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.
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.
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.
That's bullshit.
1) The Thinkpad Nano runs 13 -18 hours. Any other false claims?
2) Go take your MacBook to an Apple store and ask them to upgrade the SSD or Ram -- they'll tell you to buy a new one.
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.
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.
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.
That's bullshit.
1) The Thinkpad Nano runs 13 -18 hours. Any other false claims?
2) Go take your MacBook to an Apple store and ask them to upgrade the SSD or Ram -- they'll tell you to buy a new one.
LOL!
Show me the link where a reviewer got 13-18 hours in a real test. Most get 7 to 8 hours.
The MacBook Air now has the speed and battery life to beat the best PCs.
FOR
Remarkably fast performance
Strong legacy app support
Amazingly long battery life
Comfy Magic Keyboard
Improved webcam
AGAINST
Still has thick bezels
Light on ports
"The MacBook Air's performance — powered by the M1 processor and 16GB of RAM — is phenomenal. When I split its screen between 20 Chrome (Intel, not Universal) tabs and a 1080p YouTube video — plus Apple's Mail and Photos app, Pixelmator (again, an Intel app) and 1Password (Intel, again) in the background, I never saw anything close to a hiccup. Oh, and in the background, 20GB of 4K video was being AirDrop transferred, while everything stayed smooth and stable."
Upgradeability isn't of value to people looking for performance, long battery life, and very quiet operation.You need to move your thought processes into the 21st Century...
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.
I think most people would hear that and think it was gobsmackingly amazing that a MacBook Air even came close to be considered for replacing a Mac Pro in a professional workflow. That's the real take, not griping about upgradeability of a machine that is never going to be as upgradeable as the Mac Pro in any world.
You can't replace the screen on a Lenovo Nano. You can't replace the motherboard. You can't put wheels on it. What a failure.
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.
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.
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.
The X1 Nano battery size is similar to the one in the MBA. So any battery benefit the MBA has is because of the M1 chip. BTW, what does battery life has to do with this?
Also, from your post I could understand that consumers benefit outside the U.S. would be better with a non Apple device, since they have no easy access to an Apple Store for service, is that right? So we could say that there is value for consumers outside of the U.S. for a device that's easy to service, right?
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.
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.
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.
That's bullshit.
1) The Thinkpad Nano runs 13 -18 hours. Any other false claims?
2) Go take your MacBook to an Apple store and ask them to upgrade the SSD or Ram -- they'll tell you to buy a new one.
LOL!
Show me the link where a reviewer got 13-18 hours in a real test. Most get 7 to 8 hours.
The MacBook Air now has the speed and battery life to beat the best PCs.
FOR
Remarkably fast performance
Strong legacy app support
Amazingly long battery life
Comfy Magic Keyboard
Improved webcam
AGAINST
Still has thick bezels
Light on ports
"The MacBook Air's performance — powered by the M1 processor and 16GB of RAM — is phenomenal. When I split its screen between 20 Chrome (Intel, not Universal) tabs and a 1080p YouTube video — plus Apple's Mail and Photos app, Pixelmator (again, an Intel app) and 1Password (Intel, again) in the background, I never saw anything close to a hiccup. Oh, and in the background, 20GB of 4K video was being AirDrop transferred, while everything stayed smooth and stable."
Upgradeability isn't of value to people looking for performance, long battery life, and very quiet operation.You need to move your thought processes into the 21st Century...
And I know that the MBA has better battery life / performance. But design wise, weight and construction, the X1 Nano is a better device. Maybe the perfect device would be a X1 Nano with an M1 chip. Too bad this will never exist.
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.
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.
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.
That's bullshit.
1) The Thinkpad Nano runs 13 -18 hours. Any other false claims?
2) Go take your MacBook to an Apple store and ask them to upgrade the SSD or Ram -- they'll tell you to buy a new one.
LOL!
Show me the link where a reviewer got 13-18 hours in a real test. Most get 7 to 8 hours.
The MacBook Air now has the speed and battery life to beat the best PCs.
FOR
Remarkably fast performance
Strong legacy app support
Amazingly long battery life
Comfy Magic Keyboard
Improved webcam
AGAINST
Still has thick bezels
Light on ports
"The MacBook Air's performance — powered by the M1 processor and 16GB of RAM — is phenomenal. When I split its screen between 20 Chrome (Intel, not Universal) tabs and a 1080p YouTube video — plus Apple's Mail and Photos app, Pixelmator (again, an Intel app) and 1Password (Intel, again) in the background, I never saw anything close to a hiccup. Oh, and in the background, 20GB of 4K video was being AirDrop transferred, while everything stayed smooth and stable."
Upgradeability isn't of value to people looking for performance, long battery life, and very quiet operation.You need to move your thought processes into the 21st Century...
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.
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.
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.
The X1 Nano battery size is similar to the one in the MBA. So any battery benefit the MBA has is because of the M1 chip. BTW, what does battery life has to do with this?
Also, from your post I could understand that consumers benefit outside the U.S. would be better with a non Apple device, since they have no easy access to an Apple Store for service, is that right? So we could say that there is value for consumers outside of the U.S. for a device that's easy to service, right?
Apple Stores are not so uncommon outside of the USA, the main cities of the majority of developed counties have them, and most major cities in Australia, Canada and Western Europe. If you're unlucky enough to be a way from one of them then you'll have to rely on third party or mail in repair I guess, which will vary by location. Authorised third party repair shops should have access to most of the same parts as Apple, though will probably need to order in so may take longer.
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.
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.
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.
That's bullshit.
1) The Thinkpad Nano runs 13 -18 hours. Any other false claims?
2) Go take your MacBook to an Apple store and ask them to upgrade the SSD or Ram -- they'll tell you to buy a new one.
LOL!
Show me the link where a reviewer got 13-18 hours in a real test. Most get 7 to 8 hours.
The MacBook Air now has the speed and battery life to beat the best PCs.
FOR
Remarkably fast performance
Strong legacy app support
Amazingly long battery life
Comfy Magic Keyboard
Improved webcam
AGAINST
Still has thick bezels
Light on ports
"The MacBook Air's performance — powered by the M1 processor and 16GB of RAM — is phenomenal. When I split its screen between 20 Chrome (Intel, not Universal) tabs and a 1080p YouTube video — plus Apple's Mail and Photos app, Pixelmator (again, an Intel app) and 1Password (Intel, again) in the background, I never saw anything close to a hiccup. Oh, and in the background, 20GB of 4K video was being AirDrop transferred, while everything stayed smooth and stable."
Upgradeability isn't of value to people looking for performance, long battery life, and very quiet operation.You need to move your thought processes into the 21st Century...
Users not seeing the battery life that your reviewers are.
Like. you said, battery life is dependent in the workload. Some reviewers and users will get 8-9, other will get more than that. So it looks like there are cases where the X1 Nano will have +9 hours in battery life. Still, this has no relation to the original point about repairability, so why bring this?
Second, I didn't say the the X1 Nano is a better device overall. I was very specific that is a better device from repairability, construction and weight POV, since it was related to the original discussion.
Such a shame. Another thread ruined by GeorgeBMac. :sigh:
I'm a newbie in this forum, but I have decided to stop contributing to those discussions from now on. My apologies for feeding.
I've mainly used Thinkpads (X,T&P) for many many years. I even had the model Thinkpad copied the design from. Good Windows machines, but not at the same standard as MacBook Pro, and that's been the case since Unibody came. Thinkpad is not what I am here for.
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.
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.
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.
The X1 Nano battery size is similar to the one in the MBA. So any battery benefit the MBA has is because of the M1 chip. BTW, what does battery life has to do with this?
Also, from your post I could understand that consumers benefit outside the U.S. would be better with a non Apple device, since they have no easy access to an Apple Store for service, is that right? So we could say that there is value for consumers outside of the U.S. for a device that's easy to service, right?
Apple Stores are not so uncommon outside of the USA, the main cities of the majority of developed counties have them, and most major cities in Australia, Canada and Western Europe. If you're unlucky enough to be a way from one of them then you'll have to rely on third party or mail in repair I guess, which will vary by location. Authorised third party repair shops should have access to most of the same parts as Apple, though will probably need to order in so may take longer.
I know that there are Apple stores around the world, but that doesn't means everyone has easy access to them. For example, Brazil only have two stores, Mexico only one, same as South Korea. My point is that a device that's easy to service benefits business, but also consumers. For example, if by accident I spill liquid in my MBP keyboard and live in country without an Apple Store, it will be an issue, since they are difficult to service. Compare that to a ThinkPad, and you can see the difference. Lenovo even has the service manual in the website so the user / technician can service the device. Personally I don't see how this can be bad or negative for consumers.
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.
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.
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.
The X1 Nano battery size is similar to the one in the MBA. So any battery benefit the MBA has is because of the M1 chip. BTW, what does battery life has to do with this?
Also, from your post I could understand that consumers benefit outside the U.S. would be better with a non Apple device, since they have no easy access to an Apple Store for service, is that right? So we could say that there is value for consumers outside of the U.S. for a device that's easy to service, right?
Apple Stores are not so uncommon outside of the USA, the main cities of the majority of developed counties have them, and most major cities in Australia, Canada and Western Europe. If you're unlucky enough to be a way from one of them then you'll have to rely on third party or mail in repair I guess, which will vary by location. Authorised third party repair shops should have access to most of the same parts as Apple, though will probably need to order in so may take longer.
I know that there are Apple stores around the world, but that doesn't means everyone has easy access to them. For example, Brazil only have two stores, Mexico only one, same as South Korea. My point is that a device that's easy to service benefits business, but also consumers. For example, if by accident I spill liquid in my MBP keyboard and live in country without an Apple Store, it will be an issue, since they are difficult to service. Compare that to a ThinkPad, and you can see the difference. Lenovo even has the service manual in the website so the user / technician can service the device. Personally I don't see how this can be bad or negative for consumers.
The majority of Apple's customers will be fairly local to an Apple Store though. I'm not saying they don't care at all about customers in other places, but let's just say there's an element of proportionality at play.
And try not to spill liquid on your keyboard. Even if you have a Lenovo you very much will not enjoy the experience.
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.
How many cheap debate tactics can you fit into one post? I count three. No, four.
1) Appeal to majority ("others have pointed out"). 2) False comparision/dilemma (comparing MBP to Thinkpads directly). 3) Strawman ("you need to give up on that argument"....one I wasn't making). 4) Strawman #2 ("Obviously you think"). Maybe even 5) Appeal to authority (Andrew who said....).
I was not comparing MBP's to Thinkpads. If a Thinkpad is a better option for you because it's upgradable, thin and light, good for you. What I was doing was illustrating that Apple's products have indisputably gotten lighter and thinner. This was in direct response to your claim that there was no benefit to the consumer. Clearly, that's incorrect, especially for portables. I also illustrated (somewhat anecdotally) that at the same time, their build quality, feel and reliability have improved. Here again, this is an obvious benefit to the consumer.
Please put away the "you obviously think" straw man. I didn't say Andrew was just being critical of Apple. I'm not even sure I'd say that about you. You do seem completely entrenched, myopic and needlessly argumentative on this point, though. A perfect example is your last sentence. A poor design choice? No, it's design choice you don't like. And that's fine. But running around claiming it has no benefit to consumers, you'll have to throw out your laptop, etc? Please. Oh, and I'll point out.... I find it hilarious and bizarre that someone would accuse Apple of making a "poor design choice" because their $1500 portable doesn't meet the same needs as their $5000 desktop.
I don't know who you're trying to convince here. You're certainly not going to change Apple's mind. I doubt you're changing too many minds here.
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.
How many cheap debate tactics can you fit into one post? I count three. No, four.
1) Appeal to majority ("others have pointed out"). 2) False comparision/dilemma (comparing MBP to Thinkpads directly). 3) Strawman ("you need to give up on that argument"....one I wasn't making). 4) Strawman #2 ("Obviously you think"). Maybe even 5) Appeal to authority (Andrew who said....).
I was not comparing MBP's to Thinkpads. If a Thinkpad is a better option for you because it's upgradable, thin and light, good for you. What I was doing was illustrating that Apple's products have indisputably gotten lighter and thinner. This was in direct response to your claim that there was no benefit to the consumer. Clearly, that's incorrect, especially for portables. I also illustrated (somewhat anecdotally) that at the same time, their build quality, feel and reliability have improved. Here again, this is an obvious benefit to the consumer.
Please put away the "you obviously think" straw man. I didn't say Andrew was just being critical of Apple. I'm not even sure I'd say that about you. You do seem completely entrenched, myopic and needlessly argumentative on this point, though. A perfect example is your last sentence. A poor design choice? No, it's design choice you don't like. And that's fine. But running around claiming it has no benefit to consumers, you'll have to throw out your laptop, etc? Please. Oh, and I'll point out.... I find it hilarious and bizarre that someone would accuse Apple of making a "poor design choice" because their $1500 portable doesn't meet the same needs as their $5000 desktop.
I don't know who you're trying to convince here. You're certainly not going to change Apple's mind. I doubt you're changing too many minds here.
I disagree with you on a lot of things, but this is a really good and reasonable post, and hits every nail on the head. +1
Such a shame. Another thread ruined by GeorgeBMac. :sigh:
Really? True, that whole thread is a bit silly, but I find the corporate Micro$haft & Android shills to be the very worst, most annoyingly because even through they're blocked people always respond defensively or with corrections to their silly juvenile taunts with requotes, sort of defeating the entire purpose of blocking.
I wonder if these "M" chips can be clustered? A Mac Pro with 4, 6, 8 chips in some sort of cluster arrangement might be a good way to get the M-based Pro perform the same as it's top line Intel self.
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.
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.
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.
The X1 Nano battery size is similar to the one in the MBA. So any battery benefit the MBA has is because of the M1 chip. BTW, what does battery life has to do with this?
Also, from your post I could understand that consumers benefit outside the U.S. would be better with a non Apple device, since they have no easy access to an Apple Store for service, is that right? So we could say that there is value for consumers outside of the U.S. for a device that's easy to service, right?
Apple Stores are not so uncommon outside of the USA, the main cities of the majority of developed counties have them, and most major cities in Australia, Canada and Western Europe. If you're unlucky enough to be a way from one of them then you'll have to rely on third party or mail in repair I guess, which will vary by location. Authorised third party repair shops should have access to most of the same parts as Apple, though will probably need to order in so may take longer.
I know that there are Apple stores around the world, but that doesn't means everyone has easy access to them. For example, Brazil only have two stores, Mexico only one, same as South Korea. My point is that a device that's easy to service benefits business, but also consumers. For example, if by accident I spill liquid in my MBP keyboard and live in country without an Apple Store, it will be an issue, since they are difficult to service. Compare that to a ThinkPad, and you can see the difference. Lenovo even has the service manual in the website so the user / technician can service the device. Personally I don't see how this can be bad or negative for consumers.
The majority of Apple's customers will be fairly local to an Apple Store though. I'm not saying they don't care at all about customers in other places, but let's just say there's an element of proportionality at play.
And try not to spill liquid on your keyboard. Even if you have a Lenovo you very much will not enjoy the experience.
I agree the most Apple customer are in the U.S. and make sense for them to have their stores here. Still, my point is that there are cases were a device that's easy to service, as ThinkPad can be positive for consumers (even though ThinkPad is not a consumer brand). For example the MBP 2017 have the keyboard glued to the keyboard.
Do you really think it's a good idea? Clearly not, specially with the issues we saw in the past years with keyboards and how expensive it's to replace. Compare that to what the X1 Nano service manual show, where you can replace the keyboard and battery separately.
And maybe you don't know, but ThinkPads have spill resistant keyboards, including the X1 Nano.
Even if the keyboard or trackpad fails because of the spill, you can easily replace them.
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.
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.
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.
The X1 Nano battery size is similar to the one in the MBA. So any battery benefit the MBA has is because of the M1 chip. BTW, what does battery life has to do with this?
Also, from your post I could understand that consumers benefit outside the U.S. would be better with a non Apple device, since they have no easy access to an Apple Store for service, is that right? So we could say that there is value for consumers outside of the U.S. for a device that's easy to service, right?
Apple Stores are not so uncommon outside of the USA, the main cities of the majority of developed counties have them, and most major cities in Australia, Canada and Western Europe. If you're unlucky enough to be a way from one of them then you'll have to rely on third party or mail in repair I guess, which will vary by location. Authorised third party repair shops should have access to most of the same parts as Apple, though will probably need to order in so may take longer.
I know that there are Apple stores around the world, but that doesn't means everyone has easy access to them. For example, Brazil only have two stores, Mexico only one, same as South Korea. My point is that a device that's easy to service benefits business, but also consumers. For example, if by accident I spill liquid in my MBP keyboard and live in country without an Apple Store, it will be an issue, since they are difficult to service. Compare that to a ThinkPad, and you can see the difference. Lenovo even has the service manual in the website so the user / technician can service the device. Personally I don't see how this can be bad or negative for consumers.
The majority of Apple's customers will be fairly local to an Apple Store though. I'm not saying they don't care at all about customers in other places, but let's just say there's an element of proportionality at play.
And try not to spill liquid on your keyboard. Even if you have a Lenovo you very much will not enjoy the experience.
I agree the most Apple customer are in the U.S. and make sense for them to have their stores here. Still, my point is that there are cases were a device that's easy to service, as ThinkPad can be positive for consumers (even though ThinkPad is not a consumer brand). For example the MBP 2017 have the keyboard glued to the keyboard.
Do you really think it's a good idea? Clearly not, specially with the issues we saw in the past years with keyboards and how expensive it's to replace. Compare that to what the X1 Nano service manual show, where you can replace the keyboard and battery separately.
And maybe you don't know, but ThinkPads have spill resistant keyboards, including the X1 Nano.
Even if the keyboard or trackpad fails because of the spill, you can easily replace them.
I don't think many people defend the butterfly keyboard design any more, but we were talking about RAM, storage and the M1 SOC.
Gluing is a bit more divisive. You're right in that it's less repairable, but there's also a strong argument that gluing improves overall integrity meaning that you may not need to repair it nearly as quickly. It's a trade off either way, and some people will likely get burned by misfortune.
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.
How many cheap debate tactics can you fit into one post? I count three. No, four.
1) Appeal to majority ("others have pointed out"). 2) False comparision/dilemma (comparing MBP to Thinkpads directly). 3) Strawman ("you need to give up on that argument"....one I wasn't making). 4) Strawman #2 ("Obviously you think"). Maybe even 5) Appeal to authority (Andrew who said....).
I was not comparing MBP's to Thinkpads. If a Thinkpad is a better option for you because it's upgradable, thin and light, good for you. What I was doing was illustrating that Apple's products have indisputably gotten lighter and thinner. This was in direct response to your claim that there was no benefit to the consumer. Clearly, that's incorrect, especially for portables. I also illustrated (somewhat anecdotally) that at the same time, their build quality, feel and reliability have improved. Here again, this is an obvious benefit to the consumer.
Please put away the "you obviously think" straw man. I didn't say Andrew was just being critical of Apple. I'm not even sure I'd say that about you. You do seem completely entrenched, myopic and needlessly argumentative on this point, though. A perfect example is your last sentence. A poor design choice? No, it's design choice you don't like. And that's fine. But running around claiming it has no benefit to consumers, you'll have to throw out your laptop, etc? Please. Oh, and I'll point out.... I find it hilarious and bizarre that someone would accuse Apple of making a "poor design choice" because their $1500 portable doesn't meet the same needs as their $5000 desktop.
I don't know who you're trying to convince here. You're certainly not going to change Apple's mind. I doubt you're changing too many minds here.
I disagree with you on a lot of things, but this is a really good and reasonable post, and hits every nail on the head. +1
Thanks man. I thought the same about your posts on this topic.
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.
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.
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.
The X1 Nano battery size is similar to the one in the MBA. So any battery benefit the MBA has is because of the M1 chip. BTW, what does battery life has to do with this?
Also, from your post I could understand that consumers benefit outside the U.S. would be better with a non Apple device, since they have no easy access to an Apple Store for service, is that right? So we could say that there is value for consumers outside of the U.S. for a device that's easy to service, right?
Apple Stores are not so uncommon outside of the USA, the main cities of the majority of developed counties have them, and most major cities in Australia, Canada and Western Europe. If you're unlucky enough to be a way from one of them then you'll have to rely on third party or mail in repair I guess, which will vary by location. Authorised third party repair shops should have access to most of the same parts as Apple, though will probably need to order in so may take longer.
I know that there are Apple stores around the world, but that doesn't means everyone has easy access to them. For example, Brazil only have two stores, Mexico only one, same as South Korea. My point is that a device that's easy to service benefits business, but also consumers. For example, if by accident I spill liquid in my MBP keyboard and live in country without an Apple Store, it will be an issue, since they are difficult to service. Compare that to a ThinkPad, and you can see the difference. Lenovo even has the service manual in the website so the user / technician can service the device. Personally I don't see how this can be bad or negative for consumers.
The majority of Apple's customers will be fairly local to an Apple Store though. I'm not saying they don't care at all about customers in other places, but let's just say there's an element of proportionality at play.
And try not to spill liquid on your keyboard. Even if you have a Lenovo you very much will not enjoy the experience.
I agree the most Apple customer are in the U.S. and make sense for them to have their stores here. Still, my point is that there are cases were a device that's easy to service, as ThinkPad can be positive for consumers (even though ThinkPad is not a consumer brand). For example the MBP 2017 have the keyboard glued to the keyboard.
Do you really think it's a good idea? Clearly not, specially with the issues we saw in the past years with keyboards and how expensive it's to replace. Compare that to what the X1 Nano service manual show, where you can replace the keyboard and battery separately.
And maybe you don't know, but ThinkPads have spill resistant keyboards, including the X1 Nano.
Even if the keyboard or trackpad fails because of the spill, you can easily replace them.
I don't think many people defend the butterfly keyboard design any more, but we were talking about RAM, storage and the M1 SOC.
Gluing is a bit more divisive. You're right in that it's less repairable, but there's also a strong argument that gluing improves overall integrity meaning that you may not need to repair it nearly as quickly. It's a trade off either way, and some people will likely get burned by misfortune.
My comments were related to service a device overall, not specifically about RAM, storage and processor. That's the reason I didn't mention anything related to upgrading. Still, the X1 Nano has a replaceable SSD, that is pretty useful when you have a logic board failure, and just swap to the new one. In a MBA / MBP you still have to recover the user data. Again, my point is that upgrades is not the only benefit of a device that's easy to service. And the issue with the butterfly keyboard with a glued battery is an excellent example on why a device that's easy service is a better option, at least IMO. Also that you don't need to glue / sealed device to have a light and small notebook.
Comments
Show me the link where a reviewer got 13-18 hours in a real test. Most get 7 to 8 hours.
https://www.theverge.com/22335874/lenovo-thinkpad-x1-nano-laptop-windows-business-intel-review-price-specs
GOOD STUFF
BAD STUFF
Mac Book Air
https://www.tomsguide.com/reviews/macbook-air-2020-m1
OUR VERDICT
The MacBook Air now has the speed and battery life to beat the best PCs.
FOR
AGAINST
"The MacBook Air's performance — powered by the M1 processor and 16GB of RAM — is phenomenal. When I split its screen between 20 Chrome (Intel, not Universal) tabs and a 1080p YouTube video — plus Apple's Mail and Photos app, Pixelmator (again, an Intel app) and 1Password (Intel, again) in the background, I never saw anything close to a hiccup. Oh, and in the background, 20GB of 4K video was being AirDrop transferred, while everything stayed smooth and stable."
Upgradeability isn't of value to people looking for performance, long battery life, and very quiet operation.You need to move your thought processes into the 21st Century...
You can't replace the screen on a Lenovo Nano. You can't replace the motherboard. You can't put wheels on it. What a failure.
Also, from your post I could understand that consumers benefit outside the U.S. would be better with a non Apple device, since they have no easy access to an Apple Store for service, is that right? So we could say that there is value for consumers outside of the U.S. for a device that's easy to service, right?
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Nano Review | PCMag
PC World had it at 14 hours,
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Nano review: Lenovo drops the mic with its light, fast, and long-lasting ThinkPad | PCWorld
LaptopMag and Ubergizmo had it at close to 12 hours,
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Nano Review | Ubergizmo
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Nano review | Laptop Mag
Gizmondo had 16 hours,
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Nano Review: The Lightest Laptop Winner (gizmodo.com)
And I know that the MBA has better battery life / performance. But design wise, weight and construction, the X1 Nano is a better device. Maybe the perfect device would be a X1 Nano with an M1 chip. Too bad this will never exist.
Apple quotes it at 18 hours.
My original source stated 7 to 8 hours
Who to believe? It depends on the workload, and I'd argue that the M1 Mac Book Air would trounce the X1 Nano on native Mac OS, not Rosetta workloads.
As far as the X1 Nano being the better device, I not only disagree, but I will let the market decide that.
reddit comments
https://www.reddit.com/r/thinkpad/comments/l4wemt/x1_nano_battery_life/
Users not seeing the battery life that your reviewers are.
https://www.thebalancesmb.com/apple-retail-stores-global-locations-2892925
Second, I didn't say the the X1 Nano is a better device overall. I was very specific that is a better device from repairability, construction and weight POV, since it was related to the original discussion.
I've mainly used Thinkpads (X,T&P) for many many years. I even had the model Thinkpad copied the design from. Good Windows machines, but not at the same standard as MacBook Pro, and that's been the case since Unibody came. Thinkpad is not what I am here for.
And try not to spill liquid on your keyboard. Even if you have a Lenovo you very much will not enjoy the experience.
How many cheap debate tactics can you fit into one post? I count three. No, four.
1) Appeal to majority ("others have pointed out").
2) False comparision/dilemma (comparing MBP to Thinkpads directly).
3) Strawman ("you need to give up on that argument"....one I wasn't making).
4) Strawman #2 ("Obviously you think").
Maybe even 5) Appeal to authority (Andrew who said....).
I was not comparing MBP's to Thinkpads. If a Thinkpad is a better option for you because it's upgradable, thin and light, good for you. What I was doing was illustrating that Apple's products have indisputably gotten lighter and thinner. This was in direct response to your claim that there was no benefit to the consumer. Clearly, that's incorrect, especially for portables. I also illustrated (somewhat anecdotally) that at the same time, their build quality, feel and reliability have improved. Here again, this is an obvious benefit to the consumer.
Please put away the "you obviously think" straw man. I didn't say Andrew was just being critical of Apple. I'm not even sure I'd say that about you. You do seem completely entrenched, myopic and needlessly argumentative on this point, though. A perfect example is your last sentence. A poor design choice? No, it's design choice you don't like. And that's fine. But running around claiming it has no benefit to consumers, you'll have to throw out your laptop, etc? Please. Oh, and I'll point out.... I find it hilarious and bizarre that someone would accuse Apple of making a "poor design choice" because their $1500 portable doesn't meet the same needs as their $5000 desktop.
I don't know who you're trying to convince here. You're certainly not going to change Apple's mind. I doubt you're changing too many minds here.
Apple Engineers Its Own Downfall With the Macbook Pro Keyboard - iFixit
Do you really think it's a good idea? Clearly not, specially with the issues we saw in the past years with keyboards and how expensive it's to replace. Compare that to what the X1 Nano service manual show, where you can replace the keyboard and battery separately.
And maybe you don't know, but ThinkPads have spill resistant keyboards, including the X1 Nano.
Even if the keyboard or trackpad fails because of the spill, you can easily replace them.
Gluing is a bit more divisive. You're right in that it's less repairable, but there's also a strong argument that gluing improves overall integrity meaning that you may not need to repair it nearly as quickly. It's a trade off either way, and some people will likely get burned by misfortune.