Discussion on:
View:
Show:
Its this type hardware, purposely designed to be more expensive that its worth to repair or upgrade that has made me an enemy of Apple. I love my old ipods and macs but I refuse to buy another while Apple designed them to screw the customer out of basic function and maintainability.
1. The HDD - never mind it means you're locked into Apple's walled garden. Backups, or having a redundant drive to use if the main one fails is no longer an option. And based on some reviews for some SSDs, the long-term quality is still questionable. Pros need uptime. Having to rely on Big Brother Apple as a crutch takes away my freedom.
2. Gluing the battery? Can't get to the trackpad? See point 1 above, since these things are throwaway garbage now, that's going to become a mess. And I've used Time Capsule and Apple's Cmd-T bootup procedure to transfer apps. It's not perfect either, despite making it simple and foolproof to run.
3. People who say "freedom not to buy", "choose not to buy, it's that simple!", are being very one-dimensional in their thinking. Life isn't as simple as they make it out to be, and when other historical names prattle about freedom and leeches but then become hypocrites when their own beliefs stop being convenient for them... maybe if these people did actual work and lived under actual conditions and needs instead of making glib generalizations that only satisfy egos but nothing pragmatic, they would see how their own mindset might not be certain or so simple after all...
4. Based on reports of 2009 MacBookPros (MBP) getting up to 98C when rendering/doing math-intensive work/etc, 2010 MBPs going over 105C (seriously overheating - there are many news articles), and even my 2011MBP doing 90C... and there's a place that discusses how to do the work correctly -- for a $2500 laptop, Apple's chosen supplier chooses to build them exceedingly poorly and I've not mentioned uneven backlighting, warped screws, puddles of grease, and other things that entities like iFixit quickly found as well. But the place I'm referring to is called my2011macbookpro and is worth seeing.
5. Commodity parts at premiere prices. Not going to fly, especially as IBM sued Compaq for using off the shelf parts to clone a PC and lost. And don't tell me "Apple is the BMW of computers" - not when the BMW uses the same lame 6-cylinder engine design as my Ford Fusion. There is nothing worth the ramped up cost. Apple is trying to bend the reality to fit their greed. See point 1 above, it is all about their walled garden.
2. Gluing the battery? Can't get to the trackpad? See point 1 above, since these things are throwaway garbage now, that's going to become a mess. And I've used Time Capsule and Apple's Cmd-T bootup procedure to transfer apps. It's not perfect either, despite making it simple and foolproof to run.
3. People who say "freedom not to buy", "choose not to buy, it's that simple!", are being very one-dimensional in their thinking. Life isn't as simple as they make it out to be, and when other historical names prattle about freedom and leeches but then become hypocrites when their own beliefs stop being convenient for them... maybe if these people did actual work and lived under actual conditions and needs instead of making glib generalizations that only satisfy egos but nothing pragmatic, they would see how their own mindset might not be certain or so simple after all...
4. Based on reports of 2009 MacBookPros (MBP) getting up to 98C when rendering/doing math-intensive work/etc, 2010 MBPs going over 105C (seriously overheating - there are many news articles), and even my 2011MBP doing 90C... and there's a place that discusses how to do the work correctly -- for a $2500 laptop, Apple's chosen supplier chooses to build them exceedingly poorly and I've not mentioned uneven backlighting, warped screws, puddles of grease, and other things that entities like iFixit quickly found as well. But the place I'm referring to is called my2011macbookpro and is worth seeing.
5. Commodity parts at premiere prices. Not going to fly, especially as IBM sued Compaq for using off the shelf parts to clone a PC and lost. And don't tell me "Apple is the BMW of computers" - not when the BMW uses the same lame 6-cylinder engine design as my Ford Fusion. There is nothing worth the ramped up cost. Apple is trying to bend the reality to fit their greed. See point 1 above, it is all about their walled garden.
If I bought a Retina MB and there was an issue, does it really get repaired or replaced? I am skeptical of repair being an option. How does one get the battery out and replaced? Soldered components?
Serious, serious, concerns.....
Serious, serious, concerns.....
... engineering technician, I personally know that with the right tools anything can be unsoldered and resoldered; it's just that not every technician or shop will have the right tools. Here we're looking at a teardown by a shop that, in all honesty, doesn't have any documentation on the device and chose to do things its own way. I won't deny their observations, but Apple could well have chosen specific adhesives for their solubility to a specific solvent as far as the batteries are concerned and it's quite obvious they didn't want people mucking around inside the hardware in the same manner that Nintendo, 30 years ago, used security screws and other gimmicks to prevent users and unauthorized shops from repairing their game consoles. The CPU for the SuperNES was soldered in and the best way to remove it was with a clip-equipped hot air nozzle which, to be blunt, almost no private shop used. The owner of the shop I operated refused to purchase the needed tools claiming that solder-wick and a skilled tech could do it just as quickly. He was wrong, but I couldn't convince him of it.
Serious concerns? Hardly. Apple merely wants to make sure only properly-trained people go inside their machines.
Your question is a valid one that I frequently brought up to my customers in the shop; when does the cost of repair exceed the value of the device? $200 to replace the battery is nothing when you're working on a newer $2000 device, but if the machine is near the end of its functional lifespan where its own value may be $500 or less, then maybe replacing it is the better choice, hm?
Serious concerns? Hardly. Apple merely wants to make sure only properly-trained people go inside their machines.
Your question is a valid one that I frequently brought up to my customers in the shop; when does the cost of repair exceed the value of the device? $200 to replace the battery is nothing when you're working on a newer $2000 device, but if the machine is near the end of its functional lifespan where its own value may be $500 or less, then maybe replacing it is the better choice, hm?
You should have let the owner pull at least one LSI DIP, he'd have changed his mind very quickly.
You'll be able to recognize the very few game consoles I worked on by the after-market sockets for the CPUs. I was relatively lucky, though, because I had access to a Pace 200 when I was working on those. No need for solder-wick, desoldering bulbs, or (my personal favorite) the Soldapullt.
You'll be able to recognize the very few game consoles I worked on by the after-market sockets for the CPUs. I was relatively lucky, though, because I had access to a Pace 200 when I was working on those. No need for solder-wick, desoldering bulbs, or (my personal favorite) the Soldapullt.
What if you found yourself overcharged and/or under-repaired and had to go back again and again because the part was no longer under warranty? Would you want to return to them. At least there are lots of other authorised Ford repair places. But when you have to ship your Mac back, at your cost, and they lose it or "forget" what was supposed to be repaired, what do you do? And you would recommend your client to dump a still durable and perhaps functional machine because it is getting "old" and buy another over-priced Mac because "it can't be repaired? No wonder there are mountains of Macs sitting everywhere on this planet because of this kind of thinking. Yes, and other still functional electronics which any kid in Africa would love to have and could get repaired/fixed by the local shoemaker, are just "dumped". We're going to have to live a failing world ecosystem caused by such thinking. Why don't you do your bit to make the whole world better and get real, that is, real worried.
I bought my Jeep brand-new in '07 and it has yet to visit any other shop than the one I purchased it at and I haven't had any reason to complain about that service. Sure, it may be a little bit more expensive, but I'm assured of getting the work done right or having them re-do the task right then if it's wrong at no extra charge. Apple usually treats their customers the same way; give good service, keep loyal customers.
Now, if I had bought my G3 iBook at 10-years-old and needed a repair, then, like my Ford truck at 22, maybe not. It's so far out of warranty that quite honestly anything could be wrong and just as honestly the odds of them having factory-built repair parts on hand gets pretty slim; just letting them 'sit' on your truck can cost you money in some cases. You're almost always assured that any repair is going to be major, like the complete replacement of the front brake system on that Ford truck before I could even drive it home as well as finding out I had to replace one of the exhaust manifolds. No, I didn't go to the dealership for those repairs but I can't say I saved any money on the jobs either--they were still expensive.
I have never really considered the Mac overpriced except when I simply couldn't afford them and had to 'make do' with what I could find. I got lucky and bought my first Mac--used--for $200 and it served me well until I could afford to replace it with a newer model. I never had to have it repaired. That, by the way, was an early Mac Plus--only the third or fourth model made and retailed for nearly $2000 when new. Sure, it had a floppy drive, but I was able to attach a 40MB hard drive for file storage with no issues.
Only once in all my years of owning Macs did I ever have a catastrophic failure and that was with the third-gen iMac; I ordered it new and had it fail out of the box. Apple acknowledged the problem and recommended two different authorized repair centers in my area to take it to. Both repair centers insisted on a troubleshooting fee despite Apple's written statement that the warranty would cover all fees and repairs. I chose NOT to use either shop and advised Apple of this practice. Believe it or not, that is one reason why Apple chose to go Brick and Mortar--they simply couldn't trust many of their Authorized Repair Centers. Instead, Apple cross-shipped me a brand-new unit, waiting until I was happy with the replacement before requiring me to return the defective model. This, by the way, was in 1999 when they were still very tiny compared to the competition. Apple has never given me reason to dislike their hardware, their OS or their services.
I'm more worried about the cheapskates that only buy the cheapest, most commodity parts and materials available. I don't want to trust any of my information to a device that could fail even hours after purchase without backup. That's why I normally don't buy Ford (their trucks do have a better reputation) and that's normally why I don't buy either HP or Dell--much less any of those other brands. When I do buy a Windows PC, I don't buy the cheapest model they make, either. I tend to go for the mid-range models that are priced only slightly lower than an 'equivalent' Mac. These models tend to last at least a few years longer.
Now, if I had bought my G3 iBook at 10-years-old and needed a repair, then, like my Ford truck at 22, maybe not. It's so far out of warranty that quite honestly anything could be wrong and just as honestly the odds of them having factory-built repair parts on hand gets pretty slim; just letting them 'sit' on your truck can cost you money in some cases. You're almost always assured that any repair is going to be major, like the complete replacement of the front brake system on that Ford truck before I could even drive it home as well as finding out I had to replace one of the exhaust manifolds. No, I didn't go to the dealership for those repairs but I can't say I saved any money on the jobs either--they were still expensive.
I have never really considered the Mac overpriced except when I simply couldn't afford them and had to 'make do' with what I could find. I got lucky and bought my first Mac--used--for $200 and it served me well until I could afford to replace it with a newer model. I never had to have it repaired. That, by the way, was an early Mac Plus--only the third or fourth model made and retailed for nearly $2000 when new. Sure, it had a floppy drive, but I was able to attach a 40MB hard drive for file storage with no issues.
Only once in all my years of owning Macs did I ever have a catastrophic failure and that was with the third-gen iMac; I ordered it new and had it fail out of the box. Apple acknowledged the problem and recommended two different authorized repair centers in my area to take it to. Both repair centers insisted on a troubleshooting fee despite Apple's written statement that the warranty would cover all fees and repairs. I chose NOT to use either shop and advised Apple of this practice. Believe it or not, that is one reason why Apple chose to go Brick and Mortar--they simply couldn't trust many of their Authorized Repair Centers. Instead, Apple cross-shipped me a brand-new unit, waiting until I was happy with the replacement before requiring me to return the defective model. This, by the way, was in 1999 when they were still very tiny compared to the competition. Apple has never given me reason to dislike their hardware, their OS or their services.
I'm more worried about the cheapskates that only buy the cheapest, most commodity parts and materials available. I don't want to trust any of my information to a device that could fail even hours after purchase without backup. That's why I normally don't buy Ford (their trucks do have a better reputation) and that's normally why I don't buy either HP or Dell--much less any of those other brands. When I do buy a Windows PC, I don't buy the cheapest model they make, either. I tend to go for the mid-range models that are priced only slightly lower than an 'equivalent' Mac. These models tend to last at least a few years longer.
First... A hats off salute to Bill Detwiler and Tech Republic for an excellent tear down and honest review of the "New" Mac Book Pro.
This article is another reason why I will never own anything made by Apple. When you purchase Apple, you are stuck in the Apple world of Proprietary BS. An endless list of special cables, connections, charging devices, and equipment. Apple has never played nice with others and treats consumers like crap. Everything you do with Apple (and I dont care which device you want to talk about) costs more and is over priced for what you get.
Batteries (I dont care who makes them) **FAIL**. Its a fact of life. Whether its the Iphone Ipad or the "new" Mac Book Pro, a consumer cannot replace the battery. That is just wrong. To top it off, in the new Mac Book Pro they glue the battery in place.
Soldering memory in place is insane. Every computer I have owned has had memory upgraded or replaced at least once. Memory also fails. Not a sure thing like a battery but still significant enough to make this move by Apple idiotic at best and irresponsible at worst.
A proprietary hard drive.... What a shocker.... Another bad idea but no surprise. I have upgraded or replaced hard drives multiple times. To limit me to Apple hard drives only is completely ridiculous. If the initial price doesnt drain you... buying Apples add-ons and upgrades will. True one can buy external hard drives from third party vendors or you can store everything out in the i-Cloud (again more money). But thats no help if that proprietary drive ever fails.
Apple can keep all of their i-Crap. I personally cannot wait for the day Samsung or some other company finishes off this company once and for all!!!!
This article is another reason why I will never own anything made by Apple. When you purchase Apple, you are stuck in the Apple world of Proprietary BS. An endless list of special cables, connections, charging devices, and equipment. Apple has never played nice with others and treats consumers like crap. Everything you do with Apple (and I dont care which device you want to talk about) costs more and is over priced for what you get.
Batteries (I dont care who makes them) **FAIL**. Its a fact of life. Whether its the Iphone Ipad or the "new" Mac Book Pro, a consumer cannot replace the battery. That is just wrong. To top it off, in the new Mac Book Pro they glue the battery in place.
Soldering memory in place is insane. Every computer I have owned has had memory upgraded or replaced at least once. Memory also fails. Not a sure thing like a battery but still significant enough to make this move by Apple idiotic at best and irresponsible at worst.
A proprietary hard drive.... What a shocker.... Another bad idea but no surprise. I have upgraded or replaced hard drives multiple times. To limit me to Apple hard drives only is completely ridiculous. If the initial price doesnt drain you... buying Apples add-ons and upgrades will. True one can buy external hard drives from third party vendors or you can store everything out in the i-Cloud (again more money). But thats no help if that proprietary drive ever fails.
Apple can keep all of their i-Crap. I personally cannot wait for the day Samsung or some other company finishes off this company once and for all!!!!
Apple has never played nice with others and treats consumers like crap.
The more accurate statement would be, "... treats techies like crap," because the consumer, Apple's primary customer, absolutely couldn't care care less that they can't crawl around inside their machines. Apple is saying that it's the techies that do most of the damage that causes a machine to go in for repair in the first place. Personally, I agree with them.
Why? Because through personal experience the machines that last the longest--whether speaking OS X or Windows machines, are the ones that never get opened up. I have a G3 iBook, a G4 Mac Mini, a first-gen MacBook, two iMac Extreme 24" models, two first-gen iPads, 4 iPhones (two now used as iPad Touch) and 4 iPods and with the exception of the iMacs needing replacement hard drives, not a single one of them has been opened for maintenance or upgrades of any kind. That's 12 years of Mac ownership where I haven't had to pay a single penny for support and haven't had to crawl around inside them for any reason. In other words, Apple's machines are flat-out designed to be left alone.
You, the techie, are not the intended customer for Apple's products--at least, not in the sense you'd like to believe. A MacBook Pro is not intended for the "pro" techie but for the enterprise professional--the doctors, lawyers, engineers and executives. Photographers, videographers, musicians, none of them have a need or a desire to know how their computers work--so long as they do work.
Fine, you won't buy a Mac? More power to you. Apple could care less whether YOU buy one of their machines or not. On the other hand, the people who really count--the consumer--they care a lot about and do everything they can to offer the best product and the best service they can within the limitations that they refuse to be defrauded by people who intentionally--by whatever means--damage their machines.
The more accurate statement would be, "... treats techies like crap," because the consumer, Apple's primary customer, absolutely couldn't care care less that they can't crawl around inside their machines. Apple is saying that it's the techies that do most of the damage that causes a machine to go in for repair in the first place. Personally, I agree with them.
Why? Because through personal experience the machines that last the longest--whether speaking OS X or Windows machines, are the ones that never get opened up. I have a G3 iBook, a G4 Mac Mini, a first-gen MacBook, two iMac Extreme 24" models, two first-gen iPads, 4 iPhones (two now used as iPad Touch) and 4 iPods and with the exception of the iMacs needing replacement hard drives, not a single one of them has been opened for maintenance or upgrades of any kind. That's 12 years of Mac ownership where I haven't had to pay a single penny for support and haven't had to crawl around inside them for any reason. In other words, Apple's machines are flat-out designed to be left alone.
You, the techie, are not the intended customer for Apple's products--at least, not in the sense you'd like to believe. A MacBook Pro is not intended for the "pro" techie but for the enterprise professional--the doctors, lawyers, engineers and executives. Photographers, videographers, musicians, none of them have a need or a desire to know how their computers work--so long as they do work.
Fine, you won't buy a Mac? More power to you. Apple could care less whether YOU buy one of their machines or not. On the other hand, the people who really count--the consumer--they care a lot about and do everything they can to offer the best product and the best service they can within the limitations that they refuse to be defrauded by people who intentionally--by whatever means--damage their machines.
Sounds like you're the ultimate Apple customer...don't want to fix or upgrade, just buy a new one of whatever they make. Then defend that as being the wisest approach. It may be the wisest approach from a "sell more things, make more money" standpoint, but not for most of us who don't want to spend every spare dollar on Apple's newest whatever, and don't mind it being a disposable product tied so tightly to Apple's supervised use. A proprietary hard drive? No Ethernet port? The hard drive is an obvious attempt to force any repairs to be done by Apple at their high prices, and the lack of an Ethernet port is just plain stupid; wireless may have come a long way, but still lacks the speed and consistency of wired connection, and when you need to transfer a lot of data, performance of wireless is poor in comparison.
Perhaps it's their way of keeping users satisfied with a 256GB hard drive...much more easily filled with a good connection. Next we'll hear from the fan base who will staunchly defend both the hard drive and the (lack of) Ethernet. Problaby the battery too, which will probably be the first component to go, and with replacement likely to cost several hundred $$$, the Apple faithful will just toss the old and buy the new. (it's a "feature" to help prevent the Apple faithful from falling into the trap of using outdated equipment, because any good and true Apple customer would have replaced it with the latest long before the battery fails)
Perhaps it's their way of keeping users satisfied with a 256GB hard drive...much more easily filled with a good connection. Next we'll hear from the fan base who will staunchly defend both the hard drive and the (lack of) Ethernet. Problaby the battery too, which will probably be the first component to go, and with replacement likely to cost several hundred $$$, the Apple faithful will just toss the old and buy the new. (it's a "feature" to help prevent the Apple faithful from falling into the trap of using outdated equipment, because any good and true Apple customer would have replaced it with the latest long before the battery fails)
If you bothered to actually read my comment, you will find that I do NOT buy the "latest and greatest" but rather buy what I need, when I need it and so far my newest computer is 5 years old and my newest iPad is the first-gen model bought more than 2 years ago. Who's wasting money? Not me.
I clearly stated that you were perfectly within your rights to say you don't like them; that does not give you the right to say I'm a "sheep" because I do. I've used Apple's computers right beside Windows (and before that DOS) machines since 1980 and my Macs have never required replacement in less than 5 years while my Windows boxes almost never lasted more than three. In fact, my first Apple II, purchased in '79 even before the IBM PC came out, remained a viable PC for me for over 12 years.
The simple fact that Apple's sales of computers have been ever-increasing since the first iMac in '98 shows that USERS, not techies, like the Apple product to the point that Apple is now the #3 PC manufacturer in the world when you don't count the iPad which has driven Apple to #1.
Again, techies are NOT Apple's primary customer base--users are.
I clearly stated that you were perfectly within your rights to say you don't like them; that does not give you the right to say I'm a "sheep" because I do. I've used Apple's computers right beside Windows (and before that DOS) machines since 1980 and my Macs have never required replacement in less than 5 years while my Windows boxes almost never lasted more than three. In fact, my first Apple II, purchased in '79 even before the IBM PC came out, remained a viable PC for me for over 12 years.
The simple fact that Apple's sales of computers have been ever-increasing since the first iMac in '98 shows that USERS, not techies, like the Apple product to the point that Apple is now the #3 PC manufacturer in the world when you don't count the iPad which has driven Apple to #1.
Again, techies are NOT Apple's primary customer base--users are.
Back in the days of the Apple ][, I chose the Acorn BBC Micro which was a significantly more versatile and better designed machine which would work with third party add-on disk drives, printers, etc., unlike the Apple which only worked with Apple peripherals. Credit where credit's due, Apple did adopt USB (but not USB 3), so they're not quite as bad as they used to be. However, my brief foray into the Mac world was a failure because my Mac Mini wouldn't talk to my camcorder via firewire, nor would it talk to my musical keyboard via MIDI/USB, and as for being user friendly - as a software engineer for over 30 years working on a variety of operating systems, I couldn't figure out how to record an edited video onto DVD. I had to ask an Apple enthusiast friend of mine at work. Overall, I'm very glad that I didn't get locked into Apple as so many people have. I have a 6 year old Dell laptop which I've opened up and upgraded 3 times (2 new hard drives for increased capacity, 1 RAM upgrade for improved performance) and it's never let me down although it does need a new battery now - but at least I can unclip the battery - I don't even need to open the case! - and buy a replacement at a reasonable price. I don't hate Apple, but I don't see myself ever buying an Apple computer, and even the iPhone is now off my shortlist in view of what Samsung and HTC have to offer.
"you will find that I do NOT buy the "latest and greatest" but rather buy what I need, when I need it"
Great statement btw - I do the same.
That said, when I look at this, I am being tasked with buying not what I need, but what I think I may need over the next 3+ years. This relegates my purchase to a guess (even if educated) and at a premium cost. Based on this, will you buy into these latest "disposable black box" designs?
Great statement btw - I do the same.
That said, when I look at this, I am being tasked with buying not what I need, but what I think I may need over the next 3+ years. This relegates my purchase to a guess (even if educated) and at a premium cost. Based on this, will you buy into these latest "disposable black box" designs?
... if I felt I needed a laptop. What I've personally seen in both private and corporate use is that most laptops are used as 'portable' desktops, a function they fill very well, rather than mobility devices. As such, most of my clients set their laptop on a desk, plug it in, and never move it from that spot; they would have done just as well if not better with a true desktop computer at the same price. Many of today's AIO PCs are proving that. So for me, I simply don't have a need for a laptop. Other views will vary.
Having been a technician (not a so-called IT professional) for almost 40 years now, I've seen technology change and I've seen what works. Cheap makes sales and are often quite easy to work on--but the cost of the repair frequently exceeds the retail price of the device (Boombox, VCR, even TVs and computers). The devices that lasted the longest without repair were the ones used regularly and yet treated with respect--usually mid-priced to higher priced components that were well-built and often harder to work on.
While technology has changed, habits--both corporate and individual--haven't. People still leave their laptops plugged in full time and then complain when they get less than half the advertised charge life out of them. That's not the battery's fault, it's their own. Computer keyboards still get grunged up with food particles, dust, hair, liquids and who knows what else and yet the users complain when, for whatever reason, those keyboards quit working. This is pretty well true of every electronic device. Which reminds me, I was just given a laptop that quit working to see if I could fix it. The keyboard looks like the user did nothing but eat at his computer and the case itself is simply grungy from his (or her) dirty hands. The real problem for failure, though, is the broken plug-in adaptor where once I clean the thing up I should be able to fix by simply re-soldering a broken connector. This is a problem Apple solved 7 years ago with its Mag-safe connector. Yet another reason you don't even NEED to go inside a Mac laptop.
I don't just look at my immediate needs when I buy something, I try to look at how it will be used over its lifetime. I didn't NEED to buy a Jeep Wrangler when I bought my mid-sized SUV, but I knew it would take me places almost no other SUV could go for the price as well as giving me a drop-top convertible on a 4-door car that will cost far less to replace the top when it finally weathers through than any other convertible on the market (well, maybe except for the Fiat 500). So really, when you buy a product do you simply go impulse buy or do you think it out. If you think it through, I believe you'll find that Apple's concept is extremely well conceived.
Having been a technician (not a so-called IT professional) for almost 40 years now, I've seen technology change and I've seen what works. Cheap makes sales and are often quite easy to work on--but the cost of the repair frequently exceeds the retail price of the device (Boombox, VCR, even TVs and computers). The devices that lasted the longest without repair were the ones used regularly and yet treated with respect--usually mid-priced to higher priced components that were well-built and often harder to work on.
While technology has changed, habits--both corporate and individual--haven't. People still leave their laptops plugged in full time and then complain when they get less than half the advertised charge life out of them. That's not the battery's fault, it's their own. Computer keyboards still get grunged up with food particles, dust, hair, liquids and who knows what else and yet the users complain when, for whatever reason, those keyboards quit working. This is pretty well true of every electronic device. Which reminds me, I was just given a laptop that quit working to see if I could fix it. The keyboard looks like the user did nothing but eat at his computer and the case itself is simply grungy from his (or her) dirty hands. The real problem for failure, though, is the broken plug-in adaptor where once I clean the thing up I should be able to fix by simply re-soldering a broken connector. This is a problem Apple solved 7 years ago with its Mag-safe connector. Yet another reason you don't even NEED to go inside a Mac laptop.
I don't just look at my immediate needs when I buy something, I try to look at how it will be used over its lifetime. I didn't NEED to buy a Jeep Wrangler when I bought my mid-sized SUV, but I knew it would take me places almost no other SUV could go for the price as well as giving me a drop-top convertible on a 4-door car that will cost far less to replace the top when it finally weathers through than any other convertible on the market (well, maybe except for the Fiat 500). So really, when you buy a product do you simply go impulse buy or do you think it out. If you think it through, I believe you'll find that Apple's concept is extremely well conceived.
... you don't have to buy any Apple products. Not one. If you don't like them, don't buy them. That's it. Easy.
But, obviously, a helluva lot of people DO like Apple's products and choose to buy them -- either despite or because of Apple's designs.
For every "negative" that you point out, there's at least a counter-balancing positive. They're just different approaches.
If you like your PCs to use standards-based components, great. You've got lots of options that will undoubtedly make you perfectly happy. For whatever reason, those systems do not satisfy the needs and wants of Apple's customers. And that's okay. Choice is good, isn't it?
But, obviously, a helluva lot of people DO like Apple's products and choose to buy them -- either despite or because of Apple's designs.
For every "negative" that you point out, there's at least a counter-balancing positive. They're just different approaches.
If you like your PCs to use standards-based components, great. You've got lots of options that will undoubtedly make you perfectly happy. For whatever reason, those systems do not satisfy the needs and wants of Apple's customers. And that's okay. Choice is good, isn't it?
See my big post above with the 5 points, but spare us the one-dimensional mantra of "choice". Most of our apps that are made for OS X don't run on Windows, therefore if we want to save money by NOT replacing all the Mac software with Windows software, we stick with Apple. This means Apple has to have some responsibility as well.
You might find, out here in the real world, it's really not as simple as you want it to be. Try being in a business for once. You might not like it.
You might find, out here in the real world, it's really not as simple as you want it to be. Try being in a business for once. You might not like it.
This may be the first time I've ever heard someone whine about their business-critical software tying them to OS X.
If the machines are so overpriced and ridiculous, won't you save money in the long term by buying a cheap PC and purchasing new software? Heck, most people purchase new licenses (or re-up their subscriptions) every couple years anyway, just to be up-to-date.
I'm not saying I like the fact that everything's nailed to the case, or that there's no Ethernet port, but this is where I see the engineering decisions made, and then make a simple pass/purchase decision of my own. It *is* that simple.
If the machines are so overpriced and ridiculous, won't you save money in the long term by buying a cheap PC and purchasing new software? Heck, most people purchase new licenses (or re-up their subscriptions) every couple years anyway, just to be up-to-date.
I'm not saying I like the fact that everything's nailed to the case, or that there's no Ethernet port, but this is where I see the engineering decisions made, and then make a simple pass/purchase decision of my own. It *is* that simple.
If you read Hypno's entire post, you will notice "made for OSX". Not available on Windows. Let me add to that. I have a self owned consulting business and I need at least one MBP for design / testing. From a tax perspective I should replace it. From a functional it works great. When I do replace it, I am having serious concerns over the new design trend. See my reply above for details.
Now to my "real" job. We primarily use Windows machines. This is not a concern over function, but a concern over a single source global supply chain - hold the business hostage, basically. Now add in the latest "no fix" design. Deciding to use Apple is fiscally foolish.
I grant the right of any and all to use what they want / need. When you start taking all pieces into account, you have to really ask why you would buy a Mac.
Now to my "real" job. We primarily use Windows machines. This is not a concern over function, but a concern over a single source global supply chain - hold the business hostage, basically. Now add in the latest "no fix" design. Deciding to use Apple is fiscally foolish.
I grant the right of any and all to use what they want / need. When you start taking all pieces into account, you have to really ask why you would buy a Mac.
... why would you want to buy anything else?
Ok, for tax purposes you say you should replace your MBP, but you also clearly point out that it still works great. In other words you're getting a far higher return on your investment than any of your other machines. Why, then, replace it if you don't need to? You worry about the maintainability of the new MBP and yet you clearly point out that it doesn't need maintenance.
Which, really, is the short-sighted viewpoint?
Ok, for tax purposes you say you should replace your MBP, but you also clearly point out that it still works great. In other words you're getting a far higher return on your investment than any of your other machines. Why, then, replace it if you don't need to? You worry about the maintainability of the new MBP and yet you clearly point out that it doesn't need maintenance.
Which, really, is the short-sighted viewpoint?
Apple isn't Acer or Asus or Dell. They don't build enterprise computers, they create consumer products, for which the needs are definitely different.
Bio Hazard GXP does a great job of pointing out all the "non-standard" stuff in the new MBP. Apple has -- for years! -- used standard RAM, standard drives (optical, hard and SSD), and more. No one really cared. Sure, it helped a little when it came time to upgrade the machines -- more RAM or a bigger drive -- but I saw somewhere that Apple's research showed that something like 75% of all customers never upgrade their MacBooks from their as-shipped configurations.
So ... it became advantageous (again) for Apple to use proprietary components, because they can design them to be smaller, lighter, more power-efficient, and even less expensive.
For example, to offer an easily removable battery, Apple has to design the system to retain the battery yet release it when needed. Those elements of the design require extra space and manufacturing time. Making the batteries a dealer-serviceable item removes all that complexity -- which opens up space in the system so the battery can be bigger (and thus last longer) or so that the entire system can be smaller.
Same goes for soldered-on RAM (though I, too, am not a big fan of RAM soldered to the main logic board). And probably even the SSD.
Most consumers will appreciate the design trade-offs that Apple made, because they're undoubtedly based on some survey data, in addition to Apple's forward-thinking product planning teams who are paid big bucks to figure out what should be done to improve Apple's products without ticking off the bulk of its customers.
If you happen to like standard PC components in a standard PC form factor, you're in luck! Because pretty much every other PC maker makes pretty generic-looking laptops and desktops. But even with them, as you start getting into the ultrabook lines, they start using proprietary designs.
Fortunately, you've got the freedom to choose which device works best for you and your needs. Judging by MacBook sales (both Pro and Air), a VERY significant number of people feel the MacBook line fits their needs quite well. That's great for them. If it doesn't work for you, buy something else that will.
Funny ... that's not all that different a situation than religion, politics or just about any other passionate pursuit.
Bio Hazard GXP does a great job of pointing out all the "non-standard" stuff in the new MBP. Apple has -- for years! -- used standard RAM, standard drives (optical, hard and SSD), and more. No one really cared. Sure, it helped a little when it came time to upgrade the machines -- more RAM or a bigger drive -- but I saw somewhere that Apple's research showed that something like 75% of all customers never upgrade their MacBooks from their as-shipped configurations.
So ... it became advantageous (again) for Apple to use proprietary components, because they can design them to be smaller, lighter, more power-efficient, and even less expensive.
For example, to offer an easily removable battery, Apple has to design the system to retain the battery yet release it when needed. Those elements of the design require extra space and manufacturing time. Making the batteries a dealer-serviceable item removes all that complexity -- which opens up space in the system so the battery can be bigger (and thus last longer) or so that the entire system can be smaller.
Same goes for soldered-on RAM (though I, too, am not a big fan of RAM soldered to the main logic board). And probably even the SSD.
Most consumers will appreciate the design trade-offs that Apple made, because they're undoubtedly based on some survey data, in addition to Apple's forward-thinking product planning teams who are paid big bucks to figure out what should be done to improve Apple's products without ticking off the bulk of its customers.
If you happen to like standard PC components in a standard PC form factor, you're in luck! Because pretty much every other PC maker makes pretty generic-looking laptops and desktops. But even with them, as you start getting into the ultrabook lines, they start using proprietary designs.
Fortunately, you've got the freedom to choose which device works best for you and your needs. Judging by MacBook sales (both Pro and Air), a VERY significant number of people feel the MacBook line fits their needs quite well. That's great for them. If it doesn't work for you, buy something else that will.
Funny ... that's not all that different a situation than religion, politics or just about any other passionate pursuit.
for which I'm ironically laughing at the tragedy to follow...
I'm just worried the battery, superglued in, will cause more headaches for the company. When a battery goes bad, and they will within 2~5 years, I want to spend $100 for a new battery. Not $2500 for a new laptop without a very good reason. Apple can choose to be customer-friendly or be Apple-friendly. And since most companies really don't give one whit about customers anymore, which is one reason why the whole bleeping world is in such a mess - nobody thinking, having consideration, or even empathy... since that might hurt their profit margin... but as taxpayers we'll still be giving Apple and others plenty of subsidy to stay afloat, since we're apparently in a free market where certain types of government involvements are welcomed more than others...
Sorry for the tangent into 6 different directions... but they're all inter-related, in one form or another... nothing is ever so simple... except bumper stickers and I'm too busy driving and the ramifications to care about one-liner throwaway bumper stickers...
I'm just worried the battery, superglued in, will cause more headaches for the company. When a battery goes bad, and they will within 2~5 years, I want to spend $100 for a new battery. Not $2500 for a new laptop without a very good reason. Apple can choose to be customer-friendly or be Apple-friendly. And since most companies really don't give one whit about customers anymore, which is one reason why the whole bleeping world is in such a mess - nobody thinking, having consideration, or even empathy... since that might hurt their profit margin... but as taxpayers we'll still be giving Apple and others plenty of subsidy to stay afloat, since we're apparently in a free market where certain types of government involvements are welcomed more than others...
Sorry for the tangent into 6 different directions... but they're all inter-related, in one form or another... nothing is ever so simple... except bumper stickers and I'm too busy driving and the ramifications to care about one-liner throwaway bumper stickers...
This I believe is a product of short term profit, reward to the shareholders, options awarded to executives first, ( plus in some cases bolstered by the LLC (limitedLiability Companies) status), that come before those of their customers. Of course if it goes wrong (or spotted), the too big to fail & important stratigic home industry card is played to the government! So you still loose! What do I think about the USA having a free market? A good idea! ( apologies to Gandi).
Any business today is in the business of making money. Doesn't matter how, just make money. Banks used to be in the money service business but now they are run by lawyers hiding all the nasty stuff in small print (really, really small). Computer companies are in the business of making money by selling techno products and will do so by any means like changing the shape or color. Etc. Until there is a catastrophe, personal or national, people won't stop buying until they can't. As far as I'm concerned, Apple is a psycho-selling genius of a company as it has convinced a set of consumers, new is better. Yet, what is being done on these things is more or less the same. Retina schmetina, thinness, etc. Parts failure is an excellent excuse to buy a new something. Thus, developed, formerly wealthy countries are all experiencing deep failure and social dissonance because the only mantra left is "jobs" even if it further ruins the world we live in. China (and Walmart) control most economies and Apple is tagging along as the richest business entity but are they making the world better? "Oh, that's not our job." Just like a president or commander saying, "I didn't know. Not my fault." But, trust me, everyone dies eventually and everyone is going to live in the doggie poop before they go to wherever they go when their bionic systems fail.
Ever since this latest recession started, the average PC market has been flat or even in decline--with the exception of Apple's PCs. This seems to go counter to your argument that, "Apple is a psycho-selling genius of a company ... convinced ... customers, new is better." People, for whatever reason, despite the economic downturn were buying Apple's computers often instead of significantly lower-priced Windows computers. Why?
Now, if we were to believe you, then somehow they've managed to brainwash the un-brainwashable--the PC user. Where else could they be getting the millions of customers every quarter when they could once only manage a few hundred thousand a year? No, the more logical explanation is simply that Macs do last longer and Macs are easier to use--though I won't deny that like any other brand there will be a few that are less reliable; that percentage is lower than anyone else's, however.
Apple has never catered to the 'cheap' crowd. The reason for that is that Apple actually pays more to ensure a certain quality level for every discrete component on their boards. They balance that buy buying higher quantities which pulls the per-component price back down. I worked for one of Apple's inductive component manufacturers and watched as 40' trailers full of a single-rated device would pull out of our shipping bays--after undergoing 100% testing for accuracy. Now, I'm talking about components sometimes sized no larger than 1/8" diameter with tens of millions of individual pieces on that trailer. I've also seen those trailers return, requiring another 100% testing under even tighter conditions before Apple would accept delivery. That's not a company that accepts mere commodity components for their hardware. Apple is not a WalMart* brand. You get what you pay for with Apple; you pay for what you get with anybody else.
Now, if we were to believe you, then somehow they've managed to brainwash the un-brainwashable--the PC user. Where else could they be getting the millions of customers every quarter when they could once only manage a few hundred thousand a year? No, the more logical explanation is simply that Macs do last longer and Macs are easier to use--though I won't deny that like any other brand there will be a few that are less reliable; that percentage is lower than anyone else's, however.
Apple has never catered to the 'cheap' crowd. The reason for that is that Apple actually pays more to ensure a certain quality level for every discrete component on their boards. They balance that buy buying higher quantities which pulls the per-component price back down. I worked for one of Apple's inductive component manufacturers and watched as 40' trailers full of a single-rated device would pull out of our shipping bays--after undergoing 100% testing for accuracy. Now, I'm talking about components sometimes sized no larger than 1/8" diameter with tens of millions of individual pieces on that trailer. I've also seen those trailers return, requiring another 100% testing under even tighter conditions before Apple would accept delivery. That's not a company that accepts mere commodity components for their hardware. Apple is not a WalMart* brand. You get what you pay for with Apple; you pay for what you get with anybody else.
First, the article said "glued" not "superglued"; odds are if it does need to be replaced they have a valid, non-destructive solvent for it. But even that's beyond the point.
Apple has clearly stated for the last couple years that their batteries are intended to last a full 1,000 cycles and I've heard hints that, even taking aging into account, they could last double that with proper use. This doesn't mean that they'll last that long if the device is plugged in almost 100% of the time; honestly no battery will survive that and some die far faster than others under those circumstances. By making those batteries non-replaceable they reduce the wear and tear on the machine and the battery both.
Batteries need to be almost fully cycled with each use--brought up to full charge and used down to 20%-10% before recharging. I'll grant that you can't do that every time, but any user should be able to do that most of the time and that's what Apple is counting on. Even my 12-year-old white iBook still gets 2 hours of practical use on a charge with its original --admittedly replaceable--battery that was only designed for a 3 to 4 hour charge. Number of cycles? Just over 300 because the only time the laptop even got used was when I was on vacation which means about 10 to 15 days a year. My iPad, first-gen purchased about a month after release, still gives me 5 days of standby time or about two days of 'normal' use reading and browsing the internet on a daily basis. As such, any complaint about the battery in the new "retina" MBP is misplaced from the outset.
Apple has clearly stated for the last couple years that their batteries are intended to last a full 1,000 cycles and I've heard hints that, even taking aging into account, they could last double that with proper use. This doesn't mean that they'll last that long if the device is plugged in almost 100% of the time; honestly no battery will survive that and some die far faster than others under those circumstances. By making those batteries non-replaceable they reduce the wear and tear on the machine and the battery both.
Batteries need to be almost fully cycled with each use--brought up to full charge and used down to 20%-10% before recharging. I'll grant that you can't do that every time, but any user should be able to do that most of the time and that's what Apple is counting on. Even my 12-year-old white iBook still gets 2 hours of practical use on a charge with its original --admittedly replaceable--battery that was only designed for a 3 to 4 hour charge. Number of cycles? Just over 300 because the only time the laptop even got used was when I was on vacation which means about 10 to 15 days a year. My iPad, first-gen purchased about a month after release, still gives me 5 days of standby time or about two days of 'normal' use reading and browsing the internet on a daily basis. As such, any complaint about the battery in the new "retina" MBP is misplaced from the outset.
I have my doubts. 12 year old iBook on original battery? Hmmm.....
My MBP is only 3.5 years old, on it's 3rd battery.
My iPhone 3GS is getting its second
My iPhone 4 won't last past lunch anymore
My iPad 2 has a noticeably shorter battery life than when I bought it.
This is normal. I am unaware of any new technology that allows the level of battery life you are describing. If there was, it would make headlines.
Call me skeptical and very concerned about "throw away" electronic devices.
Oh, and Apple just pulled all of their EPEAT certs.
AND. ...... when that battery is replaced, who is recycling it?
My MBP is only 3.5 years old, on it's 3rd battery.
My iPhone 3GS is getting its second
My iPhone 4 won't last past lunch anymore
My iPad 2 has a noticeably shorter battery life than when I bought it.
This is normal. I am unaware of any new technology that allows the level of battery life you are describing. If there was, it would make headlines.
Call me skeptical and very concerned about "throw away" electronic devices.
Oh, and Apple just pulled all of their EPEAT certs.
AND. ...... when that battery is replaced, who is recycling it?
Even my iPhone 3G still gets 2 days of standby on its original battery and my iPhone 4 gives me at least 3 days of average use (not counting the Mophie battery case which effectively doubles that.). Of course, I don't leave the thing plugged in 24 hours a day or run the thing 'til the battery is totally dead. Maybe that's why my batteries last so much longer than yours.
when it gets to the landfill (or ocean), all those lovely little atoms of heavy metals, get de-ionized by rainwater or groundwater (is there anything which is actually impermeable. Or the stuff is sent to Africa or China where it is dumped - by mistake - on saltwater coasts or taken inland to be burned in old oil drums. Guess what? All the crap creeps into the creeks which flow to the coasts or rise up into the atmosphere. And satellite imaging shows stuff from China blowing right across the Pacific and into California and Nevada. That's recycling on a global scale. Heh?
... at least as far as Apple is concerned. Do your research.
And, as a photographer and web designer, and in college for web development and programming, I like and want to know how things work and how to optimize them... or repair them to keep MY downtime as a SMB low. Since that's rather important.
And I know Apple couldn't care less. I've observed their attitude. I'll praise them for being good with AppleCare and legitimately so based on what I've read, but there's a lot I dislike. But life isn't so simple I can blindly hate, even if it's simpler for people to be so blind. And that's why most customers are blind. It's too much effort for them to do...
And I know Apple couldn't care less. I've observed their attitude. I'll praise them for being good with AppleCare and legitimately so based on what I've read, but there's a lot I dislike. But life isn't so simple I can blindly hate, even if it's simpler for people to be so blind. And that's why most customers are blind. It's too much effort for them to do...
I have to disagree with your comment. A real tech won't "damage" anything, normaly the ones who "damage" computers (either Apple or Windows) are USERS. They randomly download and install crapware; remove, delete and erase important system and application data.
Now, if you don't have any need for upgrading your computers (either Apple or Windows, I can't care less), that's great for you! Now.. most 5 year old Apple computers won't even run the latest OSX (Lion) proper, and as such won't benefit iCloud and many advantages of the new OS. And sometimes, just adding some more RAM is just enough to make it run better.
I work with Apple computers, I am a tech guy. I know what I'm talking about. I upgrade a bunch of Apple computers for clients who NEED upgrade, REAL users who need their computers to WORK, and sometimes need more power of them, without having to buy more modern Macs - most wouldn't even buy more modern computers, because they wouldn't afford it at the moment.
From a TECH point of view AND THINKING ABOUT THE USER, it can be really bad having no serviceable parts. And if I can't repair/change hardware on them, neither will Apple authorized service. They'll simple replace the whole computer.
An example: Apple service doesn't change a broken lcd GLASS on a macbook pro (old model), they change the WHOLE screen and lid. The price doubles, as you can imagine.
Why won't they change it? Because it's more work. It's better to ask the customer to pay 2x more, than to have the Apple Tech work more.
Recently my macbook batery failed. Solution: Replaced battery.
If I had one of these new macbooks? Buy a new one.
My client broke his LCD glass, but the screen was ok. Solution: Replaced glass. Price? Half the price he was gonna spend with Apple Authorized dealer, changing the WHOLE screen.
I don't have anything against the new macbook pro. If I could afford it and had money to buy a new one if I needed more power or if something broke down, I'd buy it instantly. But I just don't have that amount of money laying around. I'm just the average joe, who's money comes from very hard work, and doesn't come in easy, or falls from trees.
Also, if a customer comes in with one of these computers out of warranty, I'll just have to tell him: "sorry dude, go buy a new one".
Now, if you don't have any need for upgrading your computers (either Apple or Windows, I can't care less), that's great for you! Now.. most 5 year old Apple computers won't even run the latest OSX (Lion) proper, and as such won't benefit iCloud and many advantages of the new OS. And sometimes, just adding some more RAM is just enough to make it run better.
I work with Apple computers, I am a tech guy. I know what I'm talking about. I upgrade a bunch of Apple computers for clients who NEED upgrade, REAL users who need their computers to WORK, and sometimes need more power of them, without having to buy more modern Macs - most wouldn't even buy more modern computers, because they wouldn't afford it at the moment.
From a TECH point of view AND THINKING ABOUT THE USER, it can be really bad having no serviceable parts. And if I can't repair/change hardware on them, neither will Apple authorized service. They'll simple replace the whole computer.
An example: Apple service doesn't change a broken lcd GLASS on a macbook pro (old model), they change the WHOLE screen and lid. The price doubles, as you can imagine.
Why won't they change it? Because it's more work. It's better to ask the customer to pay 2x more, than to have the Apple Tech work more.
Recently my macbook batery failed. Solution: Replaced battery.
If I had one of these new macbooks? Buy a new one.
My client broke his LCD glass, but the screen was ok. Solution: Replaced glass. Price? Half the price he was gonna spend with Apple Authorized dealer, changing the WHOLE screen.
I don't have anything against the new macbook pro. If I could afford it and had money to buy a new one if I needed more power or if something broke down, I'd buy it instantly. But I just don't have that amount of money laying around. I'm just the average joe, who's money comes from very hard work, and doesn't come in easy, or falls from trees.
Also, if a customer comes in with one of these computers out of warranty, I'll just have to tell him: "sorry dude, go buy a new one".
By reducing the number of Parts that they have to carry.
The fewer parts that they carry the cheaper it is for Apple to "Service" their products. Though it's most certainly not confined to Apple they have taken it to the extreme with the Glued in Battery concept.
I remember recently how Sony Batteries could catch Fire and here you have to believe that Apple isn't making the Batteries but buying them from one of the Big Battery Makers who in the past have had problems.
So if they get a Bad Batch of Batteries just who do you think will pay for the replacement of the Case, M'Board and so on. I can guarantee that it will not be the Battery Suppliers who will be part of the real problem.
I currently have a iPhone 4 to replace the screen on well actually the front glass after a fall. The back is easy 2 screws and it slides off. The front is a different story with a lot of work involved to get it off let alone back together and working again.
As for Techs damaging the units I vehemently disagree! I always find it's the users who do the real damage and here they are within their rights to dismantle devices to attempt a repair as the warranty under our LAW only prevents third Parties from dismantling the devices. If you work for Apple and the user dismantles it you have to carry the costs as they are one of the parties that is allowed to after all it's theirs not Apples.
Sure you can charge for what they may break but if they completely strip the thing and hand it to you you carry the cost of the time to repair and rebuild the thing. I can remember 45 years ago a customer ringing up internationally asking how to secure their product so it wouldn't get damaged in transit tot he Companies Distributer here. I said just bolt it to the case and it will be fine.
What I didn't know is that they had totally reduced it to component parts so they screwed the base to the case and threw the rest into the case before closing it up tight and giving to the airlines to transport.
What was a 15 minute repair to do took well over 12 Hours and we had to eat the costs of the reassembly because under the Warranty only the Supplier and the owner had the right to pull the thing apart. The idiot thing here is if a Qualified Repairer that was not either from the Distributer or it's Authorized Service Agents or the Owner the Warranty is Void even if they do no harm where as a Unqualified Owner in no way affects the Warranty.
Col
The fewer parts that they carry the cheaper it is for Apple to "Service" their products. Though it's most certainly not confined to Apple they have taken it to the extreme with the Glued in Battery concept.
I remember recently how Sony Batteries could catch Fire and here you have to believe that Apple isn't making the Batteries but buying them from one of the Big Battery Makers who in the past have had problems.
So if they get a Bad Batch of Batteries just who do you think will pay for the replacement of the Case, M'Board and so on. I can guarantee that it will not be the Battery Suppliers who will be part of the real problem.
I currently have a iPhone 4 to replace the screen on well actually the front glass after a fall. The back is easy 2 screws and it slides off. The front is a different story with a lot of work involved to get it off let alone back together and working again.
As for Techs damaging the units I vehemently disagree! I always find it's the users who do the real damage and here they are within their rights to dismantle devices to attempt a repair as the warranty under our LAW only prevents third Parties from dismantling the devices. If you work for Apple and the user dismantles it you have to carry the costs as they are one of the parties that is allowed to after all it's theirs not Apples.
Sure you can charge for what they may break but if they completely strip the thing and hand it to you you carry the cost of the time to repair and rebuild the thing. I can remember 45 years ago a customer ringing up internationally asking how to secure their product so it wouldn't get damaged in transit tot he Companies Distributer here. I said just bolt it to the case and it will be fine.
What I didn't know is that they had totally reduced it to component parts so they screwed the base to the case and threw the rest into the case before closing it up tight and giving to the airlines to transport.
What was a 15 minute repair to do took well over 12 Hours and we had to eat the costs of the reassembly because under the Warranty only the Supplier and the owner had the right to pull the thing apart. The idiot thing here is if a Qualified Repairer that was not either from the Distributer or it's Authorized Service Agents or the Owner the Warranty is Void even if they do no harm where as a Unqualified Owner in no way affects the Warranty.
Col
... because quite honestly on seeing the condition of that return I would have refused to service it. Sure, by LAW the owner may have the right to open the case, but that law shouldn't force the service center to 'repair' obvious negligent handling. I don't care who the manufacturer is, they're only going to authorize a certain payment based on the average repair time and materials use for a given problem. Your shop only got paid for that 15-minute fix and had to eat the remaining 11 hours plus of labor. If your shop was the manufacturer's own shop (and not an "authorized service center") they would have refused service even to the point of going to court if necessary. How do I know? My shop did that more than once and put all the onus on the factory to accept or refuse the service.
You might remember the outcry when Apple refused warranty service on an iMac, claiming negligent abuse by the user because the interior was all grunged up. A lot of people declared Apple in the wrong, but in the end Apple won out because they proved that the breakdown was due to nicotine and tar from cigarette smoke, not any defect in the material or workmanship of the machine itself. My own shop refused repairs on cat-pi$$ed devices that was supported by the manufacturer itself on several occasions. No, an unqualified owner should and in most cases will affect warranty coverage. Anything else becomes fraud against the company.
You might remember the outcry when Apple refused warranty service on an iMac, claiming negligent abuse by the user because the interior was all grunged up. A lot of people declared Apple in the wrong, but in the end Apple won out because they proved that the breakdown was due to nicotine and tar from cigarette smoke, not any defect in the material or workmanship of the machine itself. My own shop refused repairs on cat-pi$$ed devices that was supported by the manufacturer itself on several occasions. No, an unqualified owner should and in most cases will affect warranty coverage. Anything else becomes fraud against the company.
We where the Country Distributer and the Service Center was there to Serve the Customers most defiantly not make a profit.
What I did notice was when the Accountants took control of the company and started wanting the Service Section to make a profit the Sales of new product dropped to such a point that the company failed completely and no longer existed within 5 years. When I was there we where the Market Leader who everyone else was judged by, with the best product and then 8 years latter they no longer existed.
So while Apple may be within their rights I firmly believe that their actions are adversely impacting on their sales and it's only going to get worse the more that they hang their customers out to dry.
Unfortunately Winning in Court very rarely shows who was right or wrong just who had the better Legal ****** to represent them.
Col
What I did notice was when the Accountants took control of the company and started wanting the Service Section to make a profit the Sales of new product dropped to such a point that the company failed completely and no longer existed within 5 years. When I was there we where the Market Leader who everyone else was judged by, with the best product and then 8 years latter they no longer existed.
So while Apple may be within their rights I firmly believe that their actions are adversely impacting on their sales and it's only going to get worse the more that they hang their customers out to dry.
Unfortunately Winning in Court very rarely shows who was right or wrong just who had the better Legal ****** to represent them.
Col
Regretfully, Accountants have been running too many industries lately and as a result, many companies have failed and others have become mere shadows of what they used to be. Steve Jobs alone proved this with Apple itself, hiring an traditionally-trained CEO back when Apple was young and, after getting fired himself, watched his company go from a leadership role to near bankruptcy. When he returned, he fired the then-CEO and effectively took over the company. I believe we all know that Jobs was neither traditionally-trained nor an accountant, yet he carried Apple from the gutter to the top in a mere 15 years.
Take a look at Sears--once one of the most respected retailers in the world. Where is Sears now? So many other companies have taken that same route--the one you used to work for is a prime example.
Companies need leaders, not bean counters at the top. Accountants should only keep track of income and outlay and not even try to advise on actual business policies. In any business you have to spend money to make money or you simply will not succeed. To paraphrase too many cliches, you can't make something out of nothing.
This is why Apple has been winning for so long and why I believe they will continue for the foreseeable future; Jobs instilled his staff and company with the need to ensure the product was the best it could be before release and if some feature wasn't ready, then either disable that feature or delay release until it was. The three-month delay of the iPhone 4 nearly 2 years ago pretty much proved that he didn't feel it was ready for release. Yes, I do remember the so-called 'antennagate'. I also remember that for such a media circus, it had very little real affect on product sales itself. Where you say "they hang their customers out to dry," I see where they're still trying to make the best product they can--up to the point of at least trying to prevent misuse and mis-handling. Apple's reputation for customer service is still far higher than any competitor.
Now, to tell you the truth, I think Cook is right about litigation; he didn't agree with Job's drive to have all things Android killed outright even though we all know (but may not want to accept) that Google effectively stole the iPhone's concept. It was simply too coincidental that Android spawned so soon after the iPhone itself. Rather than taking it to court as strongly as Jobs did, simply blowing it away with superior technologies would have been cheaper and more effective. In my opinion, the court battles went farther towards promoting Android than they did killing it. That said, Apple still needs to protect the patents it does have and you have to admit that many of the OEMs have directly copied Apple's methods over the years and have only recently been able to bypass most of those patents. Samsung, on the other hand, has used nothing but pure industrial espionage; easy for them since they've been Apple's primary component supplier for several years now. Apple's punishment to them is slow in coming but practically inevitable as they have already started sourcing components from several of Samsung's competitors--not letting any one of them handle a majority share of the orders.
Take a look at Sears--once one of the most respected retailers in the world. Where is Sears now? So many other companies have taken that same route--the one you used to work for is a prime example.
Companies need leaders, not bean counters at the top. Accountants should only keep track of income and outlay and not even try to advise on actual business policies. In any business you have to spend money to make money or you simply will not succeed. To paraphrase too many cliches, you can't make something out of nothing.
This is why Apple has been winning for so long and why I believe they will continue for the foreseeable future; Jobs instilled his staff and company with the need to ensure the product was the best it could be before release and if some feature wasn't ready, then either disable that feature or delay release until it was. The three-month delay of the iPhone 4 nearly 2 years ago pretty much proved that he didn't feel it was ready for release. Yes, I do remember the so-called 'antennagate'. I also remember that for such a media circus, it had very little real affect on product sales itself. Where you say "they hang their customers out to dry," I see where they're still trying to make the best product they can--up to the point of at least trying to prevent misuse and mis-handling. Apple's reputation for customer service is still far higher than any competitor.
Now, to tell you the truth, I think Cook is right about litigation; he didn't agree with Job's drive to have all things Android killed outright even though we all know (but may not want to accept) that Google effectively stole the iPhone's concept. It was simply too coincidental that Android spawned so soon after the iPhone itself. Rather than taking it to court as strongly as Jobs did, simply blowing it away with superior technologies would have been cheaper and more effective. In my opinion, the court battles went farther towards promoting Android than they did killing it. That said, Apple still needs to protect the patents it does have and you have to admit that many of the OEMs have directly copied Apple's methods over the years and have only recently been able to bypass most of those patents. Samsung, on the other hand, has used nothing but pure industrial espionage; easy for them since they've been Apple's primary component supplier for several years now. Apple's punishment to them is slow in coming but practically inevitable as they have already started sourcing components from several of Samsung's competitors--not letting any one of them handle a majority share of the orders.
"... most 5 year old Apple computers won't even run the latest OSX (Lion) proper, and as such won't benefit iCloud and many advantages of the new OS."
Sorry, I'm using a 5-year-old iMac that has been running on Lion just fine ever since it came out and is cleared for running Mountain Lion as well. I will acknowledge that Mountain Lion won't work on the white iMacs or older machines, though. Anyone who says Lion doesn't work right on a Core2 device needs to get their facts checked. First-gen aluminum MacBook runs it fine.
Now, I don't deny that machines will go bad over time. In most cases Apple's machines last far longer than any other brand's, but not always. However, if the breakdown occurs during the warranty period and is a warranty item, Apple treats its customers significantly better than their competition as evidenced by their customer satisfaction ratings which are still in the 80% range. Considering AppleCare covers you up to three years then normally you're fine even after the warranty runs out since if it lasts 3 years it's likely to last longer. If it's not a warranty item, then I don't care what brand it is, it's going to cost you. If you're not an Apple-authorized repair shop, you don't need to be repairing Apple computers. Sure, they may be more expensive, but I'll guarantee you they do it right.
Sorry, I'm using a 5-year-old iMac that has been running on Lion just fine ever since it came out and is cleared for running Mountain Lion as well. I will acknowledge that Mountain Lion won't work on the white iMacs or older machines, though. Anyone who says Lion doesn't work right on a Core2 device needs to get their facts checked. First-gen aluminum MacBook runs it fine.
Now, I don't deny that machines will go bad over time. In most cases Apple's machines last far longer than any other brand's, but not always. However, if the breakdown occurs during the warranty period and is a warranty item, Apple treats its customers significantly better than their competition as evidenced by their customer satisfaction ratings which are still in the 80% range. Considering AppleCare covers you up to three years then normally you're fine even after the warranty runs out since if it lasts 3 years it's likely to last longer. If it's not a warranty item, then I don't care what brand it is, it's going to cost you. If you're not an Apple-authorized repair shop, you don't need to be repairing Apple computers. Sure, they may be more expensive, but I'll guarantee you they do it right.
Sounds to me like you are hoarding Mac stuff rather than using it everyday and feeling rather virtuous. I am not a techie professionally but I tried to maintain my mother's iMac (older version) over 4 years with a recall on the power supply, replacement of 3 hard-drives, a new MB battery and 2 Mac Keyboards. Wound up using corded stuff because the iMac wouldn't retain bluetooth connection. She became terrified of doing something wrong because of all the problems - just so she could e-mail, browse family websites and print (usually) photos of the grandkids. Wouldn't think of spending more money for a Windows machine after the cost of the iMac and subsequent repair bills. And, after 4 years the iMac was "only" worth $250 on a local sale site since no Mac dealer would take it in trade. How's that for Apple goodness? I won't go into the Mac Hell, my son had during his student days with a MacBook Pro. He even went up to Steve and a VP promised help but made him a "do not serve" customer at the local authorised fixer. And they also "lost" his machine when he sent it back for replacement. He is young enough to be OS bilingual and still prefers his "old", "slower", IBM ThinkPad which hasn't failed in 10 years and which he got off the IBM site refurbished and at a student price. Guess where my loyalty lies. We are using 10 year old Win machines here at home although I built my own gaming level machine so I can do photo editing and graphic arts. Don't know if anyone has ever "built" their own Mac.
My wife and I use our mid-'07 iMacs heavily every day and yes, I will admit that each of them have needed their internal hard drive replaced--once. They were covered under AppleCare. They're both valid for use with Mountain Lion when it comes out next month so we will continue to use them at least until the next big cat comes out. But that doesn't cover the other three.
The '05 aluminum MacBook still runs well, though admittedly we did need to replace the battery last year. Wife had a habit of leaving it plugged in all the time. She's still able to do everything on it that she does with her iMac, though she is limited to Snow Leopard as the OS. It hasn't slowed her down. The white, G3 iBook also still runs--limited to Tiger but now loaded with Ubuntu--and never used because it just doesn't have any purpose to us as a Linux box. It's the wife's play-toy as she keeps up with the Linux distros. Last but not least we have a G4 Mac Mini that for the last 4 years has served as a DVR and now that it's been replaced by an AppleTV box will turn into a local web server for our 5 websites. The iBook and the Mac Mini have never been opened for service and the iBook is still on its original battery. Of those three devices, only the iBook sees minimal use.
Hoarding? We currently have about 5 home-built PCs sitting in closets and the basement always with the thought of rebuilding them to modern standards--and never going anywhere with that. Our Macs have just been too reliable.
The '05 aluminum MacBook still runs well, though admittedly we did need to replace the battery last year. Wife had a habit of leaving it plugged in all the time. She's still able to do everything on it that she does with her iMac, though she is limited to Snow Leopard as the OS. It hasn't slowed her down. The white, G3 iBook also still runs--limited to Tiger but now loaded with Ubuntu--and never used because it just doesn't have any purpose to us as a Linux box. It's the wife's play-toy as she keeps up with the Linux distros. Last but not least we have a G4 Mac Mini that for the last 4 years has served as a DVR and now that it's been replaced by an AppleTV box will turn into a local web server for our 5 websites. The iBook and the Mac Mini have never been opened for service and the iBook is still on its original battery. Of those three devices, only the iBook sees minimal use.
Hoarding? We currently have about 5 home-built PCs sitting in closets and the basement always with the thought of rebuilding them to modern standards--and never going anywhere with that. Our Macs have just been too reliable.
(and before the phone's release), followed by said CEO blaming customers and saying they were holding the phone wrong... plenty of articles broke both of these issues and it's amazing this company is still revered. For if any one of us was a CEO and was such a condescending jerk to our customers, we'd be toast in a minute. For ethical and moral reasons, Tim Cook has a lot of repair work to do thanks to that creep who used to run the joint, doing more to sell a false image rather than true quality. His 'capture' of possibly-defective iPad3 for the wi-fi issue is a good start, but I do feel sorry for him. His predecessor treated people like fertilizer and really does not deserve the respect he gets. Man vs myth and humans should be intelligent enough not to kow tow to myths.
Fertilizer, that essential item which promotes vigorous growth & yield! Please see definition of SNAFU,
Which is this, Apple computers are a luxury item, like a BMW or a Harley. If you just want a computer you can tinker with, get a $40 Raspberry Pi, a car get a Hyundai, or a bike get a Honda. If you want luxury, then buy it, if not, stop deriding those that do and enjoy your "upgrade-able" items.
Apple's reputation was built upon its ability to forfil the needs of professionals, becoming (almost) the industry standard for photographers, editors, sound designers, ect.
It is a concern that this tool of the trade may have its life span shortened by its inability to be upgraded to cope with future software developments, which will need to deployed for one's buisness competitivity.
It is fortunate for Apple that MS appears to be turning its back on its desk/laptop customers with its W8 Metro, it is sad to see Apple to also, in this case, treat their loyal customers simularly.
May be they should rename it the MacBook Lux!
It is a concern that this tool of the trade may have its life span shortened by its inability to be upgraded to cope with future software developments, which will need to deployed for one's buisness competitivity.
It is fortunate for Apple that MS appears to be turning its back on its desk/laptop customers with its W8 Metro, it is sad to see Apple to also, in this case, treat their loyal customers simularly.
May be they should rename it the MacBook Lux!
Upgrade?
90's 1MB was a killer, few years later 8MB, around 2000 521 MB was good. So it took ten years to go from 1 MB to 1000 MB. (1000 times more)
It took another 10 years to go from 1GB to 4GB as an almost standard. (4 times more). Now we have 8 or 16 GB for top notch apps. Average user is still perfectly happy with 2 or 4 GB. This is from my point the reason why Apple did it the way they did.
With sound, video and photo we work with resolutions human ear and eye is not able to distinguish anymore. We are on the edge now. If something super new will not come, whole industry may slow down. Smaller? Yes. Lighter? Yes. There is no need for upgradability the way it was before. Ntb is good for 3-4 years for pro things. If it makes our living we will buy new after 3 years, if not, it will be still good enough.
Same for HDD - I use external device for big data. What else one needs?
90's 1MB was a killer, few years later 8MB, around 2000 521 MB was good. So it took ten years to go from 1 MB to 1000 MB. (1000 times more)
It took another 10 years to go from 1GB to 4GB as an almost standard. (4 times more). Now we have 8 or 16 GB for top notch apps. Average user is still perfectly happy with 2 or 4 GB. This is from my point the reason why Apple did it the way they did.
With sound, video and photo we work with resolutions human ear and eye is not able to distinguish anymore. We are on the edge now. If something super new will not come, whole industry may slow down. Smaller? Yes. Lighter? Yes. There is no need for upgradability the way it was before. Ntb is good for 3-4 years for pro things. If it makes our living we will buy new after 3 years, if not, it will be still good enough.
Same for HDD - I use external device for big data. What else one needs?
Where I can agree that need to change has slowed, I am not comfortable that Apple sealed the spec in such a manner that it makes it very expensive to its customers if they've got it wrong.
Although the spec looks generous, I question will it be after applying a variation of Parkinson's law, (Work expands to fill time avaiable for its completion.) to that of, Applications will grow to exploit all of the resources available. Those dynamicaly increasing required resources spec's are being set by that general market sector average & not the R McPro's static set.
Also Apple are asking us to trust that the reliabity of their SSD, ram & batteries are now at such a level to be able to maintain the specified performance over 3 to 4 years?. Again the risk of additional cost due to parts, labour (outside of warranty)& decreased availabity due to rtb, would be ours & not Apples to bare.
Anyone, how much for a used 4 yr old Retina Macbook Pro (unrefurbished)!?
At the end of the day its up to you, if you trust Apple & like the sealed utility aspect, buy it. Otherwise explore the other options that are available whilst there is a free market (patents pending of course !)
Although the spec looks generous, I question will it be after applying a variation of Parkinson's law, (Work expands to fill time avaiable for its completion.) to that of, Applications will grow to exploit all of the resources available. Those dynamicaly increasing required resources spec's are being set by that general market sector average & not the R McPro's static set.
Also Apple are asking us to trust that the reliabity of their SSD, ram & batteries are now at such a level to be able to maintain the specified performance over 3 to 4 years?. Again the risk of additional cost due to parts, labour (outside of warranty)& decreased availabity due to rtb, would be ours & not Apples to bare.
Anyone, how much for a used 4 yr old Retina Macbook Pro (unrefurbished)!?
At the end of the day its up to you, if you trust Apple & like the sealed utility aspect, buy it. Otherwise explore the other options that are available whilst there is a free market (patents pending of course !)
The current round of tablets emphatically proves it by the fact that just like the PCs of the '80s, '90s and '00s, Operating systems and software in general have inflated to take advantage of technology improvements that were required to better handle ever-larger software. It's become a very vicious cycle and until the new tablets was getting worse and is now going the same direction with them.
Apple temporarily broke that chain back in 2001 by switching from their in-house MacOS to the UNIX-based OS X. That switch pared the size of their OS by more than 50% while offering even more features than W2K and even WinXP. Vista was Microsoft's attempt to do something similar but we all know how well that went and even now Microsoft is having to patch un-needed and supposedly well-hidden Win95 code that has become a vulnerability for malware. Vista wasn't a re-write but rather just another, albeit extensive, revision. I believe Win8 is Microsoft's first real attempt to make legitimate changes but until I know more about it I really can't say they've gone to the extent Apple did to break from legacy issues. Patching is one thing, completely re-writing the code is something else and it's something Microsoft seriously needs to do.
Apple temporarily broke that chain back in 2001 by switching from their in-house MacOS to the UNIX-based OS X. That switch pared the size of their OS by more than 50% while offering even more features than W2K and even WinXP. Vista was Microsoft's attempt to do something similar but we all know how well that went and even now Microsoft is having to patch un-needed and supposedly well-hidden Win95 code that has become a vulnerability for malware. Vista wasn't a re-write but rather just another, albeit extensive, revision. I believe Win8 is Microsoft's first real attempt to make legitimate changes but until I know more about it I really can't say they've gone to the extent Apple did to break from legacy issues. Patching is one thing, completely re-writing the code is something else and it's something Microsoft seriously needs to do.
You have highlighted one of my bugbears. Why is it that PC's efficiency have not kept pace with Moore,s law. The only answer I can come up with is that it allows the developer to produce software more rapidly to present to the market place, hence increase his/her profits by beating their competitors, and who could blame them, after all they are in business!
As the cost of processing power due to Moore's law is offsetting this coding inefficiency, (at this moment), then no one notices or cares that the same tasks could have been performed on lower powered equipment, (as the overall combined cost of software/equipment might of been more).
However, as I come from an aerospace background, it does really annoy me of the inefficiencies that the market forces have forced upon the developer to produce his "bloated lazy code" and the tantalizing possibility of equally capable smaller & energy efficient equipment is denied,
It has to be stated that the commercial & the environment I work in demand different limits to be met, which for us also demands time consuming rigorous debugging, testing before release & flight that can take months (years), so I can not be too harshly critical, but hopefully offered a new perspective of what could be.
With the advent of smaller form formats such as the Tablets & Ultrabooks, it is a shame that the opportunity to produce efficient code & comparatively outstandingly powerful, highly portable & long life productive machines is again being lost to market forces. Does it really take a war (armed conflict, not commercial) to achieve this?
Apple with its unique position to produce both software & specify design to its sub contractors is in a prime place to do this, if the will was there. One thinks back to the genesis of Apple, their goals & first products, then look to their present positions which appears to be profit oriented and one is saddened at what might have been & has been achieved. This betrayal, I believe is what makes every one angry at Apple.
I would like thank all here for their contribution to this constructive discussion, especially to both Vulpinemac, jscott69 for their interesting, kind & informed opinions.
As the cost of processing power due to Moore's law is offsetting this coding inefficiency, (at this moment), then no one notices or cares that the same tasks could have been performed on lower powered equipment, (as the overall combined cost of software/equipment might of been more).
However, as I come from an aerospace background, it does really annoy me of the inefficiencies that the market forces have forced upon the developer to produce his "bloated lazy code" and the tantalizing possibility of equally capable smaller & energy efficient equipment is denied,
It has to be stated that the commercial & the environment I work in demand different limits to be met, which for us also demands time consuming rigorous debugging, testing before release & flight that can take months (years), so I can not be too harshly critical, but hopefully offered a new perspective of what could be.
With the advent of smaller form formats such as the Tablets & Ultrabooks, it is a shame that the opportunity to produce efficient code & comparatively outstandingly powerful, highly portable & long life productive machines is again being lost to market forces. Does it really take a war (armed conflict, not commercial) to achieve this?
Apple with its unique position to produce both software & specify design to its sub contractors is in a prime place to do this, if the will was there. One thinks back to the genesis of Apple, their goals & first products, then look to their present positions which appears to be profit oriented and one is saddened at what might have been & has been achieved. This betrayal, I believe is what makes every one angry at Apple.
I would like thank all here for their contribution to this constructive discussion, especially to both Vulpinemac, jscott69 for their interesting, kind & informed opinions.
Work does expand to fill time available. And customers are being asked to expect that Apple's components will last 3-4 years. But isn't that reasonable to expect? When you buy a car, do you expect to have to replace the cylinder heads in a year or two so that you can gain the 15hp that BMW will add to next year's version of your M3? No, most M3 buyers -- despite the performance nature of the model -- are more than happy to live with the car as-is the moment they take delivery. (Second owners tend to do more mods.)
Studies also show that most failures in modern equipment tend to happen within the first year or after the fourth (when the machine becomes so slow -- due to bloated software upgrades -- that it churns and churns, generating loads of heat that then "fries" components). Year one is covered by warranty. And after 3-4 years, the machine is due for replacement anyway. And there's always extended warranty coverage (AppleCare).
So, I'm not arguing the validity of your points -- they're all very accurate. But my question would be: So what? Few people fix their PCs. Most just replace them once they're out of warranty. In that case, what's it matter whether the "dead" machine is loaded with standard or proprietary parts? It doesn't. Except maybe for the second owner ... and Apple sure isn't concerned about them (nor is Dell, Asus, Acer, Lenovo or any other PC maker -- they all want to sell new machines to users every couple years).
Studies also show that most failures in modern equipment tend to happen within the first year or after the fourth (when the machine becomes so slow -- due to bloated software upgrades -- that it churns and churns, generating loads of heat that then "fries" components). Year one is covered by warranty. And after 3-4 years, the machine is due for replacement anyway. And there's always extended warranty coverage (AppleCare).
So, I'm not arguing the validity of your points -- they're all very accurate. But my question would be: So what? Few people fix their PCs. Most just replace them once they're out of warranty. In that case, what's it matter whether the "dead" machine is loaded with standard or proprietary parts? It doesn't. Except maybe for the second owner ... and Apple sure isn't concerned about them (nor is Dell, Asus, Acer, Lenovo or any other PC maker -- they all want to sell new machines to users every couple years).
Taking your car analogy, it has been pointed out in other comments that other than to change the oil, filters, brake pads ect, one takes the vehicle to a garage who can afford the expensive diagnostic equipment & other special tools to correctly service & repair the car. The car manufactures have justified this specialism & additional complexity, by making todays car very reliable, have increasing distance/time between service intervals , increase its availability and overall life span,so reducing the total life costs. They back this & generate the confidence we are expected to have to invest in their product, by increasing the length & often the scope of the warranty ( 7 years & 100,000 miles best seen yet).
Perhaps Apple should follow this example, and demonstrate equal confidence in their new sealed for life construction, by increasing the scope & length of their warranty. By doing so, not only would it possibly silence any critics of the increased risk & cost, but also raise the standard again for the industry.
As to the 3 to 4 year life expectancy, if the rate of change for required performance of is indeed reducing, negating the need for internal upgrades, wouldn't this imply that the overall laptop is still viable for its original task, Should it not be unreasonable then to expect a longer expected productive lifespan too?
Performance degrade over time is expected, but this should be, especially in this case, be accounted for in the original spec, (this degrade is sometimes a reason for replacing with higher spec components),
The traditional reliability bath tub curve of high initial failure rate followed by the long flat low productive use phase, followed by a rapid increase towards the end of life is not entirely accurate, studies show that there is a gradual increase of failure rate from the initial low point. Note that this is a probability and someone can experience a failure any where on this curve, and how the prime contractor, Apple in this case, fairly responds to that unfortunate, will & should define their reputation.
Perhaps Apple should follow this example, and demonstrate equal confidence in their new sealed for life construction, by increasing the scope & length of their warranty. By doing so, not only would it possibly silence any critics of the increased risk & cost, but also raise the standard again for the industry.
As to the 3 to 4 year life expectancy, if the rate of change for required performance of is indeed reducing, negating the need for internal upgrades, wouldn't this imply that the overall laptop is still viable for its original task, Should it not be unreasonable then to expect a longer expected productive lifespan too?
Performance degrade over time is expected, but this should be, especially in this case, be accounted for in the original spec, (this degrade is sometimes a reason for replacing with higher spec components),
The traditional reliability bath tub curve of high initial failure rate followed by the long flat low productive use phase, followed by a rapid increase towards the end of life is not entirely accurate, studies show that there is a gradual increase of failure rate from the initial low point. Note that this is a probability and someone can experience a failure any where on this curve, and how the prime contractor, Apple in this case, fairly responds to that unfortunate, will & should define their reputation.
Does define their reputation, as Apple carefully and meticulously ensures both that the breakdown is a warranty-covered item and has proven to offer the best customer satisfaction before and after service compared to any other brand. Oh, I don't deny there are some errors made; techs are human after all. But those errors are far fewer and less expected of Apple and therefore often see far more publicity than similar 'errors' by the other brands.
The problem is, those other brands go out of their way to dodge warranty work, even going so far as to delay resolution until the warranty period has expired in some cases. Why? Because warranty costs money and when you're already on razor-thin product profits you can't afford to repair every little return on an already cheaply-built product. Apple's hardware profits do cover that service and more by the simple fact that by using higher-quality components (even if they do look like commodity parts) they have fewer breakdowns and experience higher savings.
Too many people simply refuse to believe that just changing the failure rates of on-board components can have such a significant impact on overall reliability. Having been an engineering technician for an electronics company and having worked for an Apple component supplier, I've seen very clear evidence of this practical fact.
The problem is, those other brands go out of their way to dodge warranty work, even going so far as to delay resolution until the warranty period has expired in some cases. Why? Because warranty costs money and when you're already on razor-thin product profits you can't afford to repair every little return on an already cheaply-built product. Apple's hardware profits do cover that service and more by the simple fact that by using higher-quality components (even if they do look like commodity parts) they have fewer breakdowns and experience higher savings.
Too many people simply refuse to believe that just changing the failure rates of on-board components can have such a significant impact on overall reliability. Having been an engineering technician for an electronics company and having worked for an Apple component supplier, I've seen very clear evidence of this practical fact.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
