3 ms·
In my opinion, forcing everyone to standardize on Intel architecture chips is bad for an entirely different reason. However, since the industry is already broad
by jchw 3y ago
In my opinion, forcing everyone to standardize on Intel architecture chips is bad for an entirely different reason. However, since the industry is already broadly standardized on DDR RAM, I think we're not losing anything by pushing for "standard" RAM interfaces, even if it's just "some kind of standard socket for current JEDEC spec". It's sort of in a similar vein to the EU pushing for USB-C standardization on phones.
For motherboards, it ought to just be more future-proofed. Exactly how to incentivize that is not trivial, definitely not going to be figured out in a Hacker News comments section.
> And it will also result in worse computers that are necessarily slower and larger?
Slightly, which is exactly why it's never going to just magically happen on its own even if it would literally be better for everyone overall. But I don't really buy the idea that Apple can't make a competitive motherboard or computer if they're forced to support modular system RAM.
And personally, I'm not in favor of outlawing soldered RAM or embedded RAM or what have you, I'm in favor of disincentivizing not supporting expandable RAM on desktop and laptop computers. It doesn't have to be illegal, but it absolutely should be discouraged.
I am not, on the whole, more concerned about Apple's bottom line over concerns like ewaste and consumer rights. I have a sneaking suspicion they will do just fine, somehow.
- scarface_74 3y agoUnless you found another way to increase the speed that electrons move, the best way to have better speeds from RAM to the CPU is by integrating them on the same die. The slow, overheating, short battery life Intel world may have standardized on DDR RAM. But I’ll take my fast, quiet, cool, 14 hour battery life MacBook Pro 16 inch any day. It’s not about Apple’s bottom line. It’s about making a better computer. You’re taking away my right as a consumer to have a better computer.
- circuit10 3y agoRight to repair isn’t about standardising parts though, it’s about preventing things that purposefully prevent repair with no other good reason. For example, in recent Macbooks the lid closed sensor is paired to the device so if you replace it yourself it will stop working. Only Apple has the tool needed to pair it to the device and make it work again. There’s no good reason to do that apart from preventing repair
- hutzlibu 3y ago"You’re taking away my right as a consumer to have a better computer." I wouldn't do that. But do you think it is necessary, that your battery is fixed by glue? You won't have a 14 h battery life forever. And easy battery change should be standard, unless we are talking about diving electronics.
- scarface_74 3y agoWhy would I risk ruining my $3200 MacBook Pro to save $70 to replace the battery myself seeing how tight the tolerances are for everything related to laptop Macs instead of just letting Apple or a 3rd party authorized repair person do it for $249? The glue on the battery is the least of my problems. Do you really think that Apple glues the battery down for that sweet little money they make on battery replacements for the relatively few they sell? Macs themselves only make up 10% of their revenue. How much do you think out of warranty battery replacements make them?
- hutzlibu 3y ago" $249" That's the point. A battery is way cheaper and so would be the replacement, if not for the glue. If you are fine with it, thats fine for you. And every solid laptop will need a new battery at some point. That all adds up to Apples revenue.
- scarface_74 3y agoA battery that is actually safe? How much profit do you think Apple makes from selling batteries and replacement services considering how relatively few Macs Apple sells and how often people upgrade?