The only reason to stop shrinking laptops is that the physical UI can only get so small before UX suffers - and that includes making it thick enough to hold ont

The only reason to stop shrinking laptops is that the physical UI can only get so small before UX suffers - and that includes making it thick enough to hold onto. Leverage that limit by continuing to shrink components so we can fill the remaining space with more battery. They physical overhead (size, weight, cost) of socketed CPU/RAM/etc just isn't worth imposing on 99.99% of users who will never make use of that capability. This is exacerbated by the increased synergy of the components: a major part of Apple's success comes from managing the interconnectedness of all things, all carefully balanced for exact purposes - not generalized for 3rd-party parts swapping (for which failures get blamed on Apple, not the cheap POS part you thought might work). You want a lightweight high-quality device with long battery life? You're not going to get it with CPU sockets and access panels. By now, most users have learned that computers ARE disposable: come end-of-life, vanishingly few will want to futz around with upgrading parts at cost of time spent, only to extend the life of a machine straining into obsolescence. We all dearly want to hang onto those old familiar machines, but fact is by the time a product hits that point you don't want something running the best of 5-year-old+ tech, you want the next generation with better everything. I keep coming back to a rule of thumb: for something used heavily, daily, is it worth $X/day? An iPhone X over 3 years is $1/day. A robust MacBook used for work is certainly worth $3/day. Come practical end-of-life, it has more than paid for itself. ...and that's why Apple has made it so easy to switch up to a new machine, and abandoned notions of component upgrades. If coffee costs more during that time than the hardware in question, get a new one and sell/donate the old (making the switch even cheaper).