A lot of people are commenting how hard this will be to enforce/easy to avoid. That's not the right way to look at it. If someone now takes one of these laptops onto a flight and it burns mid-flight that person is now criminally liable. At the very least they will have to pay for the emergency landing etc..
I think the main issue is what happens with those who have a banned-but-repaired MBP and what happens with those who have an unaffected-but-looks-like-a-banned-model MBP. Those two groups already total over 400,000 units.
In addition to the 432,000 Macbook Pros sold in the US from mid-2015 to 2017 being outright banned from flying, there will be all the other Mackbook Pros sold from about 2013 to mid-2015 that outwardly look just like the banned ones. I suppose all those lookalikes will be pulled out and have their serial numbers checked, which is in microscopic print on the back, which will definitely slow down Pre-check when you wou…
"suppose all those lookalikes will be pulled out and have their serial numbers checked" I can almost guarantee the TSA will invest zero dollars or time into deciding which MacBooks are okay. This is Apple's problem to solve. Zero time, money or attention from the TSA or the airlines will be invested. If the FAA bans any Macbooks, all "Apple looking thingies" will be effectively banned. Source: 3 decades of govt and a…
> I can almost guarantee the TSA will invest zero dollars or time into deciding which MacBooks are okay. This is Apple's problem to solve. Zero time, money or attention from the TSA or the airlines will be invested.
how is it apple's problem then? by the way you've described things, it doesn't seem like it's anybody's problem. it could be a marketing problem for apple, but it doesn't seem like they care about those anyway.
"suppose all those lookalikes will be pulled out and have their serial numbers checked" I can almost guarantee the TSA will invest zero dollars or time into deciding which MacBooks are okay. This is Apple's problem to solve. Zero time, money or attention from the TSA or the airlines will be invested. If the FAA bans any Macbooks, all "Apple looking thingies" will be effectively banned. Source: 3 decades of govt and a…
> I can almost guarantee the TSA will invest zero dollars or time into deciding which MacBooks are okay. This is Apple's problem to solve. Zero time, money or attention from the TSA or the airlines will be invested. how is it apple's problem then? by the way you've described things, it doesn't seem like it's anybody's problem. it could be a marketing problem for apple, but it doesn't seem like they care about those a…
That's what I mean. It's a public image / marketing problem if the TSA starts blanket banning apple laptops.
> Yes, all those issues could be addressed by making Apple laptops thicker and heavier Dell XPS 13 is both, thinner and lighter than Macbook Air, yet its battery replacement process is rated as "very easy"[1] by ifixit. The same applies to Dell XPS 15 vs Macbook Pro. [1] https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Dell+XPS+13+Battery+Replacement...
Looks like the Dell XPS 13 uses a single rectangular battery, though it still requires unscrewing the whole case, disconnecting a battery cable, and then unscrewing the battery, so it's not something you can do on the fly. The 2018 MacBook Air battery isn't quite so neat and rectangular: https://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/HvCgVPqVQtVI5K5X.h... And you can see here how it fits into all of the available space in…
I admit I'm really confused as to why this particular comment is being downvoted.
This doesn't mean that TSA will be checking serial numbers. It means that people will be scared and consider checking if they need a recall, and completing it, instead of delaying. It does mean that if you bring a laptop for which the recall applies onto a plane, you could be found at fault if it crashes. Assuming you live and they're able to read the serial number from it, anyways. I assume that comes with some sort…
I have a hard time believing that this is all just to point the finger after a plane crashes. Sure the logistics of enforcing it are difficult, but this does have the effect of telling the public not to do it.
It's for "dear public, please self-police so your plane doesn't crash". That there's a possible stick behind that "don't die" carrot is not the primary point, and honestly not one most people will consider.
Indefinitely, because most people do not consider it a "fiasco." Have you seen what the batteries look like for, say, the new 13" Macbook Pro or the 12" Macbook? They're not bricks you could just feed into a slot. They're multi-part systems that distribute the battery through the gaps in the case. Fixing them in place means they don't need extra casing support, don't need to be near a specific edge and are flexible e…
> Yes, all those issues could be addressed by making Apple laptops thicker and heavier Dell XPS 13 is both, thinner and lighter than Macbook Air, yet its battery replacement process is rated as "very easy"[1] by ifixit. The same applies to Dell XPS 15 vs Macbook Pro. [1] https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Dell+XPS+13+Battery+Replacement...
I own an xps 15. It gets mega hot and can't run anything without having to slow down performance because it is too hot. Whatever the optimal battery solution is XPS15 is not doing a good job of it.
I'd imagine the batteries being switched for plastic explosive would be a simple way to take explosives onboard for unsophisticated attackers, turning on rules out that possibility. Not everyone who wants to blow stuff up is a hacker.
Wouldn’t plastic explosive have a different density to real batteries, and thus show up very obviously on the scanner? The machines are tuned to highlight specific risky materials (such as liquids & gels). At one point it was common to be asked to turn on laptops etc. But I haven’t seen them do that for years - presumably because the scanners have improved.
LiPo laptop battery is apparently around 1.8-2 g/cm3 (sorry can't find good figures), whilst C4 is 1.73 g/cm3. Not sure what the density resolution is like -- I'd guess it's poor because you can't tell what thickness/type of casing you're looking through from the luggage "xray"; I'd imagine it to be primarily good at relative density.
In fact, Dell XPS 13 is twice as powerful as Macbook Air, but lasts only a little shorter on battery[1]. [1] https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-macbook-air-vs-dell-xps-13-i...
If you were to compare it to the new Dell XPS 13 2-in-1 which uses a 10th gen Intel chip and is marketed to have 17 hours of battery life, I think it'd be more than twice as powerful and that one would last just as long if not longer. But again, that might be an apples to oranges comparison with the different chip generations. But Apple always is a bit behind on adopting those new chips.
Oh wow, that now that sounds like an upgrade. Sadly it doesn't seem to be available in the UK quite yet.
The FAA has a video on the subject: https://youtu.be/vS6KA_Si-m8?t=185 I suspect the rationale is that any potential for exposing new parts of the battery chemistry to water are dwarfed by the effectiveness of stopping the thermal runaway, and battery chemistry that's already reacted can't react again.
> The FAA has a video on the subject: > https://youtu.be/vS6KA_Si-m8?t=185 > I suspect the rationale is that any potential for exposing new parts of the battery chemistry to water are dwarfed by the effectiveness of stopping the thermal runaway, and battery chemistry that's already reacted can't react again. Immediately following that clip is an exhibit showcasing the deployment of a Halon extinguisher to extinguish…
Given that the clip is listed as methods to put out such fires, listed in order of effectiveness, most effective first, yes of course they list other methods, but as you can see they consider water most effective, halon + water for cooling less effective, and halon alone barely effective (the fire restarts).