Apple's Blue Ocean • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple's Blue Ocean

#101

Post by threeseed » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 3:37 AM UTC

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #61

EPWN3D wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

R2R enthusiasts are incapable of seeing any decision from a perspective that isn't their own personal fetish for tinkering. So any and all advantages of sealing the battery into the chassis are just waved away and not acknowledged at all. Lighter devices? That's irrelevant, no one cares about device weight. Cheaper to manufacture? That's just a ploy to gasp make more money! How dare they?! Waterproofing? Well I don't…

On the contrary, I find in amazing to see the lengths that Apple apologists will go to point out these spurious reasons why Apple included non-removable batteries. The only point that you really list that is defensible is waterproofing. Lighter devices? Cheaper to manufacture? The idea that making a removable battery would make a phone noticeably heavier or impact the cost more than a cent or two is laughable. Even w…

Removable batteries requires valuable space for the mechanism to hold the battery, transfer the power from the battery, eject the battery etc. It doesn't come for free.

At least based on what I've seen on camera mechanisms you're taking about 10-20% reduction in the battery cell.

Re: Apple's Blue Ocean

#102

Post by bradknowles » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 3:44 AM UTC

lbotos wrote: post #45

Thorrez wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd still need some in-device battery to keep the phone from fully powering off every time you change the outside battery. I think people want their phones to not have to fully power off all the time.

30min of standby capacity for an internal lil battery, external poptarts galore? I don't hate it. It's kind of an interesting play because apple could make a super thin phone that has 30 min battery life and then a few different size pop tarts with different capacities. You want 3 days, get the mondo brick.

How is that materially different from what Apple already has?

Re: Apple's Blue Ocean

#103

Post by javchz » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 3:48 AM UTC

andromeduck wrote: post #100

ttfkam wrote: post #77

Two things I've been waiting on for years: • MST (DisplayPort daisy chaining) in MacOS. The hardware has supported it for over a decade. The OS is the weak link here. It's the difference between spending $75-$300 for a dock in addition to the cables and just connecting the monitors together along with a single cable to the first monitor. • Non-soldered storage. Seriously. Storage is the most likely component to fail.…

Most people don't write terabytes per day and the ones who do can just double their storage.

But they do, specially in low RAM systems, as the SSD becomes like a backup ram to juggle extra information.

Re: Apple's Blue Ocean

#104

Post by webmobdev » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 3:59 AM UTC

javchz wrote: post #103

andromeduck wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people don't write terabytes per day and the ones who do can just double their storage.

But they do, specially in low RAM systems, as the SSD becomes like a backup ram to juggle extra information.

More so when the RAM remains limited on Macs as it too is integrated with the CPU and hence is non-upgradable. This is even worse than soldered SSD, as we can still make an attempt to replace the SSD chips with new ones with careful soldering, but nothing can be done about the RAM. These deliberately irreparable new Macs are just shitty products.

Re: Apple's Blue Ocean

#105

Post by Mrirazak1 » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 4:00 AM UTC

I think Apple’s blue ocean strategy is unique in the sense that it’s not when you feel they should release something but more so when they feel it’s the right time to release something and doing so in an Apple fashion way by being late. Because they make it refined to their standards.

In terms of blue oceans it’s where they see a lack of innovation because you can have many blue oceans within in anything you do if you see the problems that exist in a way that your competitors don’t and then you apply great engineering with great marketing (although sometimes it’s just marketing) to reach the numbers you need.

Re: Apple's Blue Ocean

#106

Post by eru » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 4:02 AM UTC

M3L0NM4N wrote: post #72

Reason077 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Why not no battery in the device?" How about a nuclear battery, aka radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG)? This would be sealed in (carefully!) and would last the lifetime of the device, with no need for charging, ever. Would need special steps/handling to ensure safe disposal at end of product life, however.

What about a fusion reactor, generating its own hydrogen molecules to power nuclear fusion through electrolysis from the water vapor in the air. There isn't really a theoretical limit to how small a fusion reactor can be, although clearly this would not achievable for a long time.

If you want to go totally crazy, you can use a black hole as a power source. The laws of physics don't give you a minimum size for them either. However for black holes the smaller they are, the more power they emit in terms of hawking radiation.

Re: Apple's Blue Ocean

#107

Post by eru » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 4:05 AM UTC

KennyBlanken wrote: post #37

Animats wrote: post #3

The future is batteries with more charge cycles, not replaceable batteries. The solid state battery people are claiming 10,000 charge/discharge cycles. If they can achieve that, it's 27 years of battery life. The case will wear out first.

Lithium ion batteries that can handle a thousand to several thousand charge cycles and only see 80% reduction in capacity have been available for ten years. My 2013 Macbook Pro has just such a battery, rated for 80% capacity after 1000 cycles, and it lasted over 6 years before the battery's internal resistance rose enough that heavy load would cause a brownout and the machine to force sleep. Yet they are not in wides…

> There's no incentive for anyone involved and consumers have gotten used to replacing devices every few years.

If anything, I would have thought that devices are good enough know that people don't exchange them quite so often? Especially laptops.

I can still reasonably comfortably use my 2016 laptop today. In 1993 using computer from 1986 would have been a much bigger downgrade.

Re: Apple's Blue Ocean

#108

Post by graphe » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 4:05 AM UTC

ttfkam wrote: post #77

Two things I've been waiting on for years: • MST (DisplayPort daisy chaining) in MacOS. The hardware has supported it for over a decade. The OS is the weak link here. It's the difference between spending $75-$300 for a dock in addition to the cables and just connecting the monitors together along with a single cable to the first monitor. • Non-soldered storage. Seriously. Storage is the most likely component to fail.…

With a large 4K screen, I'm not seeing any benefit for MST, and studies have shown it decreases productivity after 2 screens. The other problems are simply fixed with using iCloud and treating your laptop as a disposable, which many laptops have been designed as. If you use the MacBook add intended and invest in apple care it's unbeatable.

Re: Apple's Blue Ocean

#109

Post by usefulcat » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 4:06 AM UTC

KennyBlanken wrote: post #37

Animats wrote: post #3

The future is batteries with more charge cycles, not replaceable batteries. The solid state battery people are claiming 10,000 charge/discharge cycles. If they can achieve that, it's 27 years of battery life. The case will wear out first.

Lithium ion batteries that can handle a thousand to several thousand charge cycles and only see 80% reduction in capacity have been available for ten years. My 2013 Macbook Pro has just such a battery, rated for 80% capacity after 1000 cycles, and it lasted over 6 years before the battery's internal resistance rose enough that heavy load would cause a brownout and the machine to force sleep. Yet they are not in wides…

> even using a utility that allows you to set a limited maximum charge level to preserve the battery

Please tell me what that utility is--I've long wanted something like that but have yet to find anything like it.

FWIW, I've been doing something similar with my phone, but manually. I found an unusually low current charger that charges the phone at a rate of ~5% per hour, and I almost always keep the battery level between 25% and 75%. So far the phone is 4 years old and iOS claims that the maximum capacity of the battery is still 92%.

Re: Apple's Blue Ocean

#110

Post by 1letterunixname » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 4:09 AM UTC

ttfkam wrote: post #77

Two things I've been waiting on for years: • MST (DisplayPort daisy chaining) in MacOS. The hardware has supported it for over a decade. The OS is the weak link here. It's the difference between spending $75-$300 for a dock in addition to the cables and just connecting the monitors together along with a single cable to the first monitor. • Non-soldered storage. Seriously. Storage is the most likely component to fail.…

Apple devices aren't engineered to last; they're engineered to be manufactured, sell new, and sometimes sell expensive repairs by them.

Also, NVIDIA cards in eGPUs and Thunderbolt (arm64) aren't supported.

The best solution is either don't use Apple, or have a machine under warranty and very good backups.

Complaints aside, the Anker 777 dock does 5K-8K DP over USB-C, 1 GbE, 100w charging, 4 USB-A and more and works with m1 and m2 MBPs. Add a quality magnetic USB-C connector, and it's "MagSafe" docking to a monitor, power, and accessories with one cable. I'm in the camp of 1 giant 49" monitor, with occasional AirPlay to a nearby Apple TV 4K on an 85" TV.