Apple is taking a "billet" (solid piece of aluminum) and machining it to shape. There is a lot of waste (the material machined off, although it is capable of being recycled which does save a worthwhile amount of energy compared to refining bauxite (ore)). There are precision casting and other techniques which could accomplish the same result with less waste and less machining...the machining is expensive as well.
What drove the Apple design team to select this manufacturing process is something of a puzzle as it is not a good choice.
I gather you don't quote understand the technology here.
First of all, there is no waste. Every bit of "the material machined off is recycled," thus no waste.
This policy does not make sense in all circumstances. My iMac and Macbook came in their own boxes with a carrying handle built into the box. Works great.
However if I'm purchasing a bunch of small items, how am I going to carry them through the mall (the opposite side)? Does it make sense for an employee to accompany me through the mall to my car? Don't think so.
I applaud the effort at going greener, but it needs to be on a case by case basis.
If you had read my post, you would have noticed the recycling of waste. Duh!
Obviously I read your post. You implied that they could potentially recycle it, not that they actually do. And then you mentioned that there were other techniques with less waste, even though there is no waste with Apple's process.
I pass an Apple store today, I guess I'll ask in person.
Don't forget to ask about a "customer return." Could knock off another $100-200.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR
Apple is taking a "billet" (solid piece of aluminum) and machining it to shape. There is a lot of waste (the material machined off, although it is capable of being recycled which does save a worthwhile amount of energy compared to refining bauxite (ore)). There are precision casting and other techniques which could accomplish the same result with less waste and less machining...the machining is expensive as well.
What drove the Apple design team to select this manufacturing process is something of a puzzle as it is not a good choice.
CNC machining is not that expensive. Once you already have the CNC mills (and I'm sure Apple's contractor did before they started making the unibodies), the only real cost is programming in new tool paths. Die casting costs much more. It needs tool steel dies, which are not cheap (as much as 6 to 7 figures per die thanks to the expensive material and the difficulty of machining it) and don't last very long. The costs multiply if you need to make even a simple design change in the chassis. And then you have to machine the cast parts anyway because casting just doesn't give you the tolerances necessary for precision assembly. There are also limitations in terms of minimum thickness of walls, ribs, bosses and other features because you have to take into account how poorly molten aluminum flows into such small spaces.
There's no plastic bag ban in London that I'm aware of. There were proposals for something like this but these were withdrawn last year (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7749089.stm).
Apple is taking a "billet" (solid piece of aluminum) and machining it to shape. There is a lot of waste (the material machined off, although it is capable of being recycled which does save a worthwhile amount of energy compared to refining bauxite (ore)). There are precision casting and other techniques which could accomplish the same result with less waste and less machining...the machining is expensive as well.
What drove the Apple design team to select this manufacturing process is something of a puzzle as it is not a good choice.
You can't series think that pouring molten Al into millions of notebook sized casts makes sense. Besides the logistical issues and costs of having a factory with hundreds, if not thousands of casts, Apple would now have to move it's case manufacturing plant into the same plant that smelts the metal. Then you have issues with bubbles and other imperfections that won't be know until after the cooling. Then you have the issue of certain molds not being as good as others.
With a CNC machine you have precise calculations that can be adjusted for the whole lot with simple precision. You also have cost and environmental savings from Apple buying the cyclinders of purified Al, not having to buy ore and run a smelting factory. That job is best held as it is.
... the least of their worries should be plastic bags and CDs. What about all the energy used to light up their stores to be brighter than the sun, or the fact that they discourage upgradeable machines in favor of totally replacing them when it's time to upgrade. ...
This is not quite true.
Plastic bags and CD's are some of the biggest environmental problems we face today. While reducing greenhouse gasses by turning off the lights is a great idea, the effect on the environment pales against that of the simple plastic bag. They really are a huge issue and bans are going into effect around the world. Plastic is itself a huge issue in that it doesn't degrade and we now know it causes all kinds of health problems.
I agree though about the recycled paper bag option and the fact that this seems more of a PR move than anything else. A no bag option is not an option IMO. Paper bags are just fine, biodegradable plastic is even better but expensive. I think this is a case of Apple (or maybe Steve himself), just not wanting to use a dorky paper bag.
The option of "helping you to your car" is just stupid. Like I said earlier, I don't have a car. Is some Apple employee going to walk the 8 blocks to the train station with my purchases for me? Are they going to follow me home and walk the other four blocks to my house at the other end of the line?
I'm thinking they pretty much have to have some kind of bag under the counter.
If I'm ready to spend hundreds (if not thousands) of dollars at your store, and you tell me I can't even have a bag, you won't be getting a dime from me. That is not being green, it's just piss-poor customer service.
Already mentioned in this thread, but so highly relevant it bears repeating: If you want to really be doing something "green", stop making closed boxes that have little to no upgrade paths.
What, so you could install arsenic/mercury/BFR/PVC parts.
I have a better idea. You really want to do something green, stop your crapping around here.
You can't series think that pouring molten Al into millions of notebook sized casts makes sense. Besides the logistical issues and costs of having a factory with hundreds, if not thousands of casts, Apple would now have to move it's case manufacturing plant into the same plant that smelts the metal. Then you have issues with bubbles and other imperfections that won't be know until after the cooling. Then you have the issue of certain molds not being as good as others.
With a CNC machine you have precise calculations that can be adjusted for the whole lot with simple precision. You also have cost and environmental savings from Apple buying the cyclinders of purified Al, not having to buy ore and run a smelting factory. That job is best held as it is.
Yeah.
The main reason for the continued existence of milling processes is that they are far more precise than any mould can ever be. The cooling of the metal alone changes the shape and size of parts by many microns and not uniformly either.
What, so you could install arsenic/mercury/BFR/PVC parts.
I have a better idea. You really want to do something green, stop your crapping around here.
If you are installing your own aftermarket parts, all you have to do is look for the ROHS symbol. What makes you think Apple's hardware is somehow different than the rest of the PC world?
There is absolutely no reason to not offer major upgrade options for any computer except for the Mac Pro. Sure you can argue that Macs last longer than PCs because of the better software, but what happens when you install Linux, or you install Windows 7 and realize it runs on anything?
Some might say the average person doesn't want to upgrade their machine, but with the way the economy is going some people might actually not want to replace their screen just because their computer is too slow. That's why there are computer upgrade and repair businesses, so people don't have to do it.
A week ago, one Apple store had a previous generation 17" MBP, new in box, fully loaded (4 GB RAM, 320 GB HD, high-res matte display) for $1599, compared to $2799 originally. A customer had ordered it and failed to pick up. Ironically and FWIW, the customer was said to be with Greenpeace.
Oh please. Macs have been proven to last twice as long as their PC counter parts thanks to Apple's ability to make its OS speedier with each new release. Mac hardware remains relevant long after its PC counterparts have been dumped into landfills.
I can still install and run Leopard on a 6 year PowerBook without any problems. And other than needing a little more memory, it runs just fine.
I can install Windows XP on my PII Compaq Presario. Still works great with 256mb of RAM. What's your point again?
Leopard is so fast because OS X was brand new just 8 years ago, and when it came out it was buggy and slower than OS 9. If it didn't get faster Apple wouldn't exist today.
And how has it been proventhat Macs last longer? My white Macbook is falling apart, the case is cracking all over and the power brick (which is $80, WTF?) has outer insulation that's falling off. It's always in a padded carrying bag and I do only light word processing and the like. I've owned it for 2 years now.
Apple doesn't make a single piece of hardware. Not one. Chinese contractors do, the same ones that put out Dells and HPs. Notice how your Powerbook was actually manufactured in an Apple facility. Notice how my Macbook was assembled in China by Quanta or ASUSTek.
However if I'm purchasing a bunch of small items, how am I going to carry them through the mall (the opposite side)? Does it make sense for an employee to accompany me through the mall to my car?
Forget the malls - how about the city stores. They've put stores in the inner cities, and we WALK to them. Are Apple employees going to help me walk home now?
How about just asking if we want a bag. If you say no, good for you. But if I'm going to walk 2 miles home - plastic please. (althoguh you can go for thinner lighter bags than your bag-sacs you have now...)
Obviously I read your post. You implied that they could potentially recycle it, not that they actually do. And then you mentioned that there were other techniques with less waste, even though there is no waste with Apple's process.
I gather you don't quote understand the technology here.
One might suggest that you look in the mirror as I suspect you are missing a few things here. I won't say I'm an expert but I've worked in metal die casting, single point Cnc diamond turning operations (optical), and precision injection molding. It is reasonable to question the economics of such a design.
Quote:
First of all, there is no waste. Every bit of "the material machined off is recycled," thus no waste.
I really hope you don't believe that as it reflects a poor understanding of the tooling industry. Things to consider:
1. Carbide tooling wears out and must be replaced.
2. All of the materials used to arrive at surface finish have finite life.
3. All of the process guilds must be disposed of or recycled. Recycling is never 100%.
4. Like wise aluminum is never recycled 100%. Further Aluminum oxide takes a lot of energy to convert back to aluminum.
5. Tooling and fixturing have limited life.
6. There is a huge amount of waste heat generated in a plant doing such work.
Oh come on now you aren't going to reference an Apple document here for an unbiased evaluation.
Quote:
In addition, could you enlighten us on your expertise that makes you qualified to declare that this process is "?not a good choice."
I don't know about the original posters qualifications but he certainly has fewer mistakes in hispresentation than you do. Now we can discuss the issue of this being a good choice but we have compare it against something.
Going the die casting route would be the high volume solution if a die design could be successfully engineered to mold the housing. I will go out on a limb here and say it can't be done with Aluminum die casting alloys. The primary problem being the size of the thin wall structures. Even if successfully molded the process would leave a lot of stress in the structure. Diecasting might save them some money be getting much closer to net shape but I'm not sure it is worth it.
The next possibility is a stamped and machined structure. Combined with a couple of diecast inserts this would have considerable potential. Yeah you still have machining to be done but it is not the gross stock removal they are doing right now. Frankly I suspect that they could have ended up with a more rounded design going this way. The rather squared off edges of the current design are troublesome but as the housing gets thinner you don't have much of a choice.
I know this goes against Apples image right now but the economical approach would be injection molded plastics. It would be tuff to get the housing right in an engineering grade plastic but many of the features could be molded in in one shot. Done right it would be just as strong as the current housing.
The biggest problem I see with this process is the cost. It might cost a manufacture $5 for a plastic laptop housing. I can't imagine the new Aluminum laptop housing costing less than $75 out the door. There is a fudge factor there as I'm not sure how much the slaves are being paid. It is never cheap to machine such parts. It would be very interesting to know how fast they can get one of these housings through the production process. I find it difficult to imagine less than an hour to a finished shell. This does not compare very well to injection molding where your cycle times might be under 30 seconds and a large machine might be making more than one case at a time. Oh if you are thinking about asking, no I don't see the expense of the process being offset by the need for other components on a shell produced by other means. The stampings or moldings are cheap.
As a side note here I've watched die cast machines produce carburator bodies at an impressive rate. In this case there is certainly a lot of secondary work on the body. While large carburators have gone the way of the Dino, I don't think any reasonable person would suggest machining the from a block of zinc for each unit. The expense would be huge. I'm not so closed minded however not to see some value in Apples processes for this shell. The problem is the expense, it is likely an order of magnitude more expensive if not worst.
this was an inside joke when my girlfriend and i went and got a new keyboard about 2 or 3 weeks ago... they gave me a fucking backpack with it. the damn back was thick as hell (therefor a lot of plastic" and it had a damn rope through it. kind of irritated me... i kept, mostly because i didnt realize that i was taking a bag until i was out of the store... most of the time i just carry it if i can...
seriously do like recycled paper, the hipsters would love that. (and so would those of us that actually like helping the environment, even if dont buy goods that show it off)
Got side tracked with an off topic component in this thread but I have to say this is another rather stupid move on Apples part. It is not surprising that it follows the introduction of the ""new"" iMacs.
To be honest I often decline bags at stores I visit - when I can. Especially if those bags are difficult to retask for other uses. Distribute the right bag though and you might actually see people reuseing the bags. The local grocery is a perfect example here as I "recycle" each bag as a garbage bag. This dreastically reduces my need for purchased garbage bags.
As for the cities and there claims of removing all these bags from the landfills I'd have to say it is bunk and structure statistics. If anything they likely have more plastic in their landfills due to the use of large garbage bags.
The bigger question in my mind is why are the cities bring so ignorant about domestic waste. A landfill is the last place all this crap should be going. It is like putting energy into a hole in the ground. The primary goal of every city should be the removal of all the contained energy in the trash. A landfill is going to polite no mater what you do with it.
1. Without bags, Apple must make somehow still create an image noise to cover the loss of advertising that the bags provided. You'll notice that all the slave labor created 'fabric' bags from Trader Joes and Whole Foods, for example, are unique in color. Also the store name or logo is easier to distinguish on a unique, square surface. The bag creates an Apple image in another shopper and an ad 'noise', even if the contents is a generic product such as an iPod case from another vendor.
(This is a smooth trick of using modern American sub culture industries. If you think for one minute the money leaders who are behind retail truly care about paper or plastic, think again. The Rockafellers want a much smaller world population and a return to futalism. Thus crack cocaine, vaccines, homosexual promotion, gun rights, and abortion. But they purposely mislabel their profitable poisoning and destruction of the environment to promote better ways of advertising their products-like these easier to read big, unique bags. Yet for the lack of an immediate profitable solution to replace their very unique and much liked ad/logo bags, Steve Jobs and Apple are most likely a poor victims of this illuminated world mentality, rather than a contributor. Truly it is the very promotion of the web and the computer that has lead to the loss of the local newspaper reporters who uncover the plots to destroy our way of life and freedoms by the clever and disguised closing of such newspapers that have a reputation for great investigative probing. The owners say this is done because of the 'economy' and to help preserve Americas trees, even though the 'economy' has been undermined by the Fed, and the forests were replaced decades ago by Agrabiz tree farms harvested by two mexican 'imported' workers using big foreign made harvesting machines. The multinational media companies already own most of the local news anyway. It was always their purpose to stop these reporters-buying up the papers allowed this to happen! Buy the media, run ads to elect the narcissistic, corrupt officials, control the government, change the law, have your way! Close the local papers, shut down all the low power broadcasters this June, homogenize all the news. Sounds like "1984"-the year of my first Mac! Rocky wins again.)
2. Now, without bags to help, Apple employees at retail stores are going to have to be trained even better to watch for "slippage". In all reality, the reason you have always found a store full of sale people at Apple, was in a great part to prevent shop lifting. After all, dual purpose, enthusiastic sales people are far cheaper and far less threatening to customers than security guards.
9. When do The Beatles get to show up in iTunes? Apple on Apple!
Sure there is a lot of waste. However, as you point out the waste is largely recyclable. More importantly, there is plenty of waste in creating a plastic case as well. That waste is largely not recyclable. Further, when an aluminum Mac finally goes to the junk yard the aluminum will be recycled. The plastic in the old cases will not be.
Apple's old plastic case design had problems with the case flexing, thereby causing the graphic processor to eventually tear away from the board. I'd guess Apple had to replace hundreds of thousands of those (it replaced three on just one of mine alone). Those old logic boards hit the trash. The new cases will definitely prevent the same type of case flexing thereby increasing the chances of less stress on the internal components (as Apple itself points out).
Are there better ways to achieve the same results? Maybe, but you said the Macbook cases were the least energy inefficient without explaining what you mean. The least energy efficient because of cost to produce, or from actually usage of the machine? It seems you mean because of manufacturing costs. However, when Apple introduced these machines it claimed it was using a new process. So your comments are assuming a lot that can't be verified unless you have an inside source. Whatever the case may be, I doubt Apple's process is the least energy efficient. Further, as you probably know, engineering is always about striking a balance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR
Apple is taking a "billet" (solid piece of aluminum) and machining it to shape. There is a lot of waste (the material machined off, although it is capable of being recycled which does save a worthwhile amount of energy compared to refining bauxite (ore)). There are precision casting and other techniques which could accomplish the same result with less waste and less machining...the machining is expensive as well.
What drove the Apple design team to select this manufacturing process is something of a puzzle as it is not a good choice.
Comments
Apple is taking a "billet" (solid piece of aluminum) and machining it to shape. There is a lot of waste (the material machined off, although it is capable of being recycled which does save a worthwhile amount of energy compared to refining bauxite (ore)). There are precision casting and other techniques which could accomplish the same result with less waste and less machining...the machining is expensive as well.
What drove the Apple design team to select this manufacturing process is something of a puzzle as it is not a good choice.
I gather you don't quote understand the technology here.
First of all, there is no waste. Every bit of "the material machined off is recycled," thus no waste.
Perhaps you could do yourself a favor and watch "The New Macbook" video on http://www.apple.com/macbook/design.html
In addition, could you enlighten us on your expertise that makes you qualified to declare that this process is "?not a good choice."
However if I'm purchasing a bunch of small items, how am I going to carry them through the mall (the opposite side)? Does it make sense for an employee to accompany me through the mall to my car? Don't think so.
I applaud the effort at going greener, but it needs to be on a case by case basis.
If you had read my post, you would have noticed the recycling of waste. Duh!
Obviously I read your post. You implied that they could potentially recycle it, not that they actually do. And then you mentioned that there were other techniques with less waste, even though there is no waste with Apple's process.
Duh!
You don't need to be an ass.
Anyone seen deals on previous gen 8 cores?
I pass an Apple store today, I guess I'll ask in person.
Don't forget to ask about a "customer return." Could knock off another $100-200.
Apple is taking a "billet" (solid piece of aluminum) and machining it to shape. There is a lot of waste (the material machined off, although it is capable of being recycled which does save a worthwhile amount of energy compared to refining bauxite (ore)). There are precision casting and other techniques which could accomplish the same result with less waste and less machining...the machining is expensive as well.
What drove the Apple design team to select this manufacturing process is something of a puzzle as it is not a good choice.
CNC machining is not that expensive. Once you already have the CNC mills (and I'm sure Apple's contractor did before they started making the unibodies), the only real cost is programming in new tool paths. Die casting costs much more. It needs tool steel dies, which are not cheap (as much as 6 to 7 figures per die thanks to the expensive material and the difficulty of machining it) and don't last very long. The costs multiply if you need to make even a simple design change in the chassis. And then you have to machine the cast parts anyway because casting just doesn't give you the tolerances necessary for precision assembly. There are also limitations in terms of minimum thickness of walls, ribs, bosses and other features because you have to take into account how poorly molten aluminum flows into such small spaces.
Apple is taking a "billet" (solid piece of aluminum) and machining it to shape. There is a lot of waste (the material machined off, although it is capable of being recycled which does save a worthwhile amount of energy compared to refining bauxite (ore)). There are precision casting and other techniques which could accomplish the same result with less waste and less machining...the machining is expensive as well.
What drove the Apple design team to select this manufacturing process is something of a puzzle as it is not a good choice.
You can't series think that pouring molten Al into millions of notebook sized casts makes sense. Besides the logistical issues and costs of having a factory with hundreds, if not thousands of casts, Apple would now have to move it's case manufacturing plant into the same plant that smelts the metal. Then you have issues with bubbles and other imperfections that won't be know until after the cooling. Then you have the issue of certain molds not being as good as others.
With a CNC machine you have precise calculations that can be adjusted for the whole lot with simple precision. You also have cost and environmental savings from Apple buying the cyclinders of purified Al, not having to buy ore and run a smelting factory. That job is best held as it is.
... the least of their worries should be plastic bags and CDs. What about all the energy used to light up their stores to be brighter than the sun, or the fact that they discourage upgradeable machines in favor of totally replacing them when it's time to upgrade. ...
This is not quite true.
Plastic bags and CD's are some of the biggest environmental problems we face today. While reducing greenhouse gasses by turning off the lights is a great idea, the effect on the environment pales against that of the simple plastic bag. They really are a huge issue and bans are going into effect around the world. Plastic is itself a huge issue in that it doesn't degrade and we now know it causes all kinds of health problems.
I agree though about the recycled paper bag option and the fact that this seems more of a PR move than anything else. A no bag option is not an option IMO. Paper bags are just fine, biodegradable plastic is even better but expensive. I think this is a case of Apple (or maybe Steve himself), just not wanting to use a dorky paper bag.
The option of "helping you to your car" is just stupid. Like I said earlier, I don't have a car. Is some Apple employee going to walk the 8 blocks to the train station with my purchases for me? Are they going to follow me home and walk the other four blocks to my house at the other end of the line?
I'm thinking they pretty much have to have some kind of bag under the counter.
If I'm ready to spend hundreds (if not thousands) of dollars at your store, and you tell me I can't even have a bag, you won't be getting a dime from me. That is not being green, it's just piss-poor customer service.
Already mentioned in this thread, but so highly relevant it bears repeating: If you want to really be doing something "green", stop making closed boxes that have little to no upgrade paths.
What, so you could install arsenic/mercury/BFR/PVC parts.
I have a better idea. You really want to do something green, stop your crapping around here.
You can't series think that pouring molten Al into millions of notebook sized casts makes sense. Besides the logistical issues and costs of having a factory with hundreds, if not thousands of casts, Apple would now have to move it's case manufacturing plant into the same plant that smelts the metal. Then you have issues with bubbles and other imperfections that won't be know until after the cooling. Then you have the issue of certain molds not being as good as others.
With a CNC machine you have precise calculations that can be adjusted for the whole lot with simple precision. You also have cost and environmental savings from Apple buying the cyclinders of purified Al, not having to buy ore and run a smelting factory. That job is best held as it is.
Yeah.
The main reason for the continued existence of milling processes is that they are far more precise than any mould can ever be. The cooling of the metal alone changes the shape and size of parts by many microns and not uniformly either.
What, so you could install arsenic/mercury/BFR/PVC parts.
I have a better idea. You really want to do something green, stop your crapping around here.
If you are installing your own aftermarket parts, all you have to do is look for the ROHS symbol. What makes you think Apple's hardware is somehow different than the rest of the PC world?
There is absolutely no reason to not offer major upgrade options for any computer except for the Mac Pro. Sure you can argue that Macs last longer than PCs because of the better software, but what happens when you install Linux, or you install Windows 7 and realize it runs on anything?
Some might say the average person doesn't want to upgrade their machine, but with the way the economy is going some people might actually not want to replace their screen just because their computer is too slow. That's why there are computer upgrade and repair businesses, so people don't have to do it.
Oh please. Macs have been proven to last twice as long as their PC counter parts thanks to Apple's ability to make its OS speedier with each new release. Mac hardware remains relevant long after its PC counterparts have been dumped into landfills.
I can still install and run Leopard on a 6 year PowerBook without any problems. And other than needing a little more memory, it runs just fine.
I can install Windows XP on my PII Compaq Presario. Still works great with 256mb of RAM. What's your point again?
Leopard is so fast because OS X was brand new just 8 years ago, and when it came out it was buggy and slower than OS 9. If it didn't get faster Apple wouldn't exist today.
And how has it been proventhat Macs last longer? My white Macbook is falling apart, the case is cracking all over and the power brick (which is $80, WTF?) has outer insulation that's falling off. It's always in a padded carrying bag and I do only light word processing and the like. I've owned it for 2 years now.
Apple doesn't make a single piece of hardware. Not one. Chinese contractors do, the same ones that put out Dells and HPs. Notice how your Powerbook was actually manufactured in an Apple facility. Notice how my Macbook was assembled in China by Quanta or ASUSTek.
However if I'm purchasing a bunch of small items, how am I going to carry them through the mall (the opposite side)? Does it make sense for an employee to accompany me through the mall to my car?
Forget the malls - how about the city stores. They've put stores in the inner cities, and we WALK to them. Are Apple employees going to help me walk home now?
How about just asking if we want a bag. If you say no, good for you. But if I'm going to walk 2 miles home - plastic please. (althoguh you can go for thinner lighter bags than your bag-sacs you have now...)
or
Mac Mini + 4GB + 500GB + 22/24" LCD looks better
to
24" iMac for $1499 with integrated graphics.
9400M can drive 24" iMac and deliver good for graphic performance, i think macbook (white) and mac mini also should be able to do? rite?
Q: Who puts IGP in $1499 machine?
A: Apple!
previous generation 24" iMac for $1399 or less LOOKS SO GOOD to me
over priced is fine, i do not mind paying $200 or $300 more, but under specd! (I am not talking about quad core or super duper graphics) no no no...
Obviously I read your post. You implied that they could potentially recycle it, not that they actually do. And then you mentioned that there were other techniques with less waste, even though there is no waste with Apple's process.
You don't need to be an ass.
Look in the mirror.
I gather you don't quote understand the technology here.
One might suggest that you look in the mirror as I suspect you are missing a few things here. I won't say I'm an expert but I've worked in metal die casting, single point Cnc diamond turning operations (optical), and precision injection molding. It is reasonable to question the economics of such a design.
First of all, there is no waste. Every bit of "the material machined off is recycled," thus no waste.
I really hope you don't believe that as it reflects a poor understanding of the tooling industry. Things to consider:
1. Carbide tooling wears out and must be replaced.
2. All of the materials used to arrive at surface finish have finite life.
3. All of the process guilds must be disposed of or recycled. Recycling is never 100%.
4. Like wise aluminum is never recycled 100%. Further Aluminum oxide takes a lot of energy to convert back to aluminum.
5. Tooling and fixturing have limited life.
6. There is a huge amount of waste heat generated in a plant doing such work.
Perhaps you could do yourself a favor and watch "The New Macbook" video on http://www.apple.com/macbook/design.html
Oh come on now you aren't going to reference an Apple document here for an unbiased evaluation.
In addition, could you enlighten us on your expertise that makes you qualified to declare that this process is "?not a good choice."
I don't know about the original posters qualifications but he certainly has fewer mistakes in hispresentation than you do. Now we can discuss the issue of this being a good choice but we have compare it against something.
Going the die casting route would be the high volume solution if a die design could be successfully engineered to mold the housing. I will go out on a limb here and say it can't be done with Aluminum die casting alloys. The primary problem being the size of the thin wall structures. Even if successfully molded the process would leave a lot of stress in the structure. Diecasting might save them some money be getting much closer to net shape but I'm not sure it is worth it.
The next possibility is a stamped and machined structure. Combined with a couple of diecast inserts this would have considerable potential. Yeah you still have machining to be done but it is not the gross stock removal they are doing right now. Frankly I suspect that they could have ended up with a more rounded design going this way. The rather squared off edges of the current design are troublesome but as the housing gets thinner you don't have much of a choice.
I know this goes against Apples image right now but the economical approach would be injection molded plastics. It would be tuff to get the housing right in an engineering grade plastic but many of the features could be molded in in one shot. Done right it would be just as strong as the current housing.
The biggest problem I see with this process is the cost. It might cost a manufacture $5 for a plastic laptop housing. I can't imagine the new Aluminum laptop housing costing less than $75 out the door. There is a fudge factor there as I'm not sure how much the slaves are being paid. It is never cheap to machine such parts. It would be very interesting to know how fast they can get one of these housings through the production process. I find it difficult to imagine less than an hour to a finished shell. This does not compare very well to injection molding where your cycle times might be under 30 seconds and a large machine might be making more than one case at a time. Oh if you are thinking about asking, no I don't see the expense of the process being offset by the need for other components on a shell produced by other means. The stampings or moldings are cheap.
As a side note here I've watched die cast machines produce carburator bodies at an impressive rate. In this case there is certainly a lot of secondary work on the body. While large carburators have gone the way of the Dino, I don't think any reasonable person would suggest machining the from a block of zinc for each unit. The expense would be huge. I'm not so closed minded however not to see some value in Apples processes for this shell. The problem is the expense, it is likely an order of magnitude more expensive if not worst.
Dave
seriously do like recycled paper, the hipsters would love that. (and so would those of us that actually like helping the environment, even if dont buy goods that show it off)
To be honest I often decline bags at stores I visit - when I can. Especially if those bags are difficult to retask for other uses. Distribute the right bag though and you might actually see people reuseing the bags. The local grocery is a perfect example here as I "recycle" each bag as a garbage bag. This dreastically reduces my need for purchased garbage bags.
As for the cities and there claims of removing all these bags from the landfills I'd have to say it is bunk and structure statistics. If anything they likely have more plastic in their landfills due to the use of large garbage bags.
The bigger question in my mind is why are the cities bring so ignorant about domestic waste. A landfill is the last place all this crap should be going. It is like putting energy into a hole in the ground. The primary goal of every city should be the removal of all the contained energy in the trash. A landfill is going to polite no mater what you do with it.
<<<<How about just asking if we want a bag.>>>>
BAGS and packaging SERVE SEVERAL ACTUAL PURPOSES:
1. Advertising
2. Theft prevention
9. Customer service
1. Without bags, Apple must make somehow still create an image noise to cover the loss of advertising that the bags provided. You'll notice that all the slave labor created 'fabric' bags from Trader Joes and Whole Foods, for example, are unique in color. Also the store name or logo is easier to distinguish on a unique, square surface. The bag creates an Apple image in another shopper and an ad 'noise', even if the contents is a generic product such as an iPod case from another vendor.
(This is a smooth trick of using modern American sub culture industries. If you think for one minute the money leaders who are behind retail truly care about paper or plastic, think again. The Rockafellers want a much smaller world population and a return to futalism. Thus crack cocaine, vaccines, homosexual promotion, gun rights, and abortion. But they purposely mislabel their profitable poisoning and destruction of the environment to promote better ways of advertising their products-like these easier to read big, unique bags. Yet for the lack of an immediate profitable solution to replace their very unique and much liked ad/logo bags, Steve Jobs and Apple are most likely a poor victims of this illuminated world mentality, rather than a contributor. Truly it is the very promotion of the web and the computer that has lead to the loss of the local newspaper reporters who uncover the plots to destroy our way of life and freedoms by the clever and disguised closing of such newspapers that have a reputation for great investigative probing. The owners say this is done because of the 'economy' and to help preserve Americas trees, even though the 'economy' has been undermined by the Fed, and the forests were replaced decades ago by Agrabiz tree farms harvested by two mexican 'imported' workers using big foreign made harvesting machines. The multinational media companies already own most of the local news anyway. It was always their purpose to stop these reporters-buying up the papers allowed this to happen! Buy the media, run ads to elect the narcissistic, corrupt officials, control the government, change the law, have your way! Close the local papers, shut down all the low power broadcasters this June, homogenize all the news. Sounds like "1984"-the year of my first Mac! Rocky wins again.)
2. Now, without bags to help, Apple employees at retail stores are going to have to be trained even better to watch for "slippage". In all reality, the reason you have always found a store full of sale people at Apple, was in a great part to prevent shop lifting. After all, dual purpose, enthusiastic sales people are far cheaper and far less threatening to customers than security guards.
9. When do The Beatles get to show up in iTunes? Apple on Apple!
Apple's old plastic case design had problems with the case flexing, thereby causing the graphic processor to eventually tear away from the board. I'd guess Apple had to replace hundreds of thousands of those (it replaced three on just one of mine alone). Those old logic boards hit the trash. The new cases will definitely prevent the same type of case flexing thereby increasing the chances of less stress on the internal components (as Apple itself points out).
Are there better ways to achieve the same results? Maybe, but you said the Macbook cases were the least energy inefficient without explaining what you mean. The least energy efficient because of cost to produce, or from actually usage of the machine? It seems you mean because of manufacturing costs. However, when Apple introduced these machines it claimed it was using a new process. So your comments are assuming a lot that can't be verified unless you have an inside source. Whatever the case may be, I doubt Apple's process is the least energy efficient. Further, as you probably know, engineering is always about striking a balance.
Apple is taking a "billet" (solid piece of aluminum) and machining it to shape. There is a lot of waste (the material machined off, although it is capable of being recycled which does save a worthwhile amount of energy compared to refining bauxite (ore)). There are precision casting and other techniques which could accomplish the same result with less waste and less machining...the machining is expensive as well.
What drove the Apple design team to select this manufacturing process is something of a puzzle as it is not a good choice.