4 ms·

After the last few years of hardware problems with Macs let's see who's the brave one to buy a v1 of any Apple new product (meanwhile there's probably people al

After the last few years of hardware problems with Macs let's see who's the brave one to buy a v1 of any Apple new product (meanwhile there's probably people already making a queue to buy one)

Alex3917 6y ago
If you look at the problems with the 2016 - 2019 MBP, and also the problems with the first generation intel MBPs, the biggest issue in both cases was heat. (Although there were clearly other issues as well.) The new Apple chips are going to be much more power efficient, so I think there is actually hope here. I still wouldn't buy a v1 because I think they'll have problems, but I think whatever problems they'll have will be less than previous v1s.
- pathartl 6y ago
  One of the biggest problems with absolute data loss for current Apple machines is the T2 chip dying.
  - mthoms 6y ago
    Can you expand on that?
    - nsajko 6y ago
      T2 encrypts everything, so when it fails, you lose your stored data. EDIT: also see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23076929 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23076929
    - Alex3917 6y ago
      There seems to be a bug where the chip will effectively change the master password for your encrypted disk to something random and leave you unable to access any data. I'm not sure on the details, but I've seen that happen. You might still be able to recover the data if you have iCloud reset enabled for firevault, but that obviously comes with its own risks. Basically just never go more than 24 hours without backing up, one is none, keep multiple offsite backups, etc.
      - pathartl 6y ago
        Speaking of iCloud, Apple now is able to make money when your machine dies in two expensive ways: large capacity iCloud subscriptions and a brand new machine. Now that's courage.
- slantyyz 6y ago
  > the biggest issue in both cases was heat. I don't think Apple was in any way naive about how hot Intel chips can run under load. It's also not impossible to make a laptop body that can run those chips with decent temperatures... if you're willing to make compromises on size. IMO, the biggest issue was they still chose to make the systems thin in spite of the thermal tradeoffs that would result from that. Yes, thinner's probably more desirable, but would people have stopped buying MBPs if they were a little less thin? I don't think their sales would have shrunk by much, since most Mac users are for the most part a captive audience, because they love MacOS.
  - Alex3917 6y ago
    > I don't think Apple was in any way naive about how hot Intel chips can run under load. It seems like for the 2016 MBP, they either made significant last minute changes or moved up the release date by several months. When they released the computers the Apple stores didn't even have the right screwdrivers to open them for several months. That doesn't seem like something that was planned, but rather the result of some sort of timeline shift. My guess is that they decided they needed them out the door before Christmas and so skipped the last six months of QA. Maybe it was something else, but I think it was more than just being unwilling to compromise on size. Regardless, the 2020 models are basically flawless so far, so at least there's that.

After the last few years of hardware problems with Macs let's see who's the brave one to buy a v1 of any Apple new product (meanwhile there's probably people already making a queue to buy one)

Alex3917 6y ago

If you look at the problems with the 2016 - 2019 MBP, and also the problems with the first generation intel MBPs, the biggest issue in both cases was heat. (Although there were clearly other issues as well.) The new Apple chips are going to be much more power efficient, so I think there is actually hope here. I still wouldn't buy a v1 because I think they'll have problems, but I think whatever problems they'll have will be less than previous v1s.

pathartl 6y ago
One of the biggest problems with absolute data loss for current Apple machines is the T2 chip dying.
- mthoms 6y ago
  Can you expand on that?
  - nsajko 6y ago
    T2 encrypts everything, so when it fails, you lose your stored data. EDIT: also see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23076929 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23076929
  - Alex3917 6y ago
    There seems to be a bug where the chip will effectively change the master password for your encrypted disk to something random and leave you unable to access any data. I'm not sure on the details, but I've seen that happen. You might still be able to recover the data if you have iCloud reset enabled for firevault, but that obviously comes with its own risks. Basically just never go more than 24 hours without backing up, one is none, keep multiple offsite backups, etc.
    - pathartl 6y ago
      Speaking of iCloud, Apple now is able to make money when your machine dies in two expensive ways: large capacity iCloud subscriptions and a brand new machine. Now that's courage.
slantyyz 6y ago
> the biggest issue in both cases was heat. I don't think Apple was in any way naive about how hot Intel chips can run under load. It's also not impossible to make a laptop body that can run those chips with decent temperatures... if you're willing to make compromises on size. IMO, the biggest issue was they still chose to make the systems thin in spite of the thermal tradeoffs that would result from that. Yes, thinner's probably more desirable, but would people have stopped buying MBPs if they were a little less thin? I don't think their sales would have shrunk by much, since most Mac users are for the most part a captive audience, because they love MacOS.
- Alex3917 6y ago
  > I don't think Apple was in any way naive about how hot Intel chips can run under load. It seems like for the 2016 MBP, they either made significant last minute changes or moved up the release date by several months. When they released the computers the Apple stores didn't even have the right screwdrivers to open them for several months. That doesn't seem like something that was planned, but rather the result of some sort of timeline shift. My guess is that they decided they needed them out the door before Christmas and so skipped the last six months of QA. Maybe it was something else, but I think it was more than just being unwilling to compromise on size. Regardless, the 2020 models are basically flawless so far, so at least there's that.