Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Retina Macbook 2015 Teardown

ifixit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 117 posts

Re: Retina Macbook 2015 Teardown

#61

Post by hollerith »

s_kilk wrote: post #52
hollerith wrote: post #40

>Apple has opted to transition from using a row of LEDs with a light guide panel, to installing individual LEDs beneath each key. That's progress. Now, Apple, please replace each LED with an infra-red or a visible-light sensor, so that someone can write software to put a representation of the keyboard onto the screen that shows which keys have a finger hovering over them, so that the user never has to look at the key…

> so that the user never has to look at the keyboard except when the keyboard needs cleaning. The user should learn to touch-type.

So you can hit the - key or the ] key without looking at the keyboard as quickly as someone who is looking at the keyboard?

You just reach over and press the key and you never press an adjacent key by mistake?

Re: Retina Macbook 2015 Teardown

#62

Post by masklinn »

raverbashing wrote: post #41
masklinn wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's an O, not 0: It's a 0 on the left-hand side of the meter, the meter is bottomed out whereas it's at the first mark for the 2015 macbook.

Yes, but it is a 'LATIN CAPITAL LETTER O' on the text

It's still a score of 0 for the orange's repairability.

Re: Retina Macbook 2015 Teardown

#63

Post by petercooper »

a_bonobo wrote: post #13

Worth noting that this device, typical for Apple, gets the worst "repairability" score: >The MacBook 2015 Repairability Score: 1 out of 10 (10 is easiest to repair) There are several reasons why this happens; the optimist says that to save space Apple had to glue and solder so much, the pessimist says it's so that Apple can charge more for repairs/replacements. But I think both can agree that this generates more e-wa…

starting 2017, all mobile chargers in the EU have to be of the same standard to reduce electronic waste.

I doubt micro USB will cut it in 2017, but I also doubt everyone will be using Lightning. So I wonder if USB Type C will end up being that single standard - it'd explain why Apple's keen to try it out in a new product line already.

Re: Retina Macbook 2015 Teardown

#64

Post by lorenzfx »

hollerith wrote: post #61
s_kilk wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so that the user never has to look at the keyboard except when the keyboard needs cleaning. The user should learn to touch-type.

So you can hit the - key or the ] key without looking at the keyboard as quickly as someone who is looking at the keyboard? You just reach over and press the key and you never press an adjacent key by mistake?

exactly. And as I don't use the layout that is printed on the keys, looking wouldn't help anyway.

Re: Retina Macbook 2015 Teardown

#65

Post by cowsandmilk »

a_bonobo wrote: post #13

Worth noting that this device, typical for Apple, gets the worst "repairability" score: >The MacBook 2015 Repairability Score: 1 out of 10 (10 is easiest to repair) There are several reasons why this happens; the optimist says that to save space Apple had to glue and solder so much, the pessimist says it's so that Apple can charge more for repairs/replacements. But I think both can agree that this generates more e-wa…

> all mobile chargers in the EU have to be of the same standard to reduce electronic waste.

And yet this is the first criticism of the macbook 2015 by iFixit. In their opinion, moving to USB-C is creating waste since you cannot reuse your magsafe adaptor with this new macbook. Then they state moving to USB-C will cause more accidental damage than using magsafe, thus creating more waste.

Re: Retina Macbook 2015 Teardown

#66

Post by std_throwaway »

raverbashing wrote: post #42
ksec wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at the size of it compared to the Intel CPU. That thing is huge. What are the usual node size SSD controller manufactured in? 28/40nm

Here's something that might be surprising to some: package size is related to the number of pins mostly, not to the size of the silicon - and more pins if the consumption is higher (Usually bigger silicon has more pins, and vice versa, but not necessarily)

Usually yes. There is even a little PCB between the mainboard and the chip to get enough area for the thousands of pins.

But this is not the case if they stack the flash chips with the controller chips. Then only a few external pins are needed for communication and power. But the flash chips actually need the silicon area for all those tiny flash cells.

Re: Retina Macbook 2015 Teardown

#67

Post by userbinator »

xienze wrote: post #58
revelation wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only if your understanding of "leading companies in ewaste" is that their products tick a bunch of boxes for materials used to be easily recyclable. But that is not the essence of the term. To avoid ewaste, you should avoid creating any in the first place. Creating products that will be useful for 10+ years instead of until the next model cycle .

> Creating products that will be useful for 10+ years Well that's just a matter of opinion, isn't it? Nothing's going to stop you from running this laptop 10 years from now just like nothing's going to stop you from running a PC laptop 10 years from now. The question is _are you going to want to_ continue using a 10 year old laptop? That's an eternity in technological terms. Sure you can upgrade a PC laptop to squeez…

Nothing's going to stop you from running this laptop 10 years from now just like nothing's going to stop you from running a PC laptop 10 years from now.

Except for the parts that fail and can't be easily repaired...?

Incidentally, I know many people who are still using machines in the 6-8-year-old range, and it fits their use cases perfectly well. We're long past the days of multiple-times improvements in efficiency with each new generation of CPU, the improvements are much smaller now.

If the original PC from 1981 could work after 30 years with only a bit of repair...

http://www.pcworld.com/article/237878/can_you_do_real_work_w...

...do you think you could do the same with this Macbook in 2045? For what tasks would it still be useful if you could?

An interesting related article on this: http://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?page_id=1927

Re: Retina Macbook 2015 Teardown

#68

Post by hyperbovine »

martinp wrote: post #55
colinramsay wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Repairability" really means two things: 1) You can fiddle with the insides 2) You can fix it when it goes wrong Despite what you may read on places like HN and Reddit, no-one in the real world gives two hoots about #1, and if you make a product that has good reliability then #2 becomes moot.

Even if Apple uses high quality components that fail less frequently, it's still computer hardware at the end of the day. Hardware fails, no matter how much QA you do, so #2 is never moot. Experienced bad memory on a MBP Retina (late 2013) recently, it was purchased in December 2013. You can't swap out the memory because it's soldered to the motherboard, so the entire motherboard has to be ordered from Apple and repl…

So you shell out $1500 for one of these guys plus AppleCare. Three years of free, no questions asked repairs, then the thing lives an indeterminate amount of time, dies, and you do it all over again. When you look at how much people are comfortable spending these days on wireless, cell phones, digital services in general, I think most of us are fine with that scenario. The days of buying a PS/2 in hopes of passing it down to your grandkids are long gone.

Re: Retina Macbook 2015 Teardown

#69

Post by xienze »

userbinator wrote: post #67
xienze wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Creating products that will be useful for 10+ years Well that's just a matter of opinion, isn't it? Nothing's going to stop you from running this laptop 10 years from now just like nothing's going to stop you from running a PC laptop 10 years from now. The question is _are you going to want to_ continue using a 10 year old laptop? That's an eternity in technological terms. Sure you can upgrade a PC laptop to squeez…

Nothing's going to stop you from running this laptop 10 years from now just like nothing's going to stop you from running a PC laptop 10 years from now. Except for the parts that fail and can't be easily repaired...? Incidentally, I know many people who are still using machines in the 6-8-year-old range, and it fits their use cases perfectly well. We're long past the days of multiple-times improvements in efficiency…

> Except for the parts that fail and can't be easily repaired...?

And there aren't parts like that on a more open PC? I mean, if your USB port or display stops working, it's going to be a bit of an undertaking fixing it, glue or no glue.

> Incidentally, I know many people who are still using machines in the 6-8-year-old range, and it fits their use cases perfectly well. We're long past the days of multiple-times improvements in efficiency with each new generation of CPU, the improvements are much smaller now.

Indeed, I still have a very old laptop kicking around. But it's not my daily machine or even free from dust for that matter. I think there's a bit of masochism involved in using a machine WAAAY past its expiration date (6 years isn't, but 10 certainly is) when it's likely that a $299 Walmart special will smoke it.

> ...do you think you could do the same with this Macbook in 2045? For what tasks would it still be useful if you could?

The repairing part would be much more difficult, yes. But unless you're interested in antique computing, are you seriously going to make a go at using this thing on a day to day basis in 30 years? I really don't think that's the standard by which you should judge this thing.

And for the record, this thing would be much more equipped to handle computing 30 years from now than a machine from 30 years ago is at handling today's computing. But that's not saying much.

Re: Retina Macbook 2015 Teardown

#70

Post by kmfrk »

a_bonobo wrote: post #13

Worth noting that this device, typical for Apple, gets the worst "repairability" score: >The MacBook 2015 Repairability Score: 1 out of 10 (10 is easiest to repair) There are several reasons why this happens; the optimist says that to save space Apple had to glue and solder so much, the pessimist says it's so that Apple can charge more for repairs/replacements. But I think both can agree that this generates more e-wa…

Yeah, my MacBook Air's battery is dying, and instead of getting a new battery, I have to hand it to a certified shop and fork over $300.

It just seems dumb to me not to be cognizant of the fact that batteries tend to kick it after 3-5 years. Same thing happened to my ThinkPad, but the battery was easily replaceable.

Post reply on HN