No, this is a bad solution. If you want a repairable machine, buy one. They exist. Others have already mentioned Framework, but there are other options that aren't that far down the spectrum either.
One of the things macbook users praise the most is "build quality", which often means the solidity of the device, lack of flex, etc. These quality features are, in part, achieved by the same choices that make it hard to repair. Ease of repair and "build quality", are to some degree (although not entirely) tradeoffs against each other.
I say this as a framework owner who would never buy something as irreparable as a macbook. Regulation is not the answer here.
It’s time to accept regulation actually does work when you have a competent government.
This is how you end up turning a chunk of your food supply into fuel to subsidize crops which aren't all that good at being distilled into fuel in the first place...
Elected officials (and some appointed, like SCOTUS) keep changing laws and precedents to allow more and more money in politics. They can't quit all that dark money - without a lot of funding, you don't get elected. Usually the best funded candidate wins.
There was an anonymous oped from a congressman some years back which bemoaned the reality - that 60% of their time was dedicated to meeting with donors for reelection campaigns instead of working on real problems.
This is the same story told by Tom Morello, guitarist of Rage Against the Machine (at the end of the early life section): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Morello#Early_life
Key line: "He had to compromise his entire being every day."
Instead, Australia is best described as pigs at the slops trough.
A nation that seems to only want to vote for leaders who have a public humiliation kink.
The difference matters.
Not defending Trump, to be clear, just saying US imperialism and fascism has much deeper roots and that removing Trump is not going to fix any issues the rest of the world has with the USA.
A lot of invective, but nothing in practice that really indicates not tolerating.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heights_of_presidents_and_pres...
Given that it's the EU making those regulations, it looks like the government only has to be semi-competent. Maybe the only requirement is that they're not totally in bed with the big corps making money.
Said differently, it is much easier for the EU to be impartial and competent when regulating Apple or Samsung than when regulating Volkswagen or Stellantis...
US companies just hit that barrier more often historically because they got used to "lobby it and it goes away" attitude to law, and when it doesn't work we have harpy screeeching about EU using laws to tax US companies that do not want to abide to law in place where they are doing business
Context: I'm not a EU-native, I've migrated to here.
It disturbs me a lot when people keep repeating the "incompetent government" narrative when it comes to the EU, but when you compare it to the dictatorship that I escaped from, they still seem way more competent, surprising when the big advantage of a dictatorship is supposed to be increased efficiency while reducing personal rights.
Personally I cannot name a better government (or governing body, given that we are talking about the whole EU) anywhere else on this planet.
I feel I'm incredibly lucky to live here even when the economy is getting tougher. The only thing that worries me and makes me consider leaving is the right-extremes, which to this day, thankfully had limited influence.
Sorry for the digression, but I just wanted to address this repeating pattern. It's possible that you have very valid reasons to call them semi-competent and that I'm overreacting.
Not to mention Eastern Europe until the wall fell. All dictatorships in different forms. So yeah we've had our share as well.
The problem with the EU is that it seems to be becoming more susceptible to industry lobbying. As of late they are reducing environmental laws (the banning of ICE cars), weakening GDPR and DMA/DSA etc. Not very happy with that. Ursula herself was all about her 'green deal' during her first administration and now she's breaking it all down.
I think that particular one is because they realized their timeline is impossible to hit without utterly crippling EU
> weakening GDPR and DMA/DSA
There was always a lot of push for that, it is very much "yes/try later" on those legislations, we got the biggest traitor of the freedom out (UK) but there are still countries either interested, or incompetent enough to think the pushed ideas are a good thing
https://jacobin.com/2025/05/ve-day-wwii-fascism-liberalism
There's a storm coming.
In my origin country too unfortunately. But not where I live.
When it has been the Left that has largely governed Europe for the previous few decades to bring it to the point where it is now where the economics and defence capabilities of nations that once ruled the world are now laughing stock on the global stage.
...and yet it gets repeated!
I'm not worried about the right ideology. Last time I took a political test, it told me I'm slightly right-leaning, but that changes every time I take such tests :)
I said that I'm disturbed by the extremists who plan to take away my legally earned rights.
European countries have rules and requirements like most other countries. I looked at their criteria, it sounded fair, took the deal and now I'm here. I pay my taxes, obey the rules, even applied for citizenship (takes ages), and I expect my rights to be protected as well, as long as keep my end of the deal. Those people threaten that golden rule.
Some seem to be obsessed about ruling and military power, and from the outside, they seem to believe that you only are allowed to move in this world if you kill/defeat the previous residents.
Those are the people I'm scared of.
Absolutely Europe ruled the world economically and militarily.
All it takes to see that government regulation never works, is to look at how far behind the EU is in terms of GDP growth compared with the US and China who both have a significantly lighter touch when it comes to regulation.
The EU is f*cked, and will become a little socialist region, with manual and tourist industry jobs, where rich people from the rest of the world go for a few weeks of vacation.
I left the EU a long time ago, and I've earned so much money after leaving the socialist madness, that I recommend all young people I meet to do the same.
And regulation generally certainly works when it come to regulating and splitting up monopolies and oligopolies, workers right and etc. (US has plenty of both even if its occasionally idiosyncratic)
On top of that, Europe isn’t a country. To have less regulation, you need more of it. Unifying regulations, or else you have dozens of completely different jurisdictions. To a large extent, you still do, even with the EU. You can’t sell to the general public in English. There are so many more things holding Europe back than ”need deregulation”.
If USB C had been so important to me I wouldn't have bought iPhones all those years.
Lightning was a dead-end connector that was only kept around to keep the Made-for-iPhone moat drawbridge up.
USB-C makes the right design choice in putting the springs in the cable. Those wear out over time. I've never seen the male part of the female USB-C break, but I'm sure it's possible. But reversing this would require that the springs on the USB-C cable are on the outside, and those are quite fragile, so that sounds like a worse idea.
USB-C is mostly a good design.
I know anecdotes don't mean anything, but I have. Every USB-C phone I've ever had, apart from my iPhone that I currently use, ended up with having completely worn out connectors after two-three years of use. They stop holding cables in firm enough and start only making the connection when holding the cable at an angle.
The Lightning port iPhone that I used for 3 years however handled my usage just fine (just tried it now and it feels just like it did new), and the USB-C one I've had for half a year seems to be holding up fine as well. These I used with a mix of cheap Aliexpress cables and the genuine Apple ones.
It was a mistake to conflate flexible power delivery and data transfer, you rarely need both at the same time. It's possible to design a better and cheaper 3 or 4 pin power delivery standard that can use higher power. But the law now says USB-C and good luck ever changing that.
And our helpdesk had more broken lightning connectors than anything else in shop that's ~ 50/50 PC/Mac
Throughout its life, Lightning suffered from "black pin plague" where when springs in the port wore out, the power pin would start arcing. Now you have a cable with poor connectivity on the power pin, and you use this cable in another Apple device and it starts arcing on that device as well, causing that device to start transmitting this disease. It was a terrible design and USB-C does not have it.
https://ioshacker.com/iphone/why-the-fourth-pin-on-your-ligh...
I understand the added difficulty of making a version with a different port. Again, if it was Uber superior, it would have made for very good advertisemebt for apple.
Besides, it’s easy to sell one’s freedom to a competent government, but it’s insanely hard to get it back when it rots. This has been the case of many welfare states. “Let’s force them to do the damn thing” is the very root of all social conflicts, not a magical solution. Being able to withstand it is a commendable exception, not rule.
However, trying to use an argument that this is 'an issue of physical force' is a ridiculous way to make an argument for that perspective. All laws eventually come down to that, so it is pointless to debate that for every discussion on what the law should be.
So I don’t think it’s ridiculous, I think it’s efficient.
> get in my face if I don’t follow their rules
If a shopkeeper asks me to leave because I refuse to follow his rules, he's exercising his right to control his own property, he's not initiating force.
> You’re selling your freedom to big corporations.
I'm not selling my freedom to corporations, they can't throw me in jail, or take my property by edict. The government, by contrast, holds a legal monopoly on force.
I am not an American, so I cannot diagnose declining life expectancy, homelessness, poor food, and other problems from afar. But I do know this: personal problems don't give one a moral claim on other people's labor. Need does not justify compulsion, and citizens are not sacrificial animals.
> I am an unfree European blinded by communism.
You hinted that Europe's communist past was somehow not a cautionary tale.
> The perfect example of cognitive dissonance!
Dressed-up ad hominem. You have no idea what I do or don't hold in my mind.
I see it exactly the other way around. I want this to be clarified upfront, not after I’ve already cut my tongue. What I don’t understand is why market participants are being given special treatment here. There are laws, and they must be followed. That applies just as much in other areas.
> personal problems don't give one a moral claim on other people's labor
Which problem is personal and which isn't? You seem to be twisting this to suit your questionable argument.
> You have no idea what I do or don't hold in my mind
But I read what you write and interpret it. Just as you read what I write and interpret it. Here’s another ad hominem for you: in your worldview, there is no morality at all. At least, none that is consistent. People like you behave toward the state like moody teenagers toward their parents. You don’t want to be told what to do, but you wouldn’t survive a single month without the institution you so despise.
Laws are contextual, they depend on more fundamental principles. A regulation that says "you must use this specific screw size" isn't a law in the same sense as "you shall not murder." When a "law" violates the principle of non-initiation of force, when it tells a manufacturer how to exercise his property rights under threat of imprisonment, it's not really a law but edict.
The issue is who decides and when. A court decides after harm occurs, based on evidence of actual negligence or fraud. A regulatory agency decides before anyone does anything, based on hypothetical risks, and compels compliance under threat of force.
> Which problem is personal and which isn't?
A personal problem is one that doesn't involve the infringement of rights against another person. Most problems are personal. One's homelessness doesn't give one a right to another's property. The moment you say "your need obligates me," you've crossed the line into compulsion.
> in your worldview, there is no morality at all. . . . People like you behave toward the state like moody teenagers toward their parents.
That tells me enough about the depth of your study on this subject. Morality is a science of identifying the principles by which a rational being sustains his life. You're not discussing that science, you're reaching for a metaphor.
> But I read what you write and interpret it.
"Cognitive dissonance" is an accusation about the state of my mind, not an interpretation. You don't get to call me internally contradictory and then say "I'm just interpreting."
This is the free market. Free as in, regulated to allow and encourage market entry and competition (as with replacement keyboards), not free as in unregulated. When you look back at when 'free market' was first strongly mentioned as a term, this is what it meant.
You didn't say why this is a bad solution. The government mandates that cars get safer every year and fatalities are down 78% from the 1960s. Whenever government regulates things to benefit people, people tend to benefit.
> One of the things macbook users praise the most is "build quality", which often means the solidity of the device, lack of flex, etc.
It seems like the Macbook Neo has a lot of those properties as well for a very inexpensive device that is extremely easy to repair.
Forcing a particular trade-off on everyone is entirely the point. It's the point of car safety, it's also the point of minimum warranties, electrical emission regulations, safety standards, etc.
That "what if" cost is going to be built into the cost of the laptop. Repairability doesn't always keep the cost low. The purchaser will definitely have to foot the cost otherwise it isn't sustainable.
None of that is relevant in this context: The parts are available, but the laptop is designed and built such that the alone keyboard cannot be replaced.[1]
[1] Not sure if this is possible on that specific laptop, but with a steady hand, a tiny drill, maybe a magnifiying glass too, you can maybe drill out the rivets, then replace the keyboard, then either re-rivet it back again or tap very tiny thread into the laptop and use screws.
Why not? I don't understand how it's legal for manufacturers to produce absolute trash that can't be replaced and will just end up in a landfill. I think 7 years is far from enough, but because computers evolve quickly maybe 15 years is ok. For the rest of electro-mechanical goods, 50 years should be the baseline.
If a car or fridge from 50 years ago is still working with proper maintenance, that should be the minimum to be expected from products released today.
We define the rules of the game and companies that can best implement those rules will succeed. That is capitalism.
It’s easier and more profitable for companies to make a product that catastrophically fails around about when the new model is out. So that’s what they do. Until just now when the EU is reeling them back in line.
It is not a given that being repairable results in worse build quality.
The €14k Dacia Sandero ships with camera-assisted emergency braking and lane assist. By the time you get up to a €24k MG 4, you get full level 2 driving. These don't seem like very high price thresholds
You know that safety for pedestrians is also a very tightly regulated car safety category, right? Obviously, there's not much that can be done if you get hit by a car going 70mph, but the fact that most people should survive a 30mph impact with a modern car is mostly thanks to regulations requiring crumple zones specifically designed to protect pedestrians in a collision. And yeah, there are huge trade offs - I imagine people would generally prefer a car that doesn't need incredibly expensive repairs after a minor collision because everything at the front just crumpled, but then they would be guaranteed to cut off legs of any person hit - it's a trade off.
It's slightly worse, slightly more flex, thicker and heavier vs an Air in spite of having a smaller battery and more empty space. It's all trade offs.
If you want repairable, please buy a Framework or Lenovo. Backseat industrial designing through legislation is not the answer.
Again, why not? It's not mandating design, just minimal standards for repairability that should be obvious. If Framework and Lenovo can do it and Apple can do it on a $600 laptop, why can't everyone do it?
> why can't everyone do it
What everyone is missing: Because other manufactures do not have to; the profit margins are too good to give a shit, and they allow some pretty fierce competition within the target demographic:
<soapbox>
Sadly, the general public still just wants the cheapest option to consume their bullshit content, even if it needs to be replaced a year from now after their cat walks on it and causes critical damage.
The MacBook Neo is brilliant in that Apple takes a share of this market with a premium and affordable product that is basically just their previous generation phone, with the expensive bits likely sourced from their exchange program or surplus supply. Products that at some point the same people would've loved to have, but couldn't afford. Now repurposed with a larger screen, sporting the envied Apple logo, at an affordable price, and targeting that same demographic as the hot new thing, just one generation later.
I have a feeling we'll see this pattern continue, and it's genius. Minimizing waste, maximizing profits, and giving the consumers what they want, while maintaining a gap between low-end and high-end -- people that spend $$$$ still want to feel special, of course.
Don't get me wrong, the Neo is great, especially for us hackers, but it is absolutely not meant for us in any way. What is in our favor: it does, at the very least, raise the bar for these other manufactures that product absolute garbage.
</soapbox>
Someone needs to be a reference as to what is feasible in order for a standard to be established. Apple, Framework, and I guess Lenovo are the ones doing this these days. RIP the others.
???
What makes this "backseat"? When it comes to consumer products, legislation is often the only answer in most cases.
What makes this case different? Why should there be an exception carved out for laptops?
You can still legislate parts availability and availability of docs.
You can legislate parts pairing or outright ban it
There is plenty that can be done, just need competent lawmakers
But it _could_ save us from Lenovo or Dell or any other company copying Apple's design practices (and the latter largely already has), while, as another poster mentioned, not mandating design per se, but rather just setting minimum standards.
If anything, the extra material for the case would be the perimeter length times the perimeter wall width times the height.
That's what they did?
Perimeter length = 2*335mm + 2*235mm
Wall height diff = 2mm
Wall width = 1mm
(2*335 + 2*235) * 2mm * 1mm = 2,280 mm^3
For instance
(3m+5m)(2m)/(2(2))=5m^3
That's widely incorrect. EU mandates some active systems (TC, ABS) and some basic level of physical protection, but majority of gains there have been driven by manufacturers trying to ace eachother in EuroNCAP rating
EU makes sure woefully unsafe car can't be sold, sure, but most of the progress here has been manufacturers, and non-car-related road safety improvements.
On some metrics. On affordability, new cars are considerably more expensive. Whether that's a worthwhile tradeoff is beside the point. The GP's point is that there's no free lunch, and your example doesn't address that.
For my part, cars are more comfortable (bar all controls in a touch panel and ever more propietary software) and fuel efficient
The fear is that regulations ossify industries and that's why heavily regulated industries like healthcare, education, and transportation have seen basically no innovation in 50 years. If you mandate that all electronic devices must have USB-C cables, how can anyone invent something better than a USB-C cable? And for what, so people don't have to have multiple cables? That's not even in the top 100 problems that a government body as large as the EU should be concerned about.
> Whenever government regulates things to benefit people, people tend to benefit.
Healthcare, education, transportation, and housing would all be counterexamples depending on how you want to frame "benefit."
> It seems like the Macbook Neo has a lot of those properties as well for a very inexpensive device that is extremely easy to repair.
This is counter to your point, no one regulated that Apple make the MacBook Neo easy to repair. Apple is incentivized to follow the market.
Not to get distracted, but aren't these three all incredible examples of innovation over time? Healthcare alone is significantly better than it was 50 years ago and it's not really close. 50 years ago, this hip new treatment called electroshock therapy was being used to "treat" being gay. It was also within touching distance of getting a lobotomy for depression or anything else your husband thought was a problem.
That already happened with Micro USB. The EU initially mandated that manufacturers agree on a standard socket, because the absolute zoo of charging ports back then was counter-productive and only generated e-waste. Ultimately they agreed to use Micro USB, but obviously that's not what's used today.
These regulations are not just dumped on the manufacturers - there's a period of consultation and a grace period to implement them. If something actually better came up, you'd eventually see it mandated.
While I generally am quite content with that particular mandate and it does more good than bad, I would have to disagree on this. Something better doesn't come from nowhere - hell, USB itself has gone through a long and arduous path until it came to the (messy) standard it is today. This is essentially banning any other standard to grow and be improved upon with feedback and iteration.
It took Apple a looong time to adapt USB-C, which was already running circles around Lightning five years after the introduction of the latter. Ironically Apple participated in the development of the standard. They just couldn't be arsed to implement it.
Multinationals don't do anything unless they absolutely have to. Apple notably all but threatened to move out of the EU due to USB-C regulations. They were actively preventing their users from having a better standard because it hurt their bottom line in the field of accessories.
Wut?
It's a good solution. Even if you don't want to repair your meachine, it would be worth more on the second-hand market meaning less ewaste for society in general.
> One of the things macbook users praise the most is "build quality", which often means the solidity of the device, lack of flex, etc. These quality features are, in part, achieved by the same choices that make it hard to repair. Ease of repair and "build quality", are to some degree (although not entirely) tradeoffs against each other.
The neo gets pretty glossy build quality reviews and is one of the most repairable macs in decades.
Fair to push back ... but your assertion implies one of the greater fallacies of free markets.
Free markets don't magically work like that.
When there are only a handful of participants in any given market, they don't provide all the options as we would like.
It's 100% true that Apple makes some 'good tradeoffs' for build quality - but it's also 100% true that they make tradeoffs for vendor lockin.
Lightning connectors are great examples of that.
The answer may be regulation. It depends, and it has to be careful.
While it's a very 'iffy' situation with respect to keyboards, if we move the conversation to 'batteries' you can see how we might want regs that enable some way for consumers to mechanically replace batteries - and definitely 3rd party repair - and plausibly enable standard 3rd party batteries.
These companies have incredibly monopoly and monopoly power, they reason their margins are so high is partly because of demand, but also because of 'market power' which can significantly distort innovation (think apps on iPhone, totally captured market etc).
Unfortunately it's never so easy as 'always regulate or always not'.
You're making an oversimplification. You could make a heavier, thicker device with those same qualities that was repairable.
Not to mention manuals/instructions. Regulation discussed here is about these too.
Also as consumer, I would argue the marketing done by apple is just scammy. They keep praising how much carbon saved or sustainable new machines are. But in fact, a minor issue becomes a massive electronic dump.
I also like Macs, I own several of them. Repaired a few. Mostly replacing batteries and keyboards. For example 2014 Macbook Air had a normal battery, no sticky business. Meanwhile 2020-2025 MacBook Air has sticky stuff, making repairs harder.
The best part is, 2014 macbook air has 54 Watt/hr battery, 2020-2025 models are 53 watts/hour. The lasting battery gains are coming from Apple silicon efficiency as well as modern BMS.
Simply put, regulation is the answer. Apple makes it difficult because they can, and also because it creates revenue. Of repairability was the source of income, you would see 10/10 repairable macbooks with no (significant) tradeoffs. (ie. it could be a few grams heavier for added screws)
But that means Windows or Linux, not macOS. There's serious trade-offs that you're dismissing because you personally don't need macOS, but that's not the case for everyone.
#hn-bingo
I could go on for hours. It’s a buggy mess these days and I miss Lion and Snow Leopard desperately.
None of this sounds like a hardware error. Something like notification scrolling is simple bad programming and bad QA. You scroll the list of them, but when the mouse cursor ends up on a gap between them, the new scroll event doesn't apply. They're all individual even though shown together.
Or a black screen on wake - that has the mouse cursor and login prompt, it just sometimes doesn't load the wallpaper or does it slowly. Not hardware - just something buggy. It's unbelievable when I compare to Leopard or whichever version it was introduced the rotating 'cube' of login screens, which always had wallpaper and loaded fast. Here we are fifteen years later with incredibly better hardware and the thing lags.
Same for the rest.
And yes, Tahoe is shiny hot garbage piled on top of so much broken software, just to push an effect trick. I'm not sure how I feel developing with SwiftUI when Apple clearly can't make it work for their own apps.
The only way you actually depend on the platform is if you do Mac OS / iOS development.
However, I happen to work on a project that requires both Windows and Linux, so I get reminders every day of why I should stay on Mac OS as desktop.
Caveat 1: no, I'm not upgrading to Tahoe or iOS 26.
Caveat 2: I wouldn't dream of running a server on anything but Linux. Desktops with a GUI though...
The problem that fucks us over is that Mac OS only has to be better than the competition.
https://cloud.google.com/blog/topics/threat-intelligence/dar...
By the way does that mean you can root a phone that's on iOS 18.6? :)
I'm with you here, but I'm having a _much_ better time on my Linux machines (KDE and Cinnamon Mint) than on my (unbelievably-powerful-but-for-what) M4 Max MBP. It's so much cleaner, even without having upgraded to Tahoe, and imagine that I don't even like tinkering that much, it just works.
Must admit I've only looked at the default desktop in Ubuntu in the past years, and that's ... disappointing.
Maybe I should look at how KDE is these days, but it's a second class citizen in most major distros isn't it? Except in this Mint i've never tried.
I also have this fetish for cool and quiet. Can I run KDE on a box that idles at 10 W and never turns the fan audibly on?
Well, Cinammon is the windows manager for Mint, it's the barebones experience that's the closest to Windows (?) style, it's mostly what you see is what you get, but still very customizable.
KDE used to be extremely buggy 5-6 years ago and since testing it on my Steam Deck, from my experience, this is no longer the case. It's a bit more feature-rich and flashier than Cinnamon.
> Can I run KDE on a box that idles at 10 W and never turns the fan audibly on?
No laptop I'm aware of will do this, no idea about ARM adoption.
Personally I'm glad to have a windows manager that doesn't force dumb decisions down my throat. On MacOS I have to wait for half a second for the focus to land on the next window when I switch desktops, the only workaround exists as a minor feature recently introduced to BetterSwitchTool called instant desktop switching or something. And it's to be mentioned ofcourse that for all similar fixes you _must_ give full screen recording and accessibility permissions to 3rd party software. And don't get me started on the stupid windows management (maximize != full-screen, minimized windows not recoverable with keyboard only etc)
Oh the 10 W is my mac mini. The macbook pro idles at 5 W, display included :)
> you _must_ give full screen recording and accessibility permissions to 3rd party software
Well what do you expect? If Linux/KDE had a permissions system you'd have to grant it too.
> maximize != full-screen
Um. Yes. They should be different. They've been different ever since we had windows on screen in any system that I'm aware of.
Not that I'm a major fan of window management on Mac OS, I just got used to it.
Sure, but Framework doesn't run the OS I want, doesn't run the chip I want, doesn't quite meet the form factor I want. It's not an effective market because I can't pick and choose.
The problem here is vertical integration. If you want anything from Apple you have to buy everything from Apple.
And the answer to that is: regulation.
You’re actually saying: “I want Apple’s software, and I want certain chips, and I want a certain form factor. And if Apple won’t build what I want, I will pass a law to make them build it for me!”
Come on man. You will make tradeoffs either way. The answer isn’t: force a company to build what I want them to build.
The chips argument is contrived, the OS argument less so, but it's all just network effects at some level, and it's important for competition and effective markets that we prevent the largest networks from locking people in and forcing them to make a lot of other unrelated decisions.
How were you not able to do this without an iPhone?
Did they fire the guy who designed the magic mouse? What about the one who designed the iPhone 4 antenna? Are they still working there? The butterfly keyboard? The class action Apple lost over the Macbook 2011 design flaws? Should I go on?
Having said that, it seems obvious that there is a tradeoff between repairability, price, and compactness. And Apple offers devices on different points on that triangle.
Not everything you personally dislike needs to be illegal.
MacBooks are great as long as you have the money. OP could keep looking for 3rd party repairs, etc.
I'm having a hard time seeing why making stuff more difficult to repair just so that people are incentivized to throw it away and buy a new one, should not be illegal. If not for the anti-customer attitude, at least for the amount of waste and environmental destruction it results in.
Even then, if I want a new ultra thin device that doesn’t have replaceable storage or user input devices, that’s my right to buy.
Who is going to magically determine what replaceable means ? From the post it looks like OP tried to fix it incorrectly.
Does apple owe op a new laptop even if they damaged it ?
Why are you so adamant about protecting your "right" to buy a worse product?
Should the government have a reparability board ? Who gets to be on it ?
If it pleases the King , may I buy a laptop while traveling and bring it home.
An argument could be made for a refundable recycling fee. Say 5% that gets returned when you take the device to a recycling center after your done with it
There's more to the world than banned / not banned.
In this instance, people might want a sensible pragmatic government to levy against companies that have high numbers of items ending up in eWaste processing (or discarded in fly tipping) and offer reductions to companies that invest in eWaste processing and collection.
There are also legitimate total lifetime cost of item models that suggest clean, fast, simple manufacturing that leads to a product hard to deconstruct might actually be "cheaper" in time, resources, and energy across a large consumer population than a functionally equivalent item designed to be "unbuilt" and rebuilt (ie repaired).
This seems like a total fantasy. Do you actually have any examples of non-repairability making the process cheaper?
Sure there are lots of economical incentives to making stuff that you use until it breaks and then throw away, but that's just because the cost of e.g. mining metals or taking care of e-waste are externalized, due to using unethical labor in third world countries. If the "large consumer population" of the west actually had to bear the real cost of the electronics they produce, things would be vastly different.
> No, this is a bad solution.
The macbook is quite easy to repair, it's just insanely expensive because they made the choice that, for user experience, they attach the keyboard to the machines body.
You can have ease of repair and build quality, but then you give up portability I guess (bulky and heavy). And also cost goes up
You are wrong.
There are Apple laptops, and other devices, that were relatively easy to service and were lauded for their build quality.
(btw: people claiming that it has to be this way because of "waterproof": just no. Devices have existed before the whole glue sealing non-sense Apple introduced and exist now that are equally waterproof without glueing it all together to keep user's from the hardware. And even if you think it is that, it still wouldn't make sense to glue laptops and desktop pcs together who don't even claim to be waterproof)
At least there is a bright side: The EU Repairability Law is still pushing companies to make their devices more repairable - by demanding that professional repair must be possible from independent professionals and tech manufacturers must also provide repair parts for x years.
Thinkpads are a counterexample.
I came to terms with it, mostly. I buy AppleCare. I’ve had my screen on my M1 Mac replaced twice.
I agree with the sentiment tho. I had the rubber foot come off the bottom of a MacBook Pro, Apple wanted $350 to replace that $1 part. I found other solutions
Yea exactly. This is why I switched from Apple to Framework.
I like MacOS better than Linux, but it was worth the hardware trade off for me.
I'm sorry but your argument conflicts with reality at this point: regulation works better for expectations on hardware.
Apple can keep their unrepairable macbook. Butc should not be marketed as "green product". It should pay extra as ICE cars, be excluded from educational markets, public institutions etc...
Lol what.
Nothing about apple design is a sacrifice to repairability. The only reason they make it hard to repair is because when your Mac breaks, you go buy another one. Can't afford it? Then you are not "classy" enough to own a Mac.
I swear, there must be some epidemic where Mac fans are losing their marbles even more so today.
But vendor lockin mandated by management is way more powerful than powers of engineers, apple ain't immune to this since its accountants and lawyers running the company.
I'll give it a benefit of a doubt and won't claim its a PR comment and just a uncritical fanboy one, but its pretty close.
The board is riveted in, but there are enough screws to hold the replacement in place. Removing the board is a shockingly violent process, but it worked for me.
Keyboard: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CQBVMM3X (price has gone up).
Video of rivets breaking: https://i.tonybox.net/9f2083b218d5.mp4 (you can see I missed a screw and slightly cut my hand here too).
or do you mean integrating it into a different laptop a la framework? that could be cool, but would also have to think how much the chassey stiffness/specific construction contributes to the feel
p.s. has anybody here tried (the external) magic trackpad? the macbook trackpad is infuriatingly good
Broke my keyboard, a few days later i had a new one that didnt even take a minute to swap. Wanted to upgrade my GPU twice, didnt even take 10 minutes. Biggest difficulty was swapping the motherboard, but even that was easy.
The ports i need change all the time, and i can just swap them all the time :D
While a framework might be a bit expensive, overpriced even, i think the repairability and upgradeability is worth it for me
It's worth mentioning that the Neo finally does away with the pairing of topcase and keyboard that has been present ever since the launch of the plastic and unibody macbooks! Probably to comply with upcoming EU regulations.
This video is a good overview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGmMpEEP5ls
As others have already alluded to, drills and self-tapping screws exist, as do replacement keyboards without the top case.
In many other machines, it is common for the factory to use rivets on initial assembly, but to service you drill them out and replace with bolts or screws. This is the expected procedure and even described in the service manual. I actually did this a few weeks ago for an old fan.
I'm advocating for right to repair as anyone else, and not fond of Apple's decisions in general, but this seems like a tempest in a teapot.
That's surprising. I haven't had many brands of laptops, but I haven't seen rivets where screws should be. Not talking about Macs here.
You can basically buy 2 Macbook Airs for the same price as Framework 13 and keep one in the draw if you are ever scared that one breaks. That's how bad of a deal Framework is or how much of a value Macbooks are.
Try configuring a Framework yourself and you'll quickly find that even the basic configuration goes over $1400. Any upgrade on the CPU and you're already at $1770.[0]
You can usually get an M4 Macbook Air 16GB for $750 - $800 on sale. So you can get 2 of them for the same price as one Framework 13 and still significantly outperform it.
Framework is an idealogical buy. It just isn't worth it otherwise.
[0]https://frame.work/products/laptop13-diy-amd-ai300/configura...
It might still be worth it for those who hugely value open source and repairability but as for value I think its save to say that Apple is currently in a league of their own. Even if the altest os update is a flop.
Also, the Macbook has improved repairability. While its still not great its better than a few years ago.
Is it though? I'd agree the hardware is less capable but if your Macbook anything is really just one 'top case' repair away from being more expensive. RAM failure is 'motherboard replace', the display? it is similarly expensive to replace.
So I would agree that it is more expensive to purchase a Framework laptop than a Macbook laptop, but also feel it is more expensive to own a Macbook laptop than a Framework laptop. Also I just replaced the screen on my FW13 not because it was broken but because they have one with 4x the pixels on it now. That's not something I could have done with the Macbook.
If'd rather not take a low risk of a big repair/replacement bill and you don't mind helping Big Fruit make a bit more of a profit, you can pay them $50-150/year (depending on model) to take that risk. Multiply that by the number of years you expect to own the device to come up with a "real" cost including repairs/replacements.
It's not just repairs, to upgrade a Mac you have to throw away all that perfectly working hardware just to get a new mainboard.
Or you can spend 50 euros more and get an entire new laptop that is not only much more powerful than your old framework but is almost as repairable: the neo.
At some point your argument begins to work against you, you should just have talked about the keyword repair being cheap. Not how you can get a new motherboard for "only" 530 euros.
You forget to mention - less powerful than his old FW 13 with new mainboard/CPU.
Macbook Neo 31% faster ST speed and a bit slower on the MT.[1]
I wouldn't call the Neo less powerful than his 530 euros upgrade. In fact, I'd much rather have the faster ST speed in this kind of laptop. Most of the apps you're running with this class of laptops will be ST bound anyway.
You can literally get a brand new Macbook Neo using Apple EDU pricing for the price of a slower AMD motherboard upgrade. This is why Framework is an absolutely terrible deal overall. I'm not even convinced that Framework is better for the environment since Apple laptops last extremely long and will very often have second and third hand buyers.
[0]https://frame.work/nl/en/products/mainboard-amd-ai300?v=FRAN...
[1]https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/compare/17360869?baseli...
and
> ... you can pay them $50-150/year (depending on model) to take that risk.
These things are related, Apple knows what the failure rate in the field for their hardware is, and they "price in" that failure rate into their AppleCare costs. On my iPad pro, that's $90/year.
That said, it is entirely a 'bet' on your part as to whether or not you're in a position to cover costs of repair/replacement in the event of damage. That depends on a lots of factors and includes how much you can tolerate not having the equipment for a while, Etc.
That was my goal buying a Framework… to get to refresh hardware regularly as better stuff came out rather than waiting 10 years to buy a new laptop.
Will it work that way in reality? No idea, but I thought it was at least interesting enough to take a gamble.
I can drop it down to 1050E without the ram if i take ram from my older laptop.
Upgrading or fixing this is very easy. RAM/SSD i can take with me over multiple generations of a laptop.
I can't do that on a macbook, if anything breaks there (screen, ssd, ram, keyboard, battery bulging...) I might as well buy another.
Then there's the issue of macos... you're stuck with it, if you don't like it, it's a dealbreaker.
There's also issue of waste... I can make a router/firewall from an old framework mobo. I can't do that with a macbook.
I don't value open source or repairability that much. I just want to develop server software, and on macOS I always end up with the same janky VM-based workflow I suffer through on Windows. On the desktop I have no reason to waste my time with macOS, and I don't use a laptop often enough to justify reincorporating macOS into my life.
> Here’s hoping governments regulate laptop manufacturers to actually make repairable machines in the future.
So there is already a solution on the market but for some reason the immediate desire is for the government to get involved and start regulating laptop keyboards?
No charge. I was pretty grateful!
Great idea! Though I'd suggest to use RightCmd instead of Capslock, it's more ergonomic - you use your right hand just like before.
(and yes, it's both insane that the hardware is not repairable and that the OS software sucks so you have to use some other apps)
I got to experience Apple's customer hostile practices.
Many years ago l decided never to buy an Apple product again.
The future is now, old man.
A quick search shows that it's ~$500-$600 to fix the screen if it does break; I didn't bother looking up the keyboard but I'd assume it's much, much less.
So basically, on the off chance that your MacBook does shit the bed in the most expensive way, you save ~$150 or so? But in the almost-certain case that your Macbook is fine, you're down $450?
That is not a great deal at all, haha!
_The_ point of that the article you're commenting on, is that a keyboard replacement on a MacBook is very expensive. Why would you make that assumption?
The "most expensive way" to shit the bed is also not the peripherals of the computer dying, it's the logic board giving up the ghost.
Have done riveted keyboards on non-Mac machines before and would be surprised if an independent shop charged more than about $150 USD for it. It's not that hard to do.
You're right about the logic board being an extremely expensive fix, but it's also significantly less common than something like a keyboard, USB port, speaker or screen.
This is also something extremely Australian-specific, but consumer guarantees would probably cover any logic board damage within the first 1-3 years anyway, regardless of AppleCare warranty.
That is baked into the price of AppleCare just like any insurance premium.
I definitely think coverage should be free for 2 years though.
So you just get screwed twice.
For accessories I don’t see the point, those are effectively disposable wear items.
Ironically a large part of deciding to migrate to an iPhone from android was final frustrations with even Google purchased devices under warranty coupled with hardware quality requiring repairs. My wife’s experience with AppleCare won me over.
If nothing else it’s first party insurance. I will never purchase device insurance offered via a third party ever again. Either its first party so I’m dealing with the place I bought it or nothing at all.
Unless for some reason you know you will be breaking your device much more than the average person.
Insurance is for things that are unlikely to ever happen but would financially ruin you if they did.
"Peace of mind" is not free.
Paying ~ten bucks a month to insure my phone and not have to worry about it getting damaged is worth it to me, even if I could afford to replace it if I broke it; because now I just _don't worry about it_.
If you say you worry about the cost, shouldn't you worry even more about the higher cost of the insurance? Sure, for one item the variance is higher if you are uninsured, but if you have several such items, variance goes down, and you are saving all the more money.
I literally toss my phone to my couch or my bed from across the room dozens of times a week without worrying about misjudging the throw (which happens more than I’d like to admit), toss is on the ground at the gym, have no problems taking long baths with it, washing it under the sink if it gets dirty, and do dozens of things I would not do if I had to pay a full price if I ended up actually breaking it.
Having AC+, lets me treat the device with the level of carelessness that is worth the price to me.
Math-wise with how durable recent flagship devices are, you are probably correct that I’d be better off financially to just accept that I will break a phone every couple of years and just eat the cost.
But psychologically, I’m happier paying ~120bucks a year, than $500 in repair fees once in a while.
You are right that it might still feel better to you to pay regularly instead. That's subjective.
Knowing that you will likely end up paying less in the long term if you don't pay the insurance might help getting over that feeling, but that's a personal choice in the end.
AC+ includes what they call "Express Replacement Service", where you will send you an entirely new device as part of your claim, and they'll reuse your old one for parts.
If you _just happen_ to accidentally fall with your phone in hand right after the new ones come out, the delta in price between "a scuffed up, used 1-year old phone" and "brand new refurbished device from Apple" is higher than the price of the insurance and incidental damage fees.
Not sure about Applecare but Lenovo has support packages where if your thinkpad breaks they'll send a technician over to your place to fix it within 24 hours. That's definitely worth it for a work device IMO.
Which doesn’t tell you a lot because they are pretty bad, too. Being better doesn’t mean it’s a good offer.
Unfortunately a Macbook is a hard requirement for travel simply because of battery life, at my desk I use my Windows gaming rig for work.
I had this problem in my Framework. I fixed it by... holding the laptop upside down and mashing the offending key for several minutes. Didn't work immediately, but now you wouldn't tell that it was ever broken. I've managed to panic-order (~€80) another keyboard though, so now I have a spare.
For context a laptop keyboard is build like this:
https://www.iqsdirectory.com/articles/membrane-switch/membra...
This problem is caused by the layers sticking together. In the case of the Framework 16 the "d" key sits on top of a foam pad which in turn is placed on top of a heat pipe, so this area gets particularly hot under load. The layers are often made from PET, which starts softening anywhere in the range of 65-87C - so easily within range of a laptop heat pipe.
By mashing the key I was hoping to detach the layers and apparently it worked.
That being said for gaming I use an external keyboard now, because the one built-in is made by an external supplier and I don't think they'll start using a more heat-resistant material anytime soon.
Unfortunately, AFAICT, these repairability issues are largely due to the move to thinner and lighter laptops. Replacing my MILs Microsoft Surface tablet was a pain in the butt. Had to cut the case open and tape it back together. But that thing was insanely small and light. My MIL liked it because she has a lot of trouble carrying anything very heavy.
Since then, I always use keyboard skins.
Any purchase is a gamble, macs are one of those gambles that seems more risky with its difficulty to repair, however I guess the expectation is that it's less likely to need it.
https://de.ifixit.com/News/115827/new-thinkpads-score-perfec...
Overpriced COTS garbage.
That’s all it took with my Framework laptop, and I’m very grateful for it. I was in a good place financially when I got it, but now I’m not. I feel a strong sense of relief that if an accident occurs and I need a repair, it won’t set me back too much.
This is such a good idea that it makes other peoples machines nearly useless for you
All credit to https://tonsky.me/blog/cursor-keys/
https://www.ifixit.com/products/macbook-pro-14-a2442-a2779-a...
> The aluminum upper case and installation screws are not included.
I would assume you likely need those too, as the article also mentions.
you need to visit the confessional for that
(first video I found on a search)
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/WYT7YIh00Xk
I know in the Butterfly days those keys would break when you removed them.
If Apple is the BMW here, what is Framework? It's definitely not a Toyota.
Fought with them for weeks. Escalated. They lied and said they were doing a no cost replacement. Had to fight the charge. Then they lost my return.
So much so that I’ve started switching to Linux and de-googled phone. (Switching off of iPhone just to go to google seems like the greater of evils)
The non Apple ecosystem is much more mature than last I checked but still irritating. De googling was my biggest challenge. Getting a viable replacement for Mac OS was the easy part.
And what do you mean they lost your return? Like it got delivered and then it was lost? Surely they gave you a working unit at that point?
I've had a bunch of experiences with Apple repair and always always been fast and great. I mean, they're definitely the best service of literally any corporation I've dealt with, by far. Sometimes you get unlucky I guess with a particular rep or something hard to reproduce, but it sounds like you got extremely unlucky? It definitely isn't representative in my experience, not even close.
Apple has been doing this since forever and people keep buying its hardware.
You cannot replace a screen even if you buy a genuine one because Apple locks hardware ID via firmware, so only they can replace that!
Apple own customer is the reason why Apple does what it does best: You rent your hardware, you don't and never will own an Apple hardware!!
went to ebay bought the key, replaced it with tweezers after removing it from above without disabling the keyboard (I know, a little brutish) and it worked again for years.
give it a try
Otherwise fuck apple I'm not paying 700+ to fix a key.
Maintainability is actually not a mandatory standard, but a design trade-off; the biggest problem with the MacBook is not this, but rather that Apple does not allow other means of repairing the MacBook, such as various certification chips, etc.;
I too looked at Framework and like the idea, unfortunately in my case the supply chain was too slow to be tolerable, before even considering the price-performance ratio.
I strongly support the idea that the EU should force vendors to make consumer device repairs cost-effective and available or open source and expose their component interfaces in exchange for the right to sell in Europe. After all, the EU brought us USB-C, so we know regulatory pressure works. Thanks, EU!
My previous MacBook Pro keyboard was a butterfly keyboard and also broke, but got replaced for free. I don’t feel I am a heavy user as the MacBook Pro is mostly connected to an external keyboard and am pretty annoyed by apples keyboard quality (based on my sample size of 2).
I still just ordered a MacMini M4 (I know the M5 is coming but we've got something like 20 computers at home, including servers, NUCs, laptops, desktop, etc. so I may not mind buying a M5).
Still... Apple, from the bottom of my heart: FUCK YOU.
if you thing government regulation will help you you are lying to yourself that's not how the world works
The author doesn't mention ever contacting Apple to get his keyboard fixed. Maybe he could have gotten pleasantly surprised?
"Here’s hoping governments regulate laptop manufacturers to actually make repairable machines in the future."
However, this quote is not a surprise at all, and goes perfectly in line with Swedish philosophy. And the philosophy of this message board as well.
Anyway, did he contact Apple to see if they could help him out? Because sometimes Apple fixes these things for free.
I've had very good and very bad experiences with Apple support for hardware failures. It's worth trying to contact them, instead of calling for more government regulation.
Not great support on Apples side there.
Hence my comment about defeatism. Sometimes you have to push a little bit before giving up and crying for the government to come help you. Big companies aren't unbending stone statues.
Much as a laptop would suit me, I opted for a mini and a large display.
Come keyboard time, I was ready to spend $$$$$ for an Apple keyboard, but the only backlit ones come on laptops. I'm using a Logitech now, with the option of charging it all the time, else the lights dim themselves to conserve battery.
Yes, I was 19 once. And three times after that. But there we go again, stuff designed for 19 year-olds.
How about this? (image at imgbb.com)
I'm happy with the downvotes if they're for the JK laptop keyboard mashup.
Otherwise, pretty much as others have posted. Peripherals otta be peripheral, not welded in place.
I worked around the dilemma.
Twice.
An iPad pro has a keyboard, trackpad and BT mouse.
And I have a doorstop iMac because of a somehow dead display. (repair $$$$$ )
I very much favor separate everything.
Peace.
[0] https://www.ifixit.com/News/116152/macbook-neo-is-the-most-r...
I'm now on a Framework 13, and it's been pretty fun so far.
