Why Can't Apple's 'Books Be Easier To Upgrade And Repair?
by Charles W. Moore
In a commentary entitled "Laptop Replacement Vs. Repair" last week Forbes' Arik Hesseldahl related how he decided to replace his 3+ year old TiBook with a new 167 MHz AlBook. Three years is not an unusual interval between system upgrades — personally I've never managed to go that long myself in 13 years on the Mac. However, I prefer that the impetus to move on be a voluntary decision based on a perceived need for better performance and features rather than obligatory because of hardware failure. Arik's recent system upgrade was due to the latter.
"When those strange and unfamiliar electronic tones emitted from my PowerBook," he writes, "I knew it was going to be an expensive day."
"I've lugged this PowerBook G4 from Apple Computer for the better part of four years. I've replaced its hard drive once and its battery once. Only once has it given me any significant trouble, and that was when, during a trip to San Francisco, the hard drive decided go on an intermittent strike, working only some of the time....."
To my mind, getting four years reliable service out of any commodity that costs as much as a PowerBook should be unremarkable, and failure at that early age a cause for grievance.
Arik continues:
"A long visit with a friendly technician at the Apple Store.... was frustrating--through no fault of his--but mostly because after I carefully described the problem, the machine exhibited none of the symptoms.....
"Since time was short and I had no confidence in this machine, I opted instead to plunk down the cash for a new PowerBook. I opted for the 15-inch model with the 1.67-gigahertz processor, an 80-gigabyte hard drive and a SuperDrive that can burn both CDs and DVDs......
"I fell in love with this new machine right away.... but the episode has me thinking about the entire economic experience of laptop ownership, repair and so on. I don't know what the typical lifespan is for a laptop computer, but I'm betting it's not long.....
"Today's laptop designers are being lauded for their design expertise and for their ability to cram all sorts of features into ever-thinner and lighter bodies. But why aren't hard drives as easy to replace in a laptop as the battery in a mobile phone? Why should I have to pay a professional to do the work to replace it, and in some cases lose the use of the machine for a few days in order to get it done?"
I agree, and I've been droning on about this issue for years. I love my iBook, and nothing has gone wrong with it in 25 months of use, but I know that if, say, the hard drive croaked, it would require major, complex, and delicate surgery to replace it. Ditto for pretty much any other internal component save for RAM. It shouldn't be this way.
And I hope Arik's 15" PowerBook proves reelable, because, there is no easy access to any of this laptop's internals except for the memory slots, which live behind a door on the bottom of the computer. You can check it out in PBFixIt's take-apart guide:
http://pbfixit.com
G5 power and razor thin form factors, phooey. What would really get me excited is a truly user friendly, simple to service, repair, and upgrade laptop with modular, plug-in components, with things like the hard drive and RAM slots accessible through easy to remove panels or slide-in modules. Sort of the philosophy behind the commendable user-serviceability of the G5 iMacs. And if such a machine had to be somewhat bigger and bulkier than the current crop of Apple 'Books, so be it.
I don't mean that Apple should stop making thin laptops. There is a large market out there that prefers form over function. It would just be nice if we function (and long term value) fans were catered to as well.
I think it would be great if Apple came out with a big laptop — more a portable true desktop substitute than a road-warrioring machine. What about the 17-inch BigAL 'Book you might ask? Well, it's very nice. It has what appears anecdotally to be the best reliability record of any current Apple 'Books (which I would deduce is not coincidental to its larger form factor) would sure like to have one. But it's still compromised by the thinness of that form factor, which to a considerable degree negates the advantage of having a large footprint. The 17 incher also isn't any more expandable or upgradable or a whole lot easier to work on than the 15-inch PowerBook.
Of course raw bulk and weight are not the point, nor is just a large screen size. What I would dearly love to see is a jumbo PowerBook that would restore and enhance the connectability and expandability standard that was set by the WallStreet G3 Series Power Book back in 1978, with two PC card slots, two expansion bays (although even one would be a quantum improvement on the status quo), relatively easy facility of opening up to perform component upgrades and repairs, and a motherboard design that facilitated both processor and video accelerator upgrades. A larger machine should also theoretically be easier and more efficient to cool. A detachable display and keyboard for better ergonomics in desktop use would also be ideal.
Sticking my neck out a little farther, I'd like to see a new class of portable Mac, loosely based on another abandoned Apple great idea -- the PowerBook Duo. The machine I envision would be totally modular, with a basic CPU core unit could serve as either the CPU module of a desktop iMac replacement that would be available without a battery and which could be sold with a built-in (detachable) monitor, or headless to be used with an external display of the customer choice. Ease of access to internal components and upgrade slots would be a priority — external access to multiple RAM expansion slots and hard drive, and if possible a revival of the very cool slide-out motherboards that graced the Color Classic, the 500 Series AIOs and the LC/Quadra 630. And with the processor mounted on a removable daughtercard to facilitate processor upgrades, and a slot-mounted video card. The same core CPU unit would also be able to form the basis of a portable/big laptop with an add-on keyboard/ trackpad module and a battery in one or both of the expansion bays.
The Mac mini could be considered a step in this direction if only it wasn't more difficult to open up than iBooks and PowerBook, even for RAM upgrades.
I mentioned upgrading a moment ago, which segues me into another, not- unrelated topic, which is the prodigal wastefulness and environmental irresponsibility of building computers that have a useful primary service life of only two or three years due either to reliability or to the fact that they can't be upgraded.
A study by theUnited Nations University in Tokyo published in a book entitled Computers and the Environment, found that fuels used to make one desktop computer weigh over 240 kilograms, some 10 times the weight of the computer itself. This is very high compared to many other goods: For an automobile or refrigerator, for example, the weight of fossil fuels used for production is roughly equal to their weights. Also, substantial quantities of chemicals (22 kg), and water (1,500 kg) are used. The environmental impacts associated with using fossil fuels (e.g. climate change), chemicals (e.g. possible health effects on microchip production workers) and water (e.g. scarcity in some areas) are significant and deserve attention.
From this the editors draw the logical conclusion that product life should be extended as long as possible, making incremental upgrades more environmentally friendly than the "toss it to the curb" mentality adopted by many shoppers.
Eleven months ago The San Francisco Chronicle's Jane Kay reported that "[California] State officials have designated discarded laptops and flat-screen computer monitors as 'hazardous waste' and are asking consumers to drop off unwanted products at proper recycling centers and not toss them in the trash.¹
"New state tests show that laptop computers and computer monitors with liquid crystal display, or LCD, screens contain copper and lead in the circuitry at levels that exceed regulatory limits.
"These products are barred from regular landfills and require special dismantling for reuse, according to officials at the state Department of Toxic Substances Control"
According to Computers and the Environment, "The average desktop PC and 17-inch CRT monitor takes an SUV-sized 1.8 tons of water, fossil fuels and chemicals to make."
"As for energy use, a computer's lifetime energy impact is about the same as a refrigerator.
"Making a 2-gram memory chip requires 1.3 kilograms (1,300 grams) of fossil fuels and materials."
Nor is recycling the answer. Recycling managed by a monopolist concern, whose main interest is meeting simple recycling targets for a fixed fee, could result in an expensive system with relatively small environmental benefit. A multilateral concern aimed at maximizing profit and reuse across the life cycle presents a more promising picture. However, at best only metals are usually recovered while the high-tech components and plastics that take so much energy to make are destroyed. On the other hand, reselling or upgrading a computer results in five to 20 times greater energy savings than recycling.
"Extending the life of a computer is the most effective way to reduce its environmental impact" comments Computers and the Environment, co-editor Eric Williams.
More on these topics here:
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,62562,00.html
Apple likes to profile itself as a socially and environmentally aware and responsible corporate citizen, but the last Apple laptop that could be processor upgraded was the Pismo PowerBook G3, and even with that machine Apple went out of their way to make upgrading inconvenient. And no Apple laptop has ever supported video accelerator upgrades. Since the metal PowerBooks and the dual - USB iBooks were introduced in 2001, the processor chips in Apple laptops have been soldered to their motherboards, which makes processor upgrades, if not technically impossible, so impractical that no one is likely to ever offer processor upgrades for these machines. Not only that, but as noted above, all of these slim-profile Apple laptops, especially the iBooks, are a nightmare to open up and work on.
All this substantially diminishes the inherent value of these products, as well as being environmentally regressive and irresponsible. For example, The now five year old Pismo PowerBook can be upgraded to a 550 MHz G4 or 900 MHz G3. Thanks to the Pismo's expansion bay, it can accommodate a variety of devices including a DVD-burning SuperDrive that just slides in and out. The early Titanium PowerBooks that came with plain - vanilla DVD drives can be upgraded to Combo or Super Drive support, but they have to be shipped off for the conversion, and you still don't have the option of multiple different types of expansion bay devices that can be slipped in and out in seconds. I have 8x SuperDrive, DVD, Zip, and SuperDisk (also supports floppies) modules for my Pismo, which has also been upgraded to 550 MHz G4 status.
Macs used to last a long time. My old 1993 Mac LC 520 still runs great at more than 10 years old and is still in use occasionally. My WallStreet PowerBook is well past its 6th birthday, and is running flawlessly in daily use. I would be tempted to install a G4 upgrade if Apple hadn't pulled the plug on OS X support. However, at least it CAN be upgraded, and is very easy to open up and work on to swap in more RAM or a larger capacity hard drive. It also has lots of expansion potential with two PC Card slots and two removable device expansion bays. I've always thought it outrageously absurd that something as expensive and complex as a computer could become "obsolete" in three years or less, and be discarded.
Consequently, while I appreciate their many virtues, especially their power, nice keyboards, and bright, high-resolution, widescreen displays, I remain less than enchanted by the metal PowerBooks, and when I did buy a new Apple laptop a little over two years ago I opted for the cheapest iBook model. I find it hard to reconcile spending big bucks on a machine that will be as stale as yesterday's newspaper inside of 24 months with no upgrade remedy. If today's PowerBooks were as upgradable as the WallStreet and Pismo I would be more inclined to pony up the extra grickles for a PowerBook instead of an iBook (or a Mac mini). It offends my sense of wanting to get full value for money spent, and in light of the revelations cited above, my sense of environmental consciousness as well.
Computers -- not just PowerBooks or even laptops, but personal computers of all sorts, are the most pathetically unreliable and user unfriendly consumer products sold — even worse than cars.
We have a Philips TV that was purchased in 1991, and which has just worked for more than a decade with no fuss, bother, or hassle. My wife's Yamaha Clavinova CLP-50 electronic piano, which cost about as much as a Mac which she bought it back in 1986, has been similarly reliable. My Olympus 0M1 35 mm camera is 31 years old and still takes great pictures. It has never been in the shop for repair. I have a Black and Decker 1/4 inch drill that I bought in 1965 -- my first ever power tool, and still in fine working condition.
To be fair, Macs have a better history of longevity and reliability than PCs, but that's not saying a whole lot. My old 1988 Mac Plus still works, but it had to have its video power supply replaced when it was 4 years old, and the video is a bit flaky again. My LC 520 needed a new motherboard and cooling fan (both replaced under warranty) when it was 10 months old, although it has been completely reliable ever since. My PowerBook 5300 had its entire case plastics replaced (for free under Apple's extended service policy for 5300) before it was 4 years old. That may not be too bad in the context of the computer's industry's reliability record in general, but it is shoddy and crummy compared with the performance of the assortment of other consumer-products listed above, most of which cost a lot less than a Mac.
The problem is, I infer, that the computer industry, including Apple, doesn't really want to design and sell machines that customers will be able to keep, upgrade, and easily repair for a decade or more. They want to keep you coming back and laying down the plastic for a new system every two or three or four years. And it is increasingly evident that computers are conceived and designed around that paradigm. Apple only sells a few service and repair parts, and does it grudgingly at best. When Detroit operated on a similar philosophy, we called it "planned obsolescence," but even at their worst, cars could reasonably expected to give reliable service for a lot more than two or three years, and you could buy parts and have them serviced at your local auto parts store and corner garage.
Anyway, if Apple really wanted to, and sure they could design a laptop with easily accessible and replaceable circuit boards, hard drives, and RAM modules, and an entire assembly that could be easily taken apart with a screwdriver. The engineering would be challenging, but hardly rocket science. However, I'm not holding my breath.