471–480 of 493 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly, Apple is killing third party repairs, so they can demand for 10k USD from you as in the OP.
> so they can demand for 10k USD from you as in the OP I think you and others in this thread are fundamentally confused - the OP has paid nothing - the cost is Apple’s.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> so they can demand for 10k USD from you as in the OP I think you and others in this thread are fundamentally confused - the OP has paid nothing - the cost is Apple’s.
Even if in this case Apple paid the costs, very often it's on the customer to pay for out of warranty repairs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These battery cells have the same physical structure. They can be shaped however is needed, whether it's one big block or several little ones connected by wires. The same capacity requires roughly the same weight and thickness, although several smaller cells will mean more packaging material and less collective capacity, but obviously allows for more flexible placement within the chassis. However, none of this requir…
> roughly the same weight and thickness Are we looking at the same picture? They are 100% not the same thickness. They certainly could have the same mass, but thats precisely my point - if you want an easily removable battery you sacrifice other features (thickness for example). > although several smaller cells will mean more packaging material and less collective capacity Are you saying batteries didn't get more eff…
No, it's the entire point.
Nobody is asking to go back to the older "easily removable" designs with dedicated battery compartments. The problem isn't the design of the batteries being multiple smaller cells spread around but rather that they are glued to the chassis. This makes them harder to remove than if they weren't.
To be extremely clear, take a 2021 Macbook and just don't glue the batteries inside to the casing. That's it, that's all there is to it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Apple should stop nagging you to upgrade the OS if your hardware wasn't built to support the newer versions." When Apple introduced OSX I refused to upgrade a G4; I stayed on OS9. I never connected that computer to the internet, it was only used as a DAW. This "upgrade the OS" nonsense is an old trick. Microsoft made it infamous. I had Windows computers back in the day, late 90s, where I only upgraded the hardware,…
Have to partially disagree here. Remember Windows XP? Do you want to go back to that after having used W10? In W10 everything just...works. Think about how much time you spent fucking around with drivers or registry settings or TCP/IP settings or whatever to get things to work in XP, all of that is gone in W10. I can do a fresh install in 2 hrs and the computer is back to "like new" and not have to spend an additiona…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow, it's pretty interesting that you took the time to challenge the statement without actually verifying that you are correct. You are, of course, wrong. Cursory googling will show average typing speed to be about half the figure I noted. I've never worked with anyone who typed as quickly as I can, and I've been working quite a while. But hey, at least you got to drop a dig in about adverbs, so you've got that going…
I recommend expanding your web search just a little farther... 90 WPM is not considered "very, very high"! 90 WPM is ok, certainly above average. But please don't take it personally, I was just scrolling through the comments and saw what I thought was a typo, and if not, thought I'd share my perspective. 120WPM can be considered "fast". If 90 WPM is "very, very fast" then what about those at 120 or 150?
As long as we're having a big bitch-fest here, I'll throw in my $.02. Other than expanding batteries, my laptops have generally been trouble-free. But the problem I do have is that the older my MBP, the slower it becomes when I upgrade the OS. When I upgraded my 2015 to Big Sur last year, it essentially became unusable because it ran so slowly. It now sits in my closet. Apple should stop nagging you to upgrade the OS…
"Apple should stop nagging you to upgrade the OS if your hardware wasn't built to support the newer versions." When Apple introduced OSX I refused to upgrade a G4; I stayed on OS9. I never connected that computer to the internet, it was only used as a DAW. This "upgrade the OS" nonsense is an old trick. Microsoft made it infamous. I had Windows computers back in the day, late 90s, where I only upgraded the hardware,…
Microsoft actually has a performance and user experience incentive to make their OS work well on older hardware. With Apple they can just force you to upgrade, consequences be damned.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hopefully, Apple learned from their experience. By the way, isn't it nice when the hardware manufacturer doesn't degrade performance on failing hardware but instead tells the user?
Honestly, I think the best alternative in this case would have been to degrade performance (btw, it's a very very slight degradation that most users would not even notice in routine use) and also inform the user. But I agree with you, in that I do hope Apple has learned from this ordeal. I just wanted to speak out against what I see as very unfair, bad-faith attacks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If Macs had the reliability of iPads and iPhones it would make more sense to not get the extended warranty. They do. People who don't have problems don't complain so you have to be careful basing your impression on what people feel motivated to mention.
it's true, ggp's claim of "20-30% chance you will have problems during those first years." is not based in data. if that was the rate, the cost of the extended warranty (apple care) would be much higher.
It was probably worse than 30% for the 2016 MBP models considering the keyboard issues though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you make them guarantee it for three years (or perhaps five) you give them a stronger incentive to build it to last, and you can be sure it’s going to last that long. There’s a strong environmental (public good) aspect to this, so no, you should not be able to opt out. I find it even more ridiculous that big items like fridges, ovens, and washing machines are also often only guaranteed one year. I think a ten year…
Why stop at 10? Is there some mechanical threshold we can't design around at that point? I'd propose 20 years should be the minimum.. unless you hate the environment.
Of course, legislators know this and that's why it won't happen unless it becomes much more economically feasible than it is today.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why stop at 10? Is there some mechanical threshold we can't design around at that point? I'd propose 20 years should be the minimum.. unless you hate the environment.
The irony in these 'demands' is that this would simply serve to further entrench Apple in its market position, since if you legislated for increasing the cost of doing business tenfold like this, you'd shut out any competitor that wasn't flush with the cash to make it happen. Of course, legislators know this and that's why it won't happen unless it becomes much more economically feasible than it is today.
It might increase costs more for cheap and shoddy vendors, which is kind of the point — you want to rule out making cheap crap that breaks as a point of competition — but again I’d be surprised if the increase was anything like as big as that.