4 ms·

Just because Apple wants to increase their profit margins, by enforcing planned obsolescence and creating e-waste on scales that are beyond comprehension, does

Just because Apple wants to increase their profit margins, by enforcing planned obsolescence and creating e-waste on scales that are beyond comprehension, does not mean that everyone else should just ignore it and shut up about it. It's not Apple's way or the highway, there is room for criticism and change. There are also millions of Apple customers who have no idea that Apple is actively going out of their way to ensure that the devices they own can't be upgraded. Pretending that everybody knows how strict Apple is about planned obsolescence is not a given.

justinator 4y ago
>by enforcing planned obsolescence Their support for software updates and security patches in older models is actually quite good. They've also made a ton of strides in the right direction when it comes to repair-ability of their phone line.
- heavyset_go 4y ago
  I can run Windows or Linux on any computer for decades if I want to, and I have. Software is not the issue. The issue is that Macs are artificially limited by hardware, not the software that they run, although macOS deprecation can be a limitation. Computers generally become obsolete because of hardware limitations, and Macs have had had limitations imposed by soldered components like memory for more than a decade, now.
  - kube-system 4y ago
    Non-Apple laptops have also been slowly moving to more soldered components. This will likely continue as memory timings and power consumption requirements continue to tighten. I remember when you could replace the CPU in laptops, however the benefit to doing so didn't keep many systems out of landfills.
  - mgkimsal 4y ago
    Can you run modern windows on a machine from 2003? I doubt it would install. Can you run winXP on a modern machine? Possibly, but most people probably shouldn't as there's no support for it any longer.
  - justinator 4y ago
    >I can run Windows or Linux on any computer for decades if I want to, and I have. That's super cool, if that's what you're in to, but other than a small percentage of geeks, there's limited utility to do that for the majority of Macbook users. If you want to run a decades-old computer, then absolutely yes: there are much better computers to choose from, and at a good price (mostly free).
- softfalcon 4y ago
  They do provide decent support. It's not perfect, but it far outpaces most hardware vendors out there. As for repair-ability of devices. Let's be real here. Repair-ability is garbage all around and every major vendor (including Apple) is doing token gestures at best to make the situation easier. Take one look at the last minute changes Apple/Google/Microsoft forced into the recent New York right-to-repair bills and it's obvious they have absolutely zero interest in furthering repair-ability of any of their devices. Any positives you hear in the media about repair-ability are all a song-and-dance so they can sneak another "security measure" into their devices that makes it impossible to order parts online and fix your phone yourself.
yohannparis 4y ago
I might disagree here on some points. Most Apple users aren’t power users, and they will run their computer to the ground or close too. I have entourage still using their 8-year-old iMac daily. For power users that buy Apple, they tend to keep it for a few years, but they don’t throw it away. They resell it, and Apple laptops keep their value well over time. So it’s lifespan is extended, and the new owner didn’t buy a new laptop. And we’re back into my first point. I have family/friend to whom I sold/gave Apple computers, and they’re still using them even on 10-year-old laptops (MBA core i5, MBP core i5). So yes, you’re right, but it’s not all in absolutism.
sockaddr 4y ago
How do they create more ewaste though? Like many others report my experience is that apple products routinely last multiple times longer than other tech. I only just last week retired a MacBook bought in 2013, and it still worked just fine. Now someone else bought it and is using it. Things like PCs and android phones usually have some combination of cheap materials, bloat/crap ware or poorly designed software stacks that don’t age well. I used to own PCs, buy android phones, etc and the difference in longevity is incredible.
- ramesh31 4y ago
  This is the main reason I only buy Apple hardware as well. The moment you open the box on a PC desktop, it's basically worthless beyond what you could part it out for. A Mac will maintain >50% of it's retail price for years.
  - antiterra 4y ago
    A quick glance at the market for clamshell g3 iBooks shows how irrationally well Apple computers can hold value.
- wickedsickeune 4y ago
  In theory, Apple could still offer products that last many years AND are upgradeable, so that they only get partially converted to waste.
  - kube-system 4y ago
    That's not really true, there are no sockets for LPDDR4X or LPDDR5.
- macjohnmcc 4y ago
  I have an early 2013 15" MBP now running Ubuntu and a late 2013 13" MBP and it is running the latest macOS that is supported on it and Windows 11. I have a new M1 MBP but those other two machines are just slow compared to this. They are otherwise going strong in their new roles.
seanmcdirmid 4y ago
I'm using a 2014 MBP and an iMac from 2013. Feel no reason to upgrade at all on those machines. I'm less happy with my 2G (2018?) iPad Pro, which...while it still works great, the battery is clearly discharging too quickly. I've never had a Lenovo (at work) that was good past 2 years. Which one is creating more e-waste?
jrmg 4y ago
There are also millions of Apple customers who have no idea that Apple is actively going out of their way to ensure that the devices they own can't be upgraded. I think it’s way more likely they’re trying to create devices that are lighter and more reliable.* Does anyone here really believe that the vast majority of users would ever upgrade a laptop? I don’t mean the folks here, we’re outliers - although I think this is true of _most_ of us too. They get one that does what they need, and buy a new one when modern software won’t run on it well. It’s really unlikely that they even could upgrade it sensibly, because at that point most every component in the new laptop will be noticeably better and so it’ll be better to get a new one with all-better components. If what I said above is true, the non-upgradable laptop is the more responsible option - it’s less resource-intensive to produce, lighter to transport, and probably more energy efficient in use. *Edit: and cheaper!
rootusrootus 4y ago
> enforcing planned obsolescence and creating e-waste on scales that are beyond comprehension Last time I saw someone study it, the average ownership time for a Macbook was double the average for a PC laptop. Anecdotally, I spend a lot less money on electronics when I'm in the Apple ecosystem (phones & laptops) than I do when I'm on an Android/PC kick. The mild savings in capital outlay is quickly dwarfed by the absolutely abysmal resale value and quality.
urda 4y ago
> by enforcing planned obsolescence This simply isn't true, as Apple supports their devices from phones to laptops far-far-far longer than their competitors. It's why iPhones last longer in the wild. They have demonstrated clear support to their customers through their actions.
- fsflover 4y ago
  GNU/Linux-supported devices receive updates far-far-far longer, both laptops and phones.
  - taylodl 4y ago
    Then run Linux on your MacBook when you no longer have an Apple-supported Mac OS, which is 10 years. Lots of people have.
    - fsflover 4y ago
      I heard it's not always reliable, since the proprietary drivers cannot be easily reverse engineered.
      - taylodl 4y ago
        It's actually more reliable than on PC's because there's far fewer hardware combinations to support and Apple doesn't use particularly exotic hardware.
        fsflover 4y ago
        Is suspend working reliably on Linux for MacBooks?
        taylodl 4y ago
        That's a global issue with Linux. There are people having problems with Linux sleep/suspend on a wide variety of makes of laptops, include Apple's. But not everybody is having a problem with every make of laptop which means it's either a distribution issue, user error, or some combination of the two.
xenadu02 4y ago
The vast majority of upgradeable machines are never actually upgraded. Basically no laptop can have its CPU or GPU upgraded to begin with. Upgradability is not free. It has a weight and volume cost. Depending on implementation it can also have a performance cost - for example a user-swappable battery means a 30-40% reduction in battery capacity OR a corresponding increase in weight+volume. For another example SODIMM slots take up space and are larger than surface mount soldered DRAM chips... I mean that should be obvious right? Conspiracy theorists are gonna see conspiracy theories. Engineers look at ancient "luggables", imagine a future where Star Trek pads exist, then incrementally iterate reducing power consumption on 200 different individual components, shrinking the volume of 27 different assemblies, and making thousands of difficult choices - all of which has to yield a sellable product today so there will even be a chance to improve in the future. There is no magic. You can't wave your wand and make the future week-long battery life laptop that weighs nothing appear out of nowhere. Somewhere along the way you have to decide if you are going to keep the space for the extra connectors and SSD controller or if you're going to integrate everything to shave off some weight and reduce volume, along with cut power consumption by removing a single chip. The nay-sayers claim the gains are minimal for those specific changes but you can make that claim for most of the changes made along the way to get from a luggable to the modern MacBook Air. Some people really needed SCSI ports and are still angry they're gone. If everyone listened to those people laptops would have the weight of bricks and get 20 minutes on battery. History has proven those with the engineer mindset are more likely to be successful than those with the conspiracy mindset but it's up to each person to choose. (Of course you can also make a living filling a niche - the world is large)
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  I get people preferring upgradeable hardware, but find the notion that Apple went non-upgradeable to squeeze more money out of people to be among the sillier ideas people have about Apple. There are so very many other ways they could be doing that, but are instead doing the opposite. I don't think they cared enough about capturing a little more business from the surely single-digit percentage of people who ever replaced anything on their laptop, including the battery, to radically redesign the whole product line. Especially when there are other plausible reasons they might want to do that. I don't know how people get these ideas so stuck in their head, with such confidence, that they post about them on Web forums. Whatever evil Apple may in-fact get up to, this one doesn't even pass the smell test.
DrThunder 4y ago
"Ignoring" it means you buy an alternative product. As OP states there are plenty of alternatives. Capitalism works and money talks. Put your money elsewhere. If someone provides a better alternative than apple, the problem fixes itself. This is best course of action for you to change apple. Unless you're talking about some forced government legislation to make apple do things the way you want... and that's fraught with all sorts of other issues. These companies aren't going to listen to your whining. They just want your money. Give it to them or don't. Not everything is some social justice activity.

justinator 4y ago

>by enforcing planned obsolescence Their support for software updates and security patches in older models is actually quite good. They've also made a ton of strides in the right direction when it comes to repair-ability of their phone line.

heavyset_go 4y ago
I can run Windows or Linux on any computer for decades if I want to, and I have. Software is not the issue. The issue is that Macs are artificially limited by hardware, not the software that they run, although macOS deprecation can be a limitation. Computers generally become obsolete because of hardware limitations, and Macs have had had limitations imposed by soldered components like memory for more than a decade, now.
- kube-system 4y ago
  Non-Apple laptops have also been slowly moving to more soldered components. This will likely continue as memory timings and power consumption requirements continue to tighten. I remember when you could replace the CPU in laptops, however the benefit to doing so didn't keep many systems out of landfills.
- mgkimsal 4y ago
  Can you run modern windows on a machine from 2003? I doubt it would install. Can you run winXP on a modern machine? Possibly, but most people probably shouldn't as there's no support for it any longer.
- justinator 4y ago
  >I can run Windows or Linux on any computer for decades if I want to, and I have. That's super cool, if that's what you're in to, but other than a small percentage of geeks, there's limited utility to do that for the majority of Macbook users. If you want to run a decades-old computer, then absolutely yes: there are much better computers to choose from, and at a good price (mostly free).
softfalcon 4y ago
They do provide decent support. It's not perfect, but it far outpaces most hardware vendors out there. As for repair-ability of devices. Let's be real here. Repair-ability is garbage all around and every major vendor (including Apple) is doing token gestures at best to make the situation easier. Take one look at the last minute changes Apple/Google/Microsoft forced into the recent New York right-to-repair bills and it's obvious they have absolutely zero interest in furthering repair-ability of any of their devices. Any positives you hear in the media about repair-ability are all a song-and-dance so they can sneak another "security measure" into their devices that makes it impossible to order parts online and fix your phone yourself.

yohannparis 4y ago

I might disagree here on some points. Most Apple users aren’t power users, and they will run their computer to the ground or close too. I have entourage still using their 8-year-old iMac daily. For power users that buy Apple, they tend to keep it for a few years, but they don’t throw it away. They resell it, and Apple laptops keep their value well over time. So it’s lifespan is extended, and the new owner didn’t buy a new laptop. And we’re back into my first point. I have family/friend to whom I sold/gave Apple computers, and they’re still using them even on 10-year-old laptops (MBA core i5, MBP core i5). So yes, you’re right, but it’s not all in absolutism.

sockaddr 4y ago

How do they create more ewaste though? Like many others report my experience is that apple products routinely last multiple times longer than other tech. I only just last week retired a MacBook bought in 2013, and it still worked just fine. Now someone else bought it and is using it. Things like PCs and android phones usually have some combination of cheap materials, bloat/crap ware or poorly designed software stacks that don’t age well. I used to own PCs, buy android phones, etc and the difference in longevity is incredible.

ramesh31 4y ago
This is the main reason I only buy Apple hardware as well. The moment you open the box on a PC desktop, it's basically worthless beyond what you could part it out for. A Mac will maintain >50% of it's retail price for years.
- antiterra 4y ago
  A quick glance at the market for clamshell g3 iBooks shows how irrationally well Apple computers can hold value.
wickedsickeune 4y ago
In theory, Apple could still offer products that last many years AND are upgradeable, so that they only get partially converted to waste.
- kube-system 4y ago
  That's not really true, there are no sockets for LPDDR4X or LPDDR5.
macjohnmcc 4y ago
I have an early 2013 15" MBP now running Ubuntu and a late 2013 13" MBP and it is running the latest macOS that is supported on it and Windows 11. I have a new M1 MBP but those other two machines are just slow compared to this. They are otherwise going strong in their new roles.

seanmcdirmid 4y ago

I'm using a 2014 MBP and an iMac from 2013. Feel no reason to upgrade at all on those machines. I'm less happy with my 2G (2018?) iPad Pro, which...while it still works great, the battery is clearly discharging too quickly. I've never had a Lenovo (at work) that was good past 2 years. Which one is creating more e-waste?

jrmg 4y ago

There are also millions of Apple customers who have no idea that Apple is actively going out of their way to ensure that the devices they own can't be upgraded. I think it’s way more likely they’re trying to create devices that are lighter and more reliable.* Does anyone here really believe that the vast majority of users would ever upgrade a laptop? I don’t mean the folks here, we’re outliers - although I think this is true of _most_ of us too. They get one that does what they need, and buy a new one when modern software won’t run on it well. It’s really unlikely that they even could upgrade it sensibly, because at that point most every component in the new laptop will be noticeably better and so it’ll be better to get a new one with all-better components. If what I said above is true, the non-upgradable laptop is the more responsible option - it’s less resource-intensive to produce, lighter to transport, and probably more energy efficient in use. *Edit: and cheaper!

rootusrootus 4y ago

> enforcing planned obsolescence and creating e-waste on scales that are beyond comprehension Last time I saw someone study it, the average ownership time for a Macbook was double the average for a PC laptop. Anecdotally, I spend a lot less money on electronics when I'm in the Apple ecosystem (phones & laptops) than I do when I'm on an Android/PC kick. The mild savings in capital outlay is quickly dwarfed by the absolutely abysmal resale value and quality.

urda 4y ago

> by enforcing planned obsolescence This simply isn't true, as Apple supports their devices from phones to laptops far-far-far longer than their competitors. It's why iPhones last longer in the wild. They have demonstrated clear support to their customers through their actions.

fsflover 4y ago
GNU/Linux-supported devices receive updates far-far-far longer, both laptops and phones.
- taylodl 4y ago
  Then run Linux on your MacBook when you no longer have an Apple-supported Mac OS, which is 10 years. Lots of people have.
  - fsflover 4y ago
    I heard it's not always reliable, since the proprietary drivers cannot be easily reverse engineered.
    - taylodl 4y ago
      It's actually more reliable than on PC's because there's far fewer hardware combinations to support and Apple doesn't use particularly exotic hardware.
      - fsflover 4y ago
        Is suspend working reliably on Linux for MacBooks?
        taylodl 4y ago
        That's a global issue with Linux. There are people having problems with Linux sleep/suspend on a wide variety of makes of laptops, include Apple's. But not everybody is having a problem with every make of laptop which means it's either a distribution issue, user error, or some combination of the two.

xenadu02 4y ago

The vast majority of upgradeable machines are never actually upgraded. Basically no laptop can have its CPU or GPU upgraded to begin with. Upgradability is not free. It has a weight and volume cost. Depending on implementation it can also have a performance cost - for example a user-swappable battery means a 30-40% reduction in battery capacity OR a corresponding increase in weight+volume. For another example SODIMM slots take up space and are larger than surface mount soldered DRAM chips... I mean that should be obvious right? Conspiracy theorists are gonna see conspiracy theories. Engineers look at ancient "luggables", imagine a future where Star Trek pads exist, then incrementally iterate reducing power consumption on 200 different individual components, shrinking the volume of 27 different assemblies, and making thousands of difficult choices - all of which has to yield a sellable product today so there will even be a chance to improve in the future. There is no magic. You can't wave your wand and make the future week-long battery life laptop that weighs nothing appear out of nowhere. Somewhere along the way you have to decide if you are going to keep the space for the extra connectors and SSD controller or if you're going to integrate everything to shave off some weight and reduce volume, along with cut power consumption by removing a single chip. The nay-sayers claim the gains are minimal for those specific changes but you can make that claim for most of the changes made along the way to get from a luggable to the modern MacBook Air. Some people really needed SCSI ports and are still angry they're gone. If everyone listened to those people laptops would have the weight of bricks and get 20 minutes on battery. History has proven those with the engineer mindset are more likely to be successful than those with the conspiracy mindset but it's up to each person to choose. (Of course you can also make a living filling a niche - the world is large)

yamtaddle 4y ago
I get people preferring upgradeable hardware, but find the notion that Apple went non-upgradeable to squeeze more money out of people to be among the sillier ideas people have about Apple. There are so very many other ways they could be doing that, but are instead doing the opposite. I don't think they cared enough about capturing a little more business from the surely single-digit percentage of people who ever replaced anything on their laptop, including the battery, to radically redesign the whole product line. Especially when there are other plausible reasons they might want to do that. I don't know how people get these ideas so stuck in their head, with such confidence, that they post about them on Web forums. Whatever evil Apple may in-fact get up to, this one doesn't even pass the smell test.

DrThunder 4y ago

"Ignoring" it means you buy an alternative product. As OP states there are plenty of alternatives. Capitalism works and money talks. Put your money elsewhere. If someone provides a better alternative than apple, the problem fixes itself. This is best course of action for you to change apple. Unless you're talking about some forced government legislation to make apple do things the way you want... and that's fraught with all sorts of other issues. These companies aren't going to listen to your whining. They just want your money. Give it to them or don't. Not everything is some social justice activity.