Not to mention they took out the optical drive and HDD. There are now no moving parts except for the fans, so less chance of breaking down in the first place.
Just worked out by a conservative calculation/estimate that the two fans in my 5-year old MBP have revolved at least 2,625,000,000 times each (don't know if that's billions or trillions on your side of the pond)... should I take it in for its "half-life" service?
Sounds like the recycling industry needs some innovation of its own.
Like discovering a glue-softening formula to separate glass from metal, as opposed to complaining that it can't figure it out. Does Apple have to do everything around here?
next you'll be telling us we should all be efficient at cutting out the ram thats been hardwired into the motherboard so we can install our own upgrades.
You are incorrect. Soldering the RAM reduces the current requirements, generating the 30 day standby time. it also raises reliability as pins never need reseating and production tests of the motherboard assembly are complete and unchanging throughout manufacture. With fewer parts to source/ship, the repair infrastructure become less expensive and it will take FAR fewer personnel hours to do the repairs. So overall repair cost may be slightly more per occurrence, but overall occurrences should be far lower, reducing the average per capita repair costs.
So if you want a higher chance of having an expensive repair bill rather than a much lower chance of having a slightly more expensive repair bill, have at it. It's your money. But please don't try to make engineering tradeoff judgements you have not thought through, nor have any appropriate background to help inform, at all. Your guess was so bad I can't even call it an analysis.
SLIGHTLY more? a mutli hundred or thousand dollar motherboard is SLIGHTLY more than an 80 dollar stick of ram? Are you huffing glue?
I know a shit-ton of people with Macbook Pros, and haven't met a single fucking person in my life where they felt repairability was an important consideration, or that repaired their laptops themselves. Is this a blow to iFixit? Sure. Is iFixit, or other such companies that benefit from high repairability even a blip on the radar in terms of customer base? No. Does it even really matter in the big picture? Absolutely not. When someone bitches about something, the first think you look at are their vested interests. The pros of having such an integrated design, both in terms of cost to Apple and design/engineering goals certainly outweigh any cons for the VAST MAJORITY of people buying this laptop. Any objective individual that looks at the big picture, not just their own very specific needs/wants, would have to agree.
I think it's also worth pointing out that most of the people here don't have any clue what they're talking about. Apple does. For example, there's a complaint here about recycling the batteries because they're glued in. I can guarantee that no matter what glue is used, you can remove the battery if you don't care about damaging it (and you don't if you're recycling). Furthermore, Apple has to repair and refurbish these things, so I'm sure there's a way to remove the batteries. I'm betting that moderate heat will do the trick.
SLIGHTLY more? a mutli hundred or thousand dollar motherboard is SLIGHTLY more than an 80 dollar stick of ram? Are you huffing glue?
Depends. Let's say that the motherboard is $500 and the RAM is $75. Now, let's say that the RAM failure occurs 10 times as often. Of those 10 times, 9 are simply loose RAM and reseating fixes the problem.
Now, let's say that the labor is $75 for each repair.
So, for every $575 motherboard repair, you have $750 in labor and $75 in parts (10 failures, 9 of which simply involve reseating) when using sticks of RAM. So, even if you ignore the inconvenience of having 10 times as many people lose access to their computers for a time, the motherboard is cheaper. It also doesn't factor in the fact that it's cheaper to build the soldered RAM system, so the selling price may be lower.
Of course, the actual numbers are only guesses, but the point is that reliability can often be the better choice, even if it makes things more expensive. The world is quickly evolving that way. Need to fix your TV? They don't replace components, they replace entire modules. More and more electronic devices are going the "replace the entire unit or at least a major module" route. It's more reliable and less expensive in the end.
Apple has also said the new screen reduces glare by 75 percent by removing the front glass.
The fishy thing about this is that Apple has previously chosen to add the front glass, which increased the glare. Now they're supposedly "removing" the front glass? I don't think that's really why the glare went down. The new surface has a nice anti-reflective treatment applied that cuts reflected light significantly.
The car analogy is flawed, we don't know the reliability of this new rMBP. Additionally, the advances in cars were made explicitly for reliability and or performance, while many changes in the rMBP are made to cheapen production, limit upgradability, and make it thinner. Thinner laptops are all well and good, but there is a huge market segment that cares more about expandability than an extra 2 mm of thinness, and Apple fails to meet our needs.
Isn't it funny that as Americans get fatter, their laptops get thinner?
Just Americans? I thought I saw a few stories showing that Western Civilization is getting fatter.
I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUZZ OF GLUEING of PARTS IS ALL ABOUT...
I've seen most of NATGEO's Ultimate Factories series and all of the exotic cars featured uses GLUE to hold the aluminum body to its chassis. We are talking about 200mph Ferraris and Porsches here how much more for a retina MACs that just sits on your lap @ 0MPH most of the time.
Right, glue, like plastic, are often maligned construction materials. When it comes down to it, it's selection, engineering, and process. The right material for the job, designed and made right, will perform superbly. The benefits and problems must be viewed in balance.
Grind it up and melt it down, same as everything else.
So how many of these things do you think will require recycling before they figure it out?
Keep jumping on those sour grapes, they release a lot of whine.
Grinding? I doubt that's necessary, and likely hurts recyclability. I would bet anything that the proper application of heat will get the glue to let go.
I know a shit-ton of people with Macbook Pros, and haven't met a single fucking person in my life where they felt repairability was an important consideration, or that repaired their laptops themselves. Is this a blow to iFixit? Sure. Is iFixit, or other such companies that benefit from high repairability even a blip on the radar in terms of customer base? No. Does it even really matter in the big picture? Absolutely not. When someone bitches about something, the first think you look at are their vested interests. The pros of having such an integrated design, both in terms of cost to Apple and design/engineering goals certainly outweigh any cons for the VAST MAJORITY of people buying this laptop. Any objective individual that looks at the big picture, not just their own very specific needs/wants, would have to agree.
Consumers are not the only people who read iFixit. If technicians continually have to deal with time consuming, wacky procedures to do even basic repairs, then customer service can suffer. That is the "big picture" that you refer to. Right now, the hardware designers think that since they don't have to do the repairs themselves, repairability is not their problem. There needs to be more cooperation between hardware designers and technicians. Better yet, make the hardware designers spend time in the repair shops and actually do some repairs themselves.
Consumers are not the only people who read iFixit. If technicians continually have to deal with time consuming, wacky procedures to do even basic repairs, then customer service can suffer. That is the "big picture" that you refer to. Right now, the hardware designers think that since they don't have to do the repairs themselves, repairability is not their problem. There needs to be more cooperation between hardware designers and technicians. Better yet, make the hardware designers spend time in the repair shops and actually do some repairs themselves.
Who is dealing with repairs though? If you have AppleCare then Apple fixes your device. In many instances, Apple just replaces the device since replacement is more cost effective than hiring thousands of hardware technicians. If you don't have AppleCare then, well... You should; which I consider a shame but every company wants to sell additional products and services.
Anyone whose revenue is derived from consumer electronics repair should seriously reconsider their business model. Most of these businesses are not authorized repair agents and use cheap parts and labor.
Who is dealing with repairs though? If you have AppleCare then Apple fixes your device. In many instances, Apple just replaces the device since replacement is more cost effective than hiring thousands of hardware technicians.
I'm sure they hire hardware technicians, but more at centralized locations.
Sounds like the recycling industry needs some innovation of its own.
Like discovering a glue-softening formula to separate glass from metal, as opposed to complaining that it can't figure it out. Does Apple have to do everything around here?
How can this possibly be turned around so it sounds like Apple-bashing? Phil Schiller was blatantly bragging about how recyclable the thing was, when all along he knew exactly how much he was bending the truth.
I love the new machine, and fair enough if it's not as recyclable... But I don't like being lied to.
Few people these days, or ever really, ever even upgraded their machines, or fix it themselves.
Sour grapes, iFixit.
That's so not true. My 1G MacBook originally came with 1 GB RAM and a 100 GB HD. I "maxed out" both at 2 GB and 320 GB HD at a later date. When I bought it, I couldn't afford 2 GB (especially at Apple prices), and I don't think 320 GB HDs even existed. As a result, my lovely old MB has lasted me over 6 years and is still going strong.
If I was to buy a rMBP, I could only afford the minimum spec and there's no way I'd want that. 8 GB sounds great now, but the OS and Apps will become bigger and better in the future, and I will need 16 GB. So I'd have to wait and save for the 16 GB upgrade. But also I'd want more than the 256 GB storage, and that's the sticking point. I can't upgrade that to 512 GB unless I choose the higher-end 2.6 GHz model, which is $400 more. Not only that, but according to the benchmark tests, there's not an awful lot more power in it than the 2.3 GHz. And the 2.3 GHz is faster than the 2.6 GHz non-retina! So the fact you can't get more storage on the lower spec rMBP strikes me as a clever ploy from Apple to get people spending more money. If they are going to make a machine that has no user-upgradeable parts, I think it's a shame they don't make the BTO options more flexible.
And before anyone suggests that iPhones are made like this... I get my phone on a contract, so I know that in 18-24 months time I can get a new one with better memory, better everything... And they're a hell of a lot cheaper than a new laptop. I'm afraid that I'm one of the minority(?) who can't afford to spend 3 grand on a new machine every 2 years!
Sounds like the recycling industry needs some innovation of its own.
Like discovering a glue-softening formula to separate glass from metal, as opposed to complaining that it can't figure it out. Does Apple have to do everything around here?
This is a bit naive. There's virtually no profit in the recycling portion of it, and many people are not sure where to take them. In California it's illegal to put an old television in the dumpster, yet people do this anyway. We need a functional idiot proofed solution there, yet no one is willing to pay for it most of the time. Ideally it would be built into the retail price of the electronic device with clear instructions available online and within the documentation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tokenuser
The cynic in me says that this is a guy who funds most of his projects from the revenue generated selling the tools to the DIYers who want to fix their iHardware themselves.
His revenue stream has dried up - and is likely to get worse.
Non upgradable RAM? CTO with 16GB up front. You cant go beyond 16GB, and - while expensive - its not a deal breaker.
Non replaceable screen? Cracked screens are a risk - but only time will tell if this is a genuine problem on the redesigned model(s). For most screen repairs it wasnt the LCD that was damaged, but the front glass. No front glass means ... more LCD damage or a fragile component removed from the scenario?
Nonremovable battery? This one concerns me a little. I am on my third MB battery since I bought my Early 08 MB ... but then again, those battery packs were known to have issues.
Recycling? OK, as part of a total lifecycle that is a concern but not now. That "glass" is an LCD. It is not LCD per se. You dont throw bare LCD panels out with your beer bottles for recycling. Metal recycling - even for electronics is a high temp smelting process where the metals liquify at different temps and get filtered (low tech analogy) off. If he means reuse, thats a different story, but recycling? Thats a furphy.
I am anxiously awaiting my MBP:NG (MBPR?) ...
The ram isn't such a bad issue here. If 16GB does not become more common in this specific ram spec, pricing could remain where it is. Note the price to go to 8GB on a much older macbook vs 16 on a newer one. While 16 will undoubtedly be cheaper on future macbook generations, it may or may not reach that point on the current generation. Overall the upgrade cost here isn't a huge deal relative to the machine. The battery and drive should be seen as bigger issues given their nature as expendable parts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maltz
But those changes in cars made them last longer and run more efficiently and reliably. But soldering RAM to the motherboard, making up their own SATA interface, and gluing the battery to the case does none of those things. All it does it allow them to make it marginally smaller and drives repair costs through the roof. Personally, I'd rather have a machine that's slightly thicker and maybe even slightly heavier that I can upgrade and don't have to pay Apple prices for RAM.
I'm much more neutral on the ram thing. These have never been appropriate for really heavy computing. They get too hot. The other components annoy me to the point of where I may never buy one unless battery and drive technology sees some drastic improvements.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla
Few people these days, or ever really, ever even upgraded their machines, or fix it themselves.
Sour grapes, iFixit.
This is just such a silly paradigm. Apple has all of you convinced that changing a laptop battery is a "repair".
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla
Huge = Less than 5%
Not huge.
Like the 'enormous' number of people using Google+. Who are mostly just people who comment on tech blogs.
I avoid creating my own statistics. I suggest you do the same. You're just making the statement with confidence figuring that the confidence will dissuade people from fact checking it. Given the lack of credible published readily available information, I'm not going to bother.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Yeah, poor repair company will eventually lose their revenue stream.
I'll take reliability over repairability any day. Better to build a system reliable enough that repairs aren't needed often than to build a crappy system that DIYers can fix like those that you obviously prefer.
Nonsense. Soldered RAM will be considerably more reliable than socketed RAM. First, there are probably half as many solder connections. Then you have the inherent unreliability of a DIMM socket which can work lose over time or during shipping. And, of course, many problems with DIY RAM upgrades were the use of crappy RAM which led to intermittent problems. A soldered RAM system, while not upgradeable and less flexible for the consumer offers significant advantage.
Gluing batteries to the case? Less components to come loose during shipping. Less chance of assembly error. Less chance of DIYers messing it up and ruining their system (there was a case not too long ago where a battery screw was misplaced and damaged a battery, causing a fire).
And Apple prices for RAM? You're living in the past. If you buy the older MBP with 8 GB and want to upgrade to 16, most places are charging around $160 for two 8 GB SO-DIMMs. And even then, you have to worry about whether the RAM is as good as Apple RAM. Apple charges $200 - which isn't out of line at all considering that you get a full factory warranty and don't have to muck about inside your computer.
Of course, if you don't like it, you're free to buy the older MBP or someone else's laptop.
The ram isn't a big deal to me, but don't overstate factory warranties. Some third party ram can come with a lifetime warranty. In terms of its cost, it's a very normal markup. You're basically paying retail + brand markup and configuration charge. $40 more on a laptop in this price range is not a big deal in any way. You can defend the battery and drive all you like, but Apple has done very little to inform people of such changes. They've transformed things that were never truly "repairs" but merely replacements on expendable parts (changing an Air filter on the car if you will ) to expensive repairs which would weigh heavily against the value of an aging device. Essentially they may eventually force earlier retirement of their machines in this way which is bad for their consumers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjlcool
I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUZZ OF GLUEING of PARTS IS ALL ABOUT...
I've seen most of NATGEO's Ultimate Factories series and all of the exotic cars featured uses GLUE to hold the aluminum body to its chassis. We are talking about 200mph Ferraris and Porsches here how much more for a retina MACs that just sits on your lap @ 0MPH most of the time.
Disassembling computer parts is done on a very low budget, and it's not always done correctly. Beyond that, stop comparing Ferraris to mass market products. Apple and Ferrari serve completely different markets with some overlap in demographic due to Apple's scale.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jowie74
That's so not true. My 1G MacBook originally came with 1 GB RAM and a 100 GB HD. I "maxed out" both at 2 GB and 320 GB HD at a later date. When I bought it, I couldn't afford 2 GB (especially at Apple prices), and I don't think 320 GB HDs even existed. As a result, my lovely old MB has lasted me over 6 years and is still going strong.
If I was to buy a rMBP, I could only afford the minimum spec and there's no way I'd want that. 8 GB sounds great now, but the OS and Apps will become bigger and better in the future, and I will need 16 GB. So I'd have to wait and save for the 16 GB upgrade. But also I'd want more than the 256 GB storage, and that's the sticking point. I can't upgrade that to 512 GB unless I choose the higher-end 2.6 GHz model, which is $400 more. Not only that, but according to the benchmark tests, there's not an awful lot more power in it than the 2.3 GHz. And the 2.3 GHz is faster than the 2.6 GHz non-retina! So the fact you can't get more storage on the lower spec rMBP strikes me as a clever ploy from Apple to get people spending more money. If they are going to make a machine that has no user-upgradeable parts, I think it's a shame they don't make the BTO options more flexible.
And before anyone suggests that iPhones are made like this... I get my phone on a contract, so I know that in 18-24 months time I can get a new one with better memory, better everything... And they're a hell of a lot cheaper than a new laptop. I'm afraid that I'm one of the minority(?) who can't afford to spend 3 grand on a new machine every 2 years!
My solution would be don't buy it. If enough people follow that trend, they won't create machines like this. It's possible that I may find myself looking for another brand, but it would bother me less if the reliability is truly exceptional within these machines. I dislike the battery issue quite a lot. Their previous warranty terms do have cycle allotments for what is covered as opposed to just considered normal wear and tear. As I've mentioned they are considered expendable parts. If the machine is built perfectly, these parts will naturally degrade and fail prior to the rest of the machine. With the battery, they've always been expensive to replace. This was true even when they were swappable. It's just that requiring more complex service leading to machine downtime and increased service charges for a replacement that may become an issue after two to three years or faster if you use your machine in colder regions is an issue. They've been experimenting for years with what people will tolerate, and it's becoming truly annoying.
How can this possibly be turned around so it sounds like Apple-bashing? Phil Schiller was blatantly bragging about how recyclable the thing was, when all along he knew exactly how much he was bending the truth.
I love the new machine, and fair enough if it's not as recyclable... But I don't like being lied to.
Your lied to. You know that for a fact?
Did you ask Apple about it, or did you react on hearsay?
If you asked Apple I'am sure they will reply that "it isn't recyclable at all because we knew that recycling is a very important design requirement and several large environmental organizations are watching our every move, not to mention the government , also, lots of people would really like it if we dropped the ball and we ourselves are really behind recycling..."
We have a saying here: "zoals de waard is vertrouwt hij zijn gasten".
Did you ask Apple about it, or did you react on hearsay?
If you asked Apple I'am sure they will reply that "it isn't recyclable at all because we knew that recycling is a very important design requirement and several large environmental organizations are watching our every move, not to mention the government , also, lots of people would really like it if we dropped the ball and we ourselves are really behind recycling..."
We have a saying here: "zoals de waard is vertrouwt hij zijn gasten".
J.
Okay, so "lied to" is a bit heavy. But if the display is welded to the glass, is it actually possible to recycle?
I guess you have not paid atention to any of the teardowns? The display comes off, not in a repairable manner, but it is not in unassailable permanent bond. The recycler will have to spend a couple minutes separating components like they already do. They will just use a different technique to do the job.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii
Not to mention they took out the optical drive and HDD. There are now no moving parts except for the fans, so less chance of breaking down in the first place.
Just worked out by a conservative calculation/estimate that the two fans in my 5-year old MBP have revolved at least 2,625,000,000 times each (don't know if that's billions or trillions on your side of the pond)... should I take it in for its "half-life" service?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
Sounds like the recycling industry needs some innovation of its own.
Like discovering a glue-softening formula to separate glass from metal, as opposed to complaining that it can't figure it out. Does Apple have to do everything around here?
next you'll be telling us we should all be efficient at cutting out the ram thats been hardwired into the motherboard so we can install our own upgrades.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro
You are incorrect. Soldering the RAM reduces the current requirements, generating the 30 day standby time. it also raises reliability as pins never need reseating and production tests of the motherboard assembly are complete and unchanging throughout manufacture. With fewer parts to source/ship, the repair infrastructure become less expensive and it will take FAR fewer personnel hours to do the repairs. So overall repair cost may be slightly more per occurrence, but overall occurrences should be far lower, reducing the average per capita repair costs.
So if you want a higher chance of having an expensive repair bill rather than a much lower chance of having a slightly more expensive repair bill, have at it. It's your money. But please don't try to make engineering tradeoff judgements you have not thought through, nor have any appropriate background to help inform, at all. Your guess was so bad I can't even call it an analysis.
SLIGHTLY more? a mutli hundred or thousand dollar motherboard is SLIGHTLY more than an 80 dollar stick of ram? Are you huffing glue?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert
SLIGHTLY more? a mutli hundred or thousand dollar motherboard is SLIGHTLY more than an 80 dollar stick of ram? Are you huffing glue?
Would you feel better if you thought about the entire motherboard as being a giant stick of RAM?
This is like people bitching about whether a Ferrari is better than a Bugatti, while driving a Pinto.
You'll never own one. You'll never drive one. So why do you care?
Dupe - stupid internets.
I saw the unboxings, and the tear downs of a whole MBPR, and now the tear downs of the MBPR display.
What I really want to see is a tear down of the the boxes the MBPR comes in...
What kind of paper and cardboard is Apple using?
Is it a proprietary box design? How do they fold the corners?
Did they copy the design from Android?
Did they use a special glue?
Did Steve work on the box designs for the new MBPR on his deathbed?
How many FoxConn workers died boxing my MBPR?
How many lawsuits will be generated by the box design and packaging?
Did Tim Cook crackdown and make them use better paper?
Are the packaging materials Apple uses approved by Greenpeace?
How come Apple does not make the boxes in the United States?
I predicted that Apple's new MacBook's would come out in white boxes with an Apple logo on them, months before anyone else.
I think it's also worth pointing out that most of the people here don't have any clue what they're talking about. Apple does. For example, there's a complaint here about recycling the batteries because they're glued in. I can guarantee that no matter what glue is used, you can remove the battery if you don't care about damaging it (and you don't if you're recycling). Furthermore, Apple has to repair and refurbish these things, so I'm sure there's a way to remove the batteries. I'm betting that moderate heat will do the trick.
Depends. Let's say that the motherboard is $500 and the RAM is $75. Now, let's say that the RAM failure occurs 10 times as often. Of those 10 times, 9 are simply loose RAM and reseating fixes the problem.
Now, let's say that the labor is $75 for each repair.
So, for every $575 motherboard repair, you have $750 in labor and $75 in parts (10 failures, 9 of which simply involve reseating) when using sticks of RAM. So, even if you ignore the inconvenience of having 10 times as many people lose access to their computers for a time, the motherboard is cheaper. It also doesn't factor in the fact that it's cheaper to build the soldered RAM system, so the selling price may be lower.
Of course, the actual numbers are only guesses, but the point is that reliability can often be the better choice, even if it makes things more expensive. The world is quickly evolving that way. Need to fix your TV? They don't replace components, they replace entire modules. More and more electronic devices are going the "replace the entire unit or at least a major module" route. It's more reliable and less expensive in the end.
The fishy thing about this is that Apple has previously chosen to add the front glass, which increased the glare. Now they're supposedly "removing" the front glass? I don't think that's really why the glare went down. The new surface has a nice anti-reflective treatment applied that cuts reflected light significantly.
Just Americans? I thought I saw a few stories showing that Western Civilization is getting fatter.
Right, glue, like plastic, are often maligned construction materials. When it comes down to it, it's selection, engineering, and process. The right material for the job, designed and made right, will perform superbly. The benefits and problems must be viewed in balance.
Grinding? I doubt that's necessary, and likely hurts recyclability. I would bet anything that the proper application of heat will get the glue to let go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
I know a shit-ton of people with Macbook Pros, and haven't met a single fucking person in my life where they felt repairability was an important consideration, or that repaired their laptops themselves. Is this a blow to iFixit? Sure. Is iFixit, or other such companies that benefit from high repairability even a blip on the radar in terms of customer base? No. Does it even really matter in the big picture? Absolutely not. When someone bitches about something, the first think you look at are their vested interests. The pros of having such an integrated design, both in terms of cost to Apple and design/engineering goals certainly outweigh any cons for the VAST MAJORITY of people buying this laptop. Any objective individual that looks at the big picture, not just their own very specific needs/wants, would have to agree.
Consumers are not the only people who read iFixit. If technicians continually have to deal with time consuming, wacky procedures to do even basic repairs, then customer service can suffer. That is the "big picture" that you refer to. Right now, the hardware designers think that since they don't have to do the repairs themselves, repairability is not their problem. There needs to be more cooperation between hardware designers and technicians. Better yet, make the hardware designers spend time in the repair shops and actually do some repairs themselves.
Who is dealing with repairs though? If you have AppleCare then Apple fixes your device. In many instances, Apple just replaces the device since replacement is more cost effective than hiring thousands of hardware technicians. If you don't have AppleCare then, well... You should; which I consider a shame but every company wants to sell additional products and services.
Anyone whose revenue is derived from consumer electronics repair should seriously reconsider their business model. Most of these businesses are not authorized repair agents and use cheap parts and labor.
I'm sure they hire hardware technicians, but more at centralized locations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
Sounds like the recycling industry needs some innovation of its own.
Like discovering a glue-softening formula to separate glass from metal, as opposed to complaining that it can't figure it out. Does Apple have to do everything around here?
How can this possibly be turned around so it sounds like Apple-bashing? Phil Schiller was blatantly bragging about how recyclable the thing was, when all along he knew exactly how much he was bending the truth.
I love the new machine, and fair enough if it's not as recyclable... But I don't like being lied to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla
Few people these days, or ever really, ever even upgraded their machines, or fix it themselves.
Sour grapes, iFixit.
That's so not true. My 1G MacBook originally came with 1 GB RAM and a 100 GB HD. I "maxed out" both at 2 GB and 320 GB HD at a later date. When I bought it, I couldn't afford 2 GB (especially at Apple prices), and I don't think 320 GB HDs even existed. As a result, my lovely old MB has lasted me over 6 years and is still going strong.
If I was to buy a rMBP, I could only afford the minimum spec and there's no way I'd want that. 8 GB sounds great now, but the OS and Apps will become bigger and better in the future, and I will need 16 GB. So I'd have to wait and save for the 16 GB upgrade. But also I'd want more than the 256 GB storage, and that's the sticking point. I can't upgrade that to 512 GB unless I choose the higher-end 2.6 GHz model, which is $400 more. Not only that, but according to the benchmark tests, there's not an awful lot more power in it than the 2.3 GHz. And the 2.3 GHz is faster than the 2.6 GHz non-retina! So the fact you can't get more storage on the lower spec rMBP strikes me as a clever ploy from Apple to get people spending more money. If they are going to make a machine that has no user-upgradeable parts, I think it's a shame they don't make the BTO options more flexible.
And before anyone suggests that iPhones are made like this... I get my phone on a contract, so I know that in 18-24 months time I can get a new one with better memory, better everything... And they're a hell of a lot cheaper than a new laptop. I'm afraid that I'm one of the minority(?) who can't afford to spend 3 grand on a new machine every 2 years!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
Sounds like the recycling industry needs some innovation of its own.
Like discovering a glue-softening formula to separate glass from metal, as opposed to complaining that it can't figure it out. Does Apple have to do everything around here?
This is a bit naive. There's virtually no profit in the recycling portion of it, and many people are not sure where to take them. In California it's illegal to put an old television in the dumpster, yet people do this anyway. We need a functional idiot proofed solution there, yet no one is willing to pay for it most of the time. Ideally it would be built into the retail price of the electronic device with clear instructions available online and within the documentation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tokenuser
The cynic in me says that this is a guy who funds most of his projects from the revenue generated selling the tools to the DIYers who want to fix their iHardware themselves.
His revenue stream has dried up - and is likely to get worse.
Non upgradable RAM? CTO with 16GB up front. You cant go beyond 16GB, and - while expensive - its not a deal breaker.
Non replaceable screen? Cracked screens are a risk - but only time will tell if this is a genuine problem on the redesigned model(s). For most screen repairs it wasnt the LCD that was damaged, but the front glass. No front glass means ... more LCD damage or a fragile component removed from the scenario?
Nonremovable battery? This one concerns me a little. I am on my third MB battery since I bought my Early 08 MB ... but then again, those battery packs were known to have issues.
Recycling? OK, as part of a total lifecycle that is a concern but not now. That "glass" is an LCD. It is not LCD per se. You dont throw bare LCD panels out with your beer bottles for recycling. Metal recycling - even for electronics is a high temp smelting process where the metals liquify at different temps and get filtered (low tech analogy) off. If he means reuse, thats a different story, but recycling? Thats a furphy.
I am anxiously awaiting my MBP:NG (MBPR?) ...
The ram isn't such a bad issue here. If 16GB does not become more common in this specific ram spec, pricing could remain where it is. Note the price to go to 8GB on a much older macbook vs 16 on a newer one. While 16 will undoubtedly be cheaper on future macbook generations, it may or may not reach that point on the current generation. Overall the upgrade cost here isn't a huge deal relative to the machine. The battery and drive should be seen as bigger issues given their nature as expendable parts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maltz
But those changes in cars made them last longer and run more efficiently and reliably. But soldering RAM to the motherboard, making up their own SATA interface, and gluing the battery to the case does none of those things. All it does it allow them to make it marginally smaller and drives repair costs through the roof. Personally, I'd rather have a machine that's slightly thicker and maybe even slightly heavier that I can upgrade and don't have to pay Apple prices for RAM.
I'm much more neutral on the ram thing. These have never been appropriate for really heavy computing. They get too hot. The other components annoy me to the point of where I may never buy one unless battery and drive technology sees some drastic improvements.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla
Few people these days, or ever really, ever even upgraded their machines, or fix it themselves.
Sour grapes, iFixit.
This is just such a silly paradigm. Apple has all of you convinced that changing a laptop battery is a "repair".
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla
Huge = Less than 5%
Not huge.
Like the 'enormous' number of people using Google+. Who are mostly just people who comment on tech blogs.
I avoid creating my own statistics. I suggest you do the same. You're just making the statement with confidence figuring that the confidence will dissuade people from fact checking it. Given the lack of credible published readily available information, I'm not going to bother.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Yeah, poor repair company will eventually lose their revenue stream.
I'll take reliability over repairability any day. Better to build a system reliable enough that repairs aren't needed often than to build a crappy system that DIYers can fix like those that you obviously prefer.
Nonsense. Soldered RAM will be considerably more reliable than socketed RAM. First, there are probably half as many solder connections. Then you have the inherent unreliability of a DIMM socket which can work lose over time or during shipping. And, of course, many problems with DIY RAM upgrades were the use of crappy RAM which led to intermittent problems. A soldered RAM system, while not upgradeable and less flexible for the consumer offers significant advantage.
Gluing batteries to the case? Less components to come loose during shipping. Less chance of assembly error. Less chance of DIYers messing it up and ruining their system (there was a case not too long ago where a battery screw was misplaced and damaged a battery, causing a fire).
And Apple prices for RAM? You're living in the past. If you buy the older MBP with 8 GB and want to upgrade to 16, most places are charging around $160 for two 8 GB SO-DIMMs. And even then, you have to worry about whether the RAM is as good as Apple RAM. Apple charges $200 - which isn't out of line at all considering that you get a full factory warranty and don't have to muck about inside your computer.
Of course, if you don't like it, you're free to buy the older MBP or someone else's laptop.
The ram isn't a big deal to me, but don't overstate factory warranties. Some third party ram can come with a lifetime warranty. In terms of its cost, it's a very normal markup. You're basically paying retail + brand markup and configuration charge. $40 more on a laptop in this price range is not a big deal in any way. You can defend the battery and drive all you like, but Apple has done very little to inform people of such changes. They've transformed things that were never truly "repairs" but merely replacements on expendable parts (changing an Air filter on the car if you will
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjlcool
I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUZZ OF GLUEING of PARTS IS ALL ABOUT...
I've seen most of NATGEO's Ultimate Factories series and all of the exotic cars featured uses GLUE to hold the aluminum body to its chassis. We are talking about 200mph Ferraris and Porsches here how much more for a retina MACs that just sits on your lap @ 0MPH most of the time.
Disassembling computer parts is done on a very low budget, and it's not always done correctly. Beyond that, stop comparing Ferraris to mass market products. Apple and Ferrari serve completely different markets with some overlap in demographic due to Apple's scale.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jowie74
That's so not true. My 1G MacBook originally came with 1 GB RAM and a 100 GB HD. I "maxed out" both at 2 GB and 320 GB HD at a later date. When I bought it, I couldn't afford 2 GB (especially at Apple prices), and I don't think 320 GB HDs even existed. As a result, my lovely old MB has lasted me over 6 years and is still going strong.
If I was to buy a rMBP, I could only afford the minimum spec and there's no way I'd want that. 8 GB sounds great now, but the OS and Apps will become bigger and better in the future, and I will need 16 GB. So I'd have to wait and save for the 16 GB upgrade. But also I'd want more than the 256 GB storage, and that's the sticking point. I can't upgrade that to 512 GB unless I choose the higher-end 2.6 GHz model, which is $400 more. Not only that, but according to the benchmark tests, there's not an awful lot more power in it than the 2.3 GHz. And the 2.3 GHz is faster than the 2.6 GHz non-retina! So the fact you can't get more storage on the lower spec rMBP strikes me as a clever ploy from Apple to get people spending more money. If they are going to make a machine that has no user-upgradeable parts, I think it's a shame they don't make the BTO options more flexible.
And before anyone suggests that iPhones are made like this... I get my phone on a contract, so I know that in 18-24 months time I can get a new one with better memory, better everything... And they're a hell of a lot cheaper than a new laptop. I'm afraid that I'm one of the minority(?) who can't afford to spend 3 grand on a new machine every 2 years!
My solution would be don't buy it. If enough people follow that trend, they won't create machines like this. It's possible that I may find myself looking for another brand, but it would bother me less if the reliability is truly exceptional within these machines. I dislike the battery issue quite a lot. Their previous warranty terms do have cycle allotments for what is covered as opposed to just considered normal wear and tear. As I've mentioned they are considered expendable parts. If the machine is built perfectly, these parts will naturally degrade and fail prior to the rest of the machine. With the battery, they've always been expensive to replace. This was true even when they were swappable. It's just that requiring more complex service leading to machine downtime and increased service charges for a replacement that may become an issue after two to three years or faster if you use your machine in colder regions is an issue. They've been experimenting for years with what people will tolerate, and it's becoming truly annoying.
Your lied to. You know that for a fact?
Did you ask Apple about it, or did you react on hearsay?
If you asked Apple I'am sure they will reply that "it isn't recyclable at all because we knew that recycling is a very important design requirement and several large environmental organizations are watching our every move, not to mention the government , also, lots of people would really like it if we dropped the ball and we ourselves are really behind recycling..."
We have a saying here: "zoals de waard is vertrouwt hij zijn gasten".
J.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnjnjn
Your lied to. You know that for a fact?
Did you ask Apple about it, or did you react on hearsay?
If you asked Apple I'am sure they will reply that "it isn't recyclable at all because we knew that recycling is a very important design requirement and several large environmental organizations are watching our every move, not to mention the government , also, lots of people would really like it if we dropped the ball and we ourselves are really behind recycling..."
We have a saying here: "zoals de waard is vertrouwt hij zijn gasten".
J.
Okay, so "lied to" is a bit heavy. But if the display is welded to the glass, is it actually possible to recycle?
http://www.apple.com/macbook-pro/environment/
I guess you have not paid atention to any of the teardowns? The display comes off, not in a repairable manner, but it is not in unassailable permanent bond. The recycler will have to spend a couple minutes separating components like they already do. They will just use a different technique to do the job.