and found the benefits of hardwiring and gluing everything outweighed the negatives.  While I can see the other side, I agree.  I've had Macs since the Pismo PowerBook G3 (2000).   The number of issues I had with those machines (getting a new one every 3-4 years) was far, far higher than now.  The products are not as serviceable or upgradable.  But they also don't need to be.  

     
    Perhaps the question is:   Who benefited?   i don't think it was the customer.   For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit.   Can it be made a half millimeter thinner by eliminating a socket?   Perhaps.  But, even if true, that is a pretty marginal benefit.
    "For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit"

    It offers a laptop that is lighter due it being thinner.  That may not be a benefit to you but it is benefit to many consumers.  So much so that Windows makers have started copying the MBA design in spades.  It isn't a surprise that ultrabooks like the MBA are the hottest selling segment of the laptop market.  And now with the M1 MBA, you get a laptop that's light, fast and runs cool & quiet.

    The average consumer does not care about the same things that you or other IT folk care about.  What they care about are devices that are convenient, easy to use, fast, quiet, cool and have access to web and their favorite apps. Sure, there are some consumers who care about upgradeability but they're far from the majority.  This is the mass market.  And don't get me wrong, I have nothing against computers that are upgradeable but if that's what YOU are after then you should buy a device that allows you to do that.
    Maybe you don't need to copy Apple to make devices thinner and lighter.  For example, the ThinkPad X1 Nano is a 2 pound notebook, smaller and lighter than any current Apple notebook, and it has a replaceable SSD and battery, among other parts.  


    X1 Nano Gen 1 Hardware Maintenance Manual (lenovo.com)

    And this not only benefits someone who later needs a larger SSD drive, but also makes possible to service the device onsite without special tools.  That could be a better design compared to Apple notebooks, where you have to send it via mail or take it to an Apple Store for service.  
    Like I said in my previous post, if that's a design that works for you then more power to you.  The vast majority of average consumers using their device for home use is not goint to go through the trouble of opening up their laptop, upgrade the SSD & reinstall the OS.  They want to buy it and forget it.
    Did you read my post?  It wasn't about upgradeability at all.  I pointed out the the X1 Nano showed that you don't need to glue or sold everything for a think / light device.  Second, I think that consumers could benefit from a device that's easy to service.  For example, if the logic board needs to be replaced, the user won't lose data since the SSD can be swapped to the new logic board.  Or after 3-4 years, the battery can be replaced extending the life of the notebook.  Is that really bad for consumers?
    I am of the belief that consumers want the most reliable devices, vs ease of service, so consumers have a purchase choice, same as it ever was. For the record, the X1 Nano traded battery life for lightweight and serviceability, and given that Apple has better battery life, plus better performance based on its M1 silicon, I'm not in agreement with your argument.

    One would think that the market will actually decide this, not any of our arguments, but here we are, arguing to little effect, one way or another.
    Do you have proof that the X1 Nano is a less reliable device?  Most ThinkPads, including the X1 Nano, pass many durability tests.  And based on what I have seen from my customer ThinkPad, they have many advantages over my MBP, from a design and construction POV.  

    Lenovo ThinkPad | Military-tested Rugged Laptops | Lenovo US

    Second, I agree that the M1 is a better compared to the Intel processor the X1 Nano have.  But that wasn't my point.  What I'm saying is that Lenovo showed that it's possible to create a thin and light device, while keeping the device easy to service.  
    Lenovo created a thin and light device by compromising battery life. The marketing value of ease of serviceability to the consumer is minimal if their device has a high level of reliability to begin with. It may be an advantage for Lenovo, but Apple has retail stores that do a modest level of service and are within a short drive  by the bulk of the U.S. population.

    Which service paradigm is more valuable to the consumer?

    That's the question.
    edited April 28 williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 155 of 291
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 9,470member
    crowley said:
    tmay said:
    elijahg said:
    thedba said:
    For all those defending the "Everything Glued together & soldered together" assembly of the MacBooks by saying "Nobody ever upgraded a computer", Andrew just called bull!

    His biggest (only?) complaint about his M1 MacBook Air is that it can't meet his needs because it is frozen in time with what it came with when he bought it -- versus his MacPro which grew and developed with enhancements as his needs, wants and requirements grew.

    Likewise, my 9 year old i7 Thinkpad runs perfectly well and meets all of my needs -- because it's been upgraded to a 500Gb SSD, 16Gb Ram and an internal harddrive used for ongoing, real time backups.  Without those cheap and very simple to install (5 minutes or less) upgrades the machine would have been scrap
    Statements such as this remind me of my now deceased father who used to long for the days of when he could service his car himself. 
    I sometimes wonder what he would say seeing today's Teslas or Priuses. 

    Either way, all technology will move towards this way of doing things with ARM architecture taking up more space. Apple is just ahead of the curve on this. 

    I don't see the logic behind equating an inability to service or upgrade something as synonymous with better products.
    How often do you service or upgrade your iPad? Your iPhone? Your Apple TV? Your Watch? Your TV set? etc... Yet these are clearly better products than the more-easily serviceable early-computing counter-parts, right? Side note, my grandad used to repair his vacuum-tube tele, but I have never done this nor will I. My solid-state flat panel TV lasts way longer, and by the time it fails, it won't be cost effective to try to repair its electronics. I'll dispose of it properly and get whatever newer tech is out.

    You apparently don't understand the goals of appliance computing, after all these decades. That's fine, but that doesn't mean Apple is going to conform to you. Nor will you being able to crack open your Tesla and work on the OS or CPU.
    The new Mac Pro is in some ways "clearly better" than the older Mac Pro, both of which are equally serviceable. You are making a false correlation that serviceability is mutually exclusive to how good a machine is. The lack of serviceability isn't the definition of how good a product is. What disadvantages to you would the ability to add more RAM or storage space to a desktop machine bring? I await your reply, but I doubt you will since you never concede when asked something awkward.

    Not sure who you think you're kidding when you say there are consumer advantages to non-serviceable products, the only advantage is to Apple, more repair profits and more RAM/SSD upgrade profits. Should we glue everything together in cars too such that the entire thing has to be replaced when a tyre wears out?

    Interesting point!  Especially when it is reframed to:  "Should we glue everything together in cars too such that the entire thing has to be replaced when the battery wears out?

    Are the coming EVs designed to replace the battery when it dies?   I have not seen much on that -- especially as some manufacturers are talking about making it part of "frame" of the car.   Rather, I hear auto makers say that the "battery will last for the life of the car" -- which may be another way of saying "the car will last the length of the battery".

    We, in developed countries, have normalized a disposable culture.   I do not think that speaks well for us.  Nor does it bode well for us.   You don't get rich by throwing stuff away.
    You seem to be unable to comprehend that bonding parts is a preferred method of manufacture in a number of industries, increasing structural stiffness and integrity, reliability and the product life cycle. See the aviation industry, and the great example of the Boeing 787. That Apple has been an early adopter of these methods to create a more compact, performant, and increasly reliable devices through most of its product lines will only accelerate.

    If you don't like what Apple is manufacturing, you have many choices in the PC industry to choose from, but I would note that those OEM's are also increasingly following Apple and others in building compact computing devices that are not upgradeable not user serviceable, and these have also proven very popular with their customer base.


    "You don't get rich by throwing stuff away", is an obvious falsehood.

    You get rich by increasing productivity, quite rich in fact, and "throwing stuff away" is certainly a cost, in energy and environmental waste that must be managed and recycled, but that cost pales against the productivity increases. Apple appears to be managing all of that with increasing success, as are other companies.

    Maybe you should only speak for yourself, not for the rest of the buying public, given that you aren't really looking for productivity increases in your computing.

    Ok... LOL... Throw away your MacBook and see if that makes you any richer.
    tmay gave you a thoughtful reply, and this is your response?  You've lost it George, it you ever had it.

    Sorry, but if you think trying to convince me that throwing something away makes one richer is a "thoughtful reply" then You've lost it Crowey, if you ever had it.
  • Reply 156 of 291
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 9,470member
    danvm said:
    sdw2001 said:
    Wgkrueger said:
    seanj said:
    For all those defending the "Everything Glued together & soldered together" assembly of the MacBooks by saying "Nobody ever upgraded a computer", Andrew just called bull!

    His biggest (only?) complaint about his M1 MacBook Air is that it can't meet his needs because it is frozen in time with what it came with when he bought it -- versus his MacPro which grew and developed with enhancements as his needs, wants and requirements grew.

    Likewise, my 9 year old i7 Thinkpad runs perfectly well and meets all of my needs -- because it's been upgraded to a 500Gb SSD, 16Gb Ram and an internal harddrive used for ongoing, real time backups.  Without those cheap and very simple to install (5 minutes or less) upgrades the machine would have been scrap
    Only a tiny percentage of people tinker with the computers, it’s a niche market that’s similar to those that add nitrous oxide to their cars...
    Most people just want a computer they can do things with, rather than do things to, in other words a consumer product. With Apple they get that, which is why customer satisfaction is so high.

    If you have a 9 year old Thinkpad then you’re probably either running XP (good luck browsing the Internet securely) or you’re running Linux. If it’s the latter then if you happy with a limited number of professional applications then that’s fine.

    I forgot to mention that its running WIndows 10.  So, its security is a good as good as any Windows machine.   Admittedly that's a low bar. 
    But the point of the post was NOT about lengetivity but to reiterate what Andew said:   His MacPro remained functional because it could be upgraded with additional RAM & Storage -- while his MacBook AIr could not meet his needs because it was all glued and soldered together and locked into its initial configuration when he bought it.
    If it needed to be upgraded immediately then it can be returned to Apple. If his needs exceeded the capabilities of a maxed out machine then he couldn’t upgrade it anyway (thinking memory here) and he could return it to Apple. If he used it for a period of time and his use cases changed so they exceeded the machines capabilities, which I think was part of your original point, then it’s a case of longevity. 
    ...

    The point?  Apple clearly looked at what its customers were actually doing, and found the benefits of hardwiring and gluing everything outweighed the negatives.  While I can see the other side, I agree.  I've had Macs since the Pismo PowerBook G3 (2000).   The number of issues I had with those machines (getting a new one every 3-4 years) was far, far higher than now.  The products are not as serviceable or upgradable.  But they also don't need to be.  

     
    Perhaps the question is:   Who benefited?   i don't think it was the customer.   For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit.   Can it be made a half millimeter thinner by eliminating a socket?   Perhaps.  But, even if true, that is a pretty marginal benefit.
    "For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit"

    It offers a laptop that is lighter due it being thinner.  That may not be a benefit to you but it is benefit to many consumers.  So much so that Windows makers have started copying the MBA design in spades.  It isn't a surprise that ultrabooks like the MBA are the hottest selling segment of the laptop market.  And now with the M1 MBA, you get a laptop that's light, fast and runs cool & quiet.

    The average consumer does not care about the same things that you or other IT folk care about.  What they care about are devices that are convenient, easy to use, fast, quiet, cool and have access to web and their favorite apps. Sure, there are some consumers who care about upgradeability but they're far from the majority.  This is the mass market.  And don't get me wrong, I have nothing against computers that are upgradeable but if that's what YOU are after then you should buy a device that allows you to do that.
    Maybe you don't need to copy Apple to make devices thinner and lighter.  For example, the ThinkPad X1 Nano is a 2 pound notebook, smaller and lighter than any current Apple notebook, and it has a replaceable SSD and battery, among other parts.  


    X1 Nano Gen 1 Hardware Maintenance Manual (lenovo.com)

    And this not only benefits someone who later needs a larger SSD drive, but also makes possible to service the device onsite without special tools.  That could be a better design compared to Apple notebooks, where you have to send it via mail or take it to an Apple Store for service.  

    And, even if the person never takes advantage of it, it destroys the argument of those who say that doing so degrades the device -- making their rationale just an excuse for bad design.   In addition to being lighter, Thinkpads, in the words of my local PC repairman "Won't ever die".  

    But, for myself, even if I intended to never upgrade or repair a machine, I would rest easier knowing that I could if I needed to.
  • Reply 157 of 291
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 9,470member
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    elijahg said:
    thedba said:
    For all those defending the "Everything Glued together & soldered together" assembly of the MacBooks by saying "Nobody ever upgraded a computer", Andrew just called bull!

    His biggest (only?) complaint about his M1 MacBook Air is that it can't meet his needs because it is frozen in time with what it came with when he bought it -- versus his MacPro which grew and developed with enhancements as his needs, wants and requirements grew.

    Likewise, my 9 year old i7 Thinkpad runs perfectly well and meets all of my needs -- because it's been upgraded to a 500Gb SSD, 16Gb Ram and an internal harddrive used for ongoing, real time backups.  Without those cheap and very simple to install (5 minutes or less) upgrades the machine would have been scrap
    Statements such as this remind me of my now deceased father who used to long for the days of when he could service his car himself. 
    I sometimes wonder what he would say seeing today's Teslas or Priuses. 

    Either way, all technology will move towards this way of doing things with ARM architecture taking up more space. Apple is just ahead of the curve on this. 

    I don't see the logic behind equating an inability to service or upgrade something as synonymous with better products.
    How often do you service or upgrade your iPad? Your iPhone? Your Apple TV? Your Watch? Your TV set? etc... Yet these are clearly better products than the more-easily serviceable early-computing counter-parts, right? Side note, my grandad used to repair his vacuum-tube tele, but I have never done this nor will I. My solid-state flat panel TV lasts way longer, and by the time it fails, it won't be cost effective to try to repair its electronics. I'll dispose of it properly and get whatever newer tech is out.

    You apparently don't understand the goals of appliance computing, after all these decades. That's fine, but that doesn't mean Apple is going to conform to you. Nor will you being able to crack open your Tesla and work on the OS or CPU.
    The new Mac Pro is in some ways "clearly better" than the older Mac Pro, both of which are equally serviceable. You are making a false correlation that serviceability is mutually exclusive to how good a machine is. The lack of serviceability isn't the definition of how good a product is. What disadvantages to you would the ability to add more RAM or storage space to a desktop machine bring? I await your reply, but I doubt you will since you never concede when asked something awkward.

    Not sure who you think you're kidding when you say there are consumer advantages to non-serviceable products, the only advantage is to Apple, more repair profits and more RAM/SSD upgrade profits. Should we glue everything together in cars too such that the entire thing has to be replaced when a tyre wears out?

    Interesting point!  Especially when it is reframed to:  "Should we glue everything together in cars too such that the entire thing has to be replaced when the battery wears out?

    Are the coming EVs designed to replace the battery when it dies?   I have not seen much on that -- especially as some manufacturers are talking about making it part of "frame" of the car.   Rather, I hear auto makers say that the "battery will last for the life of the car" -- which may be another way of saying "the car will last the length of the battery".

    We, in developed countries, have normalized a disposable culture.   I do not think that speaks well for us.  Nor does it bode well for us.   You don't get rich by throwing stuff away.
    You seem to be unable to comprehend that bonding parts is a preferred method of manufacture in a number of industries, increasing structural stiffness and integrity, reliability and the product life cycle. See the aviation industry, and the great example of the Boeing 787. That Apple has been an early adopter of these methods to create a more compact, performant, and increasly reliable devices through most of its product lines will only accelerate.

    If you don't like what Apple is manufacturing, you have many choices in the PC industry to choose from, but I would note that those OEM's are also increasingly following Apple and others in building compact computing devices that are not upgradeable not user serviceable, and these have also proven very popular with their customer base.


    "You don't get rich by throwing stuff away", is an obvious falsehood.

    You get rich by increasing productivity, quite rich in fact, and "throwing stuff away" is certainly a cost, in energy and environmental waste that must be managed and recycled, but that cost pales against the productivity increases. Apple appears to be managing all of that with increasing success, as are other companies.

    Maybe you should only speak for yourself, not for the rest of the buying public, given that you aren't really looking for productivity increases in your computing.

    Ok... LOL... Throw away your MacBook and see if that makes you any richer.
    Well, for one, I don't have a Mac Book, Mac Book Air, or Mac Book Pro, as I haven't a need for a notebook. More to the point, you using a nine year old computer and accepting that as productive, leaves the question of whether you even need a modern or more performant computer at all, in which case, you are merely arguing against Apple Marketing, an argument which will be shown this afternoon to be grossly erroneous.

    But of course, I continue to use a 2014 iMac, without ever upgrading, though I will soon be updating to the large screen version this fall. Whether I will be richer for being more productive is of course open to question, but I'm certainly never any less rich for passing my older hardware on to someone else at no cost. I also will absolutely enjoy the new capabilities that I will see for photography and video, over the current iMac; I literal night and day difference, which is the essence of productivity.

    Sorry, but my 9 year old, 15", i7 Thinkpad has been upgraded with an SSD and 16Gb of memory and runs as well as my grandson's newer MacBook Air or his dad's brand new IdeaPad.   I simply have no reason to replace it.

    And, nobody yet has shown that Andrew was wrong when he complained that, although fast enough, his MacBook Air could not meet his needs like his MacPro because, unlike his MacPro, it cannot be upgraded.  
    edited April 29
  • Reply 158 of 291
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 9,470member
    tmay said:
    sdw2001 said:
    Wgkrueger said:
    seanj said:
    For all those defending the "Everything Glued together & soldered together" assembly of the MacBooks by saying "Nobody ever upgraded a computer", Andrew just called bull!

    His biggest (only?) complaint about his M1 MacBook Air is that it can't meet his needs because it is frozen in time with what it came with when he bought it -- versus his MacPro which grew and developed with enhancements as his needs, wants and requirements grew.

    Likewise, my 9 year old i7 Thinkpad runs perfectly well and meets all of my needs -- because it's been upgraded to a 500Gb SSD, 16Gb Ram and an internal harddrive used for ongoing, real time backups.  Without those cheap and very simple to install (5 minutes or less) upgrades the machine would have been scrap
    Only a tiny percentage of people tinker with the computers, it’s a niche market that’s similar to those that add nitrous oxide to their cars...
    Most people just want a computer they can do things with, rather than do things to, in other words a consumer product. With Apple they get that, which is why customer satisfaction is so high.

    If you have a 9 year old Thinkpad then you’re probably either running XP (good luck browsing the Internet securely) or you’re running Linux. If it’s the latter then if you happy with a limited number of professional applications then that’s fine.

    I forgot to mention that its running WIndows 10.  So, its security is a good as good as any Windows machine.   Admittedly that's a low bar. 
    But the point of the post was NOT about lengetivity but to reiterate what Andew said:   His MacPro remained functional because it could be upgraded with additional RAM & Storage -- while his MacBook AIr could not meet his needs because it was all glued and soldered together and locked into its initial configuration when he bought it.
    If it needed to be upgraded immediately then it can be returned to Apple. If his needs exceeded the capabilities of a maxed out machine then he couldn’t upgrade it anyway (thinking memory here) and he could return it to Apple. If he used it for a period of time and his use cases changed so they exceeded the machines capabilities, which I think was part of your original point, then it’s a case of longevity. 
    ...

    The point?  Apple clearly looked at what its customers were actually doing, and found the benefits of hardwiring and gluing everything outweighed the negatives.  While I can see the other side, I agree.  I've had Macs since the Pismo PowerBook G3 (2000).   The number of issues I had with those machines (getting a new one every 3-4 years) was far, far higher than now.  The products are not as serviceable or upgradable.  But they also don't need to be.  

     
    Perhaps the question is:   Who benefited?   i don't think it was the customer.   For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit.   Can it be made a half millimeter thinner by eliminating a socket?   Perhaps.  But, even if true, that is a pretty marginal benefit.
    "For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit"

    It offers a laptop that is lighter due it being thinner.  That may not be a benefit to you but it is benefit to many consumers.  So much so that Windows makers have started copying the MBA design in spades.  It isn't a surprise that ultrabooks like the MBA are the hottest selling segment of the laptop market.  And now with the M1 MBA, you get a laptop that's light, fast and runs cool & quiet.

    The average consumer does not care about the same things that you or other IT folk care about.  What they care about are devices that are convenient, easy to use, fast, quiet, cool and have access to web and their favorite apps. Sure, there are some consumers who care about upgradeability but they're far from the majority.  This is the mass market.  And don't get me wrong, I have nothing against computers that are upgradeable but if that's what YOU are after then you should buy a device that allows you to do that.

    You don't need to solder & glue stuff to get an ultrabook.  And, eliminating a socket might allow it to be, what? a half millimeter thinner?
    I see the real advantage goes to the manufacturer:  it's cheaper -- and promote planned obsolescence.
    ....  But, as others have pointed out:   while it keeps the economy humming, its not great for the ecology.
    You are perfectly okay with demanding Mac OS on the M1 iPad, a device which is absolutely not upgradable, yet you turn your nose up when you talk about the identical manufacturing techniques in a Mac Book Air or Mac Book Pro. What gives?

    You really need to reflect on the the world that you have created in your head, and straighten that out, because you come across as hypocritical.

    LOL... Now, there you go again.....   Attacking the messenger, changing the topic when you lose the argument.  Typical...
  • Reply 159 of 291
    crowleycrowley Posts: 7,881member
    crowley said:
    tmay said:
    elijahg said:
    thedba said:
    For all those defending the "Everything Glued together & soldered together" assembly of the MacBooks by saying "Nobody ever upgraded a computer", Andrew just called bull!

    His biggest (only?) complaint about his M1 MacBook Air is that it can't meet his needs because it is frozen in time with what it came with when he bought it -- versus his MacPro which grew and developed with enhancements as his needs, wants and requirements grew.

    Likewise, my 9 year old i7 Thinkpad runs perfectly well and meets all of my needs -- because it's been upgraded to a 500Gb SSD, 16Gb Ram and an internal harddrive used for ongoing, real time backups.  Without those cheap and very simple to install (5 minutes or less) upgrades the machine would have been scrap
    Statements such as this remind me of my now deceased father who used to long for the days of when he could service his car himself. 
    I sometimes wonder what he would say seeing today's Teslas or Priuses. 

    Either way, all technology will move towards this way of doing things with ARM architecture taking up more space. Apple is just ahead of the curve on this. 

    I don't see the logic behind equating an inability to service or upgrade something as synonymous with better products.
    How often do you service or upgrade your iPad? Your iPhone? Your Apple TV? Your Watch? Your TV set? etc... Yet these are clearly better products than the more-easily serviceable early-computing counter-parts, right? Side note, my grandad used to repair his vacuum-tube tele, but I have never done this nor will I. My solid-state flat panel TV lasts way longer, and by the time it fails, it won't be cost effective to try to repair its electronics. I'll dispose of it properly and get whatever newer tech is out.

    You apparently don't understand the goals of appliance computing, after all these decades. That's fine, but that doesn't mean Apple is going to conform to you. Nor will you being able to crack open your Tesla and work on the OS or CPU.
    The new Mac Pro is in some ways "clearly better" than the older Mac Pro, both of which are equally serviceable. You are making a false correlation that serviceability is mutually exclusive to how good a machine is. The lack of serviceability isn't the definition of how good a product is. What disadvantages to you would the ability to add more RAM or storage space to a desktop machine bring? I await your reply, but I doubt you will since you never concede when asked something awkward.

    Not sure who you think you're kidding when you say there are consumer advantages to non-serviceable products, the only advantage is to Apple, more repair profits and more RAM/SSD upgrade profits. Should we glue everything together in cars too such that the entire thing has to be replaced when a tyre wears out?

    Interesting point!  Especially when it is reframed to:  "Should we glue everything together in cars too such that the entire thing has to be replaced when the battery wears out?

    Are the coming EVs designed to replace the battery when it dies?   I have not seen much on that -- especially as some manufacturers are talking about making it part of "frame" of the car.   Rather, I hear auto makers say that the "battery will last for the life of the car" -- which may be another way of saying "the car will last the length of the battery".

    We, in developed countries, have normalized a disposable culture.   I do not think that speaks well for us.  Nor does it bode well for us.   You don't get rich by throwing stuff away.
    You seem to be unable to comprehend that bonding parts is a preferred method of manufacture in a number of industries, increasing structural stiffness and integrity, reliability and the product life cycle. See the aviation industry, and the great example of the Boeing 787. That Apple has been an early adopter of these methods to create a more compact, performant, and increasly reliable devices through most of its product lines will only accelerate.

    If you don't like what Apple is manufacturing, you have many choices in the PC industry to choose from, but I would note that those OEM's are also increasingly following Apple and others in building compact computing devices that are not upgradeable not user serviceable, and these have also proven very popular with their customer base.


    "You don't get rich by throwing stuff away", is an obvious falsehood.

    You get rich by increasing productivity, quite rich in fact, and "throwing stuff away" is certainly a cost, in energy and environmental waste that must be managed and recycled, but that cost pales against the productivity increases. Apple appears to be managing all of that with increasing success, as are other companies.

    Maybe you should only speak for yourself, not for the rest of the buying public, given that you aren't really looking for productivity increases in your computing.

    Ok... LOL... Throw away your MacBook and see if that makes you any richer.
    tmay gave you a thoughtful reply, and this is your response?  You've lost it George, it you ever had it.

    Sorry, but if you think trying to convince me that throwing something away makes one richer is a "thoughtful reply" then You've lost it Crowey, if you ever had it.
    You never throw away trash?  You don't think having an absence of trash in your living space improves your living space, making your life richer?

    Moreover, throwing away things that are less useful, and not clinging to things that have diminishing returns can indeed give you the opportunity for better, which makes you richer.  A tech firm could still be using 386 PCs but I daresay their efficiency would not be market competitive and they'd be struggling.

    Think for one George, stop this binary nonsense you constantly peddle.
    tmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 160 of 291
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 9,470member
    sdw2001 said:
    sdw2001 said:
    sdw2001 said:
    Wgkrueger said:
    seanj said:
    For all those defending the "Everything Glued together & soldered together" assembly of the MacBooks by saying "Nobody ever upgraded a computer", Andrew just called bull!

    His biggest (only?) complaint about his M1 MacBook Air is that it can't meet his needs because it is frozen in time with what it came with when he bought it -- versus his MacPro which grew and developed with enhancements as his needs, wants and requirements grew.

    Likewise, my 9 year old i7 Thinkpad runs perfectly well and meets all of my needs -- because it's been upgraded to a 500Gb SSD, 16Gb Ram and an internal harddrive used for ongoing, real time backups.  Without those cheap and very simple to install (5 minutes or less) upgrades the machine would have been scrap
    Only a tiny percentage of people tinker with the computers, it’s a niche market that’s similar to those that add nitrous oxide to their cars...
    Most people just want a computer they can do things with, rather than do things to, in other words a consumer product. With Apple they get that, which is why customer satisfaction is so high.

    If you have a 9 year old Thinkpad then you’re probably either running XP (good luck browsing the Internet securely) or you’re running Linux. If it’s the latter then if you happy with a limited number of professional applications then that’s fine.

    I forgot to mention that its running WIndows 10.  So, its security is a good as good as any Windows machine.   Admittedly that's a low bar. 
    But the point of the post was NOT about lengetivity but to reiterate what Andew said:   His MacPro remained functional because it could be upgraded with additional RAM & Storage -- while his MacBook AIr could not meet his needs because it was all glued and soldered together and locked into its initial configuration when he bought it.
    If it needed to be upgraded immediately then it can be returned to Apple. If his needs exceeded the capabilities of a maxed out machine then he couldn’t upgrade it anyway (thinking memory here) and he could return it to Apple. If he used it for a period of time and his use cases changed so they exceeded the machines capabilities, which I think was part of your original point, then it’s a case of longevity. 
    ...

    The point?  Apple clearly looked at what its customers were actually doing, and found the benefits of hardwiring and gluing everything outweighed the negatives.  While I can see the other side, I agree.  I've had Macs since the Pismo PowerBook G3 (2000).   The number of issues I had with those machines (getting a new one every 3-4 years) was far, far higher than now.  The products are not as serviceable or upgradable.  But they also don't need to be.  

     
    Perhaps the question is:   Who benefited?   i don't think it was the customer.   For them, in a laptop, soldered & glued together that was non-upgradeable offers no benefit.   Can it be made a half millimeter thinner by eliminating a socket?   Perhaps.  But, even if true, that is a pretty marginal benefit.

    I think I explained my thinking on the benefits to the customer.  A thinner, lighter, more solid and perhaps longer-lasting design benefits the customer.  Speaking from a real-world and personal perspective, the benefits to me have been more than marginal.  As I said, I was a person who used to upgrade things myself.  I did RAM, HDD, SSD, battery (modular or internal), etc.  I don't care about that anymore.  Know why?  Because I don't need to do it.  The components on my 2015 (model year, actually started using in fall of 2016) MBP haven't needed to be replaced or upgraded.  I'm at the point now where I still don't need more capabilities, but I'll probably upgrade in a year or two anyway.  After all, my product is now vintage and nearly obsolete.  

    Again, all things being equal, I prefer upgradeability.  But things are not equal.  The design is better.  The feel is better.  Components last longer and are higher performance.  It's like complaining that you can't swap out your fuel injectors, when you could change your carburetor in your classic car.  

    I still fail to see how eliminating a socket makes a machine thinner (at least in any meaningful way).  Nor do I see how soldering an SSD makes it any stronger.  If the frame of the machine is that weak, it will work the opposite and break the solder joint -- at which time you lose your data when you throw away your machine.


    OK, we're beyond just a difference in philosophy or even consumer preference at this point.  Given the way you're going at it with others, I get the feeling that you are rigidly stuck in your position or perhaps just looking to debate.  I'm hoping I'm wrong, though.  

    The point is not just removing a socket, though removing anything could conceivably allow less mass and therefore a potential thinner design.  We don't even have to speculate though, because it is an established fact that Apple products are thinner and lighter.  My 2009 MBP weighs 5.5 lbs and is .95 inches thick.  My 2015 is obviously a much higher performing machine, and is 4.49 lbs and .71 inches thick.  So it's about 20% lighter and thinner.  I won't get into the performance benchmarks, but you can imagine that my current quad core machine pretty much slays the dual core 2009 machine.  

    So we've established that whatever changes Apple is making, they result in (or correlate with) faster, more powerful machines that are thinner and lighter.  So, let's now talk reliability.  As I stated, I've replaced my 2009's battery once, and it now needs it again.  I've replaced the charger.  I upgraded to an SSD (a Samsung that ended up being a problem) and then replaced the SSD again (an OWC I think).  I can't recall if I upgraded the RAM...but I think I may have.  Conversely, I'm in my 6th year of use with my 2015 MBP 2.2GHZ quad core (Retina).  I've repaired and upgraded precisely nothing.  The battery is still at least 80%.  It doesn't even have any loose screws.  The keyboard is better and quieter.  I've spilled liquids near it....no issues.  It's higher performance, thinner, lighter, more solid machine.  It's a better machine, period.  Nothing on the machine is user serviceable as far as I know.  But why does it matter to me anymore?  

    Again, if you like having user upgradable laptops, that's fine.  I'm not arguing you shouldn't.  But you are being extremely critical of Apple and anyone who has a different take.  Your comment about "throwing away your machine" is frankly ridiculous.  A broken solder joint is not going to result in permanent data loss, for a variety of reason I suspect you already know, but won't acknowledge.  People back up their data quite a bit now, thanks to the cloud.  The system IS serviceable by authorized centers, including Apple.  People aren't just going to "throw their machine away."  That's absurd.  

    You may prefer to swap out a failed SSD yourself, but at what cost does that come? Apple evaluated who actually works on their own machines, what the costs and benefits of each approach were, and decided to go with a more hardwired method.  Think what you like, but that's obviously what happened.  Again, you're entitled to your own opinion.  But you're not even considering the other side of the debate.  

     

    As others have pointed out:  Thinkpads are lighter, thinner and upgradeable.   So, you need to give up on that argument.

    And, it was Andrew who said his MacBook Air could not meet his needs because, unlike his MacPro, it cannot be upgraded.  I agree with him.   Obviously you think he just "critical of Apple".   He isn't and neither I am I.   But, we both recognize a poor design choice when we see it.
    muthuk_vanalingam
Sign In or Register to comment.