Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

CPark98

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Apr 5, 2016
411
1,882
Embarrassing how little the design has evolved. It has even devolved, the 2016 body shape is so much sleeker and elegant.
If you want a sleek laptop, you can always grab a MacBook Air. This is a tool that I think looks better than any other laptop currently on the market. With the performance and usability gains we've gotten, I'll gladly sacrifice unneeded thinness for a functional chassis.
 

mo5214

macrumors regular
Sep 20, 2019
145
102
Embarrassing how little the design has evolved. It has even devolved, the 2016 body shape is so much sleeker and elegant.

Tinfoil hat speculative opinion:

They could’ve originally designed this chassis for an intel Model. Note that from the teardown, the pcb of the logicboard looks rather barren, similar to how M1 macbook pro 13 was.

Given how the M1 Max tops out at 60-ish watts SoC vs ~110+ of intels. It could be that they see this as an opportunity to smack M1 in this design, and then get to run fan at much lower speed vs potentially bothering with a newer design, and that it happens to be marketable as sending a message that they care about pro users or whatever.

It could also be that they just design less elegant products now.

It looks worse than my A1398 (2012-2015) design

I don’t really like the new iMac design. The two tones on the glass is kinda distracting.

(My favorite iMac design was 2005 G5 - 2006 intel and 2008-2011 design)

But then again, maybe I’m just getting old.

We’ll see how M2 Air design looks once its out next year
 

mo5214

macrumors regular
Sep 20, 2019
145
102
In practice, and we know this is true, the more parts you have and more removable parts you have the greater the number of points of failure, fragility and ultimately e-waste. People chuck broken parts, unused parts and depleted batteries haphazardly away in general garbage bins and can't be relied on to recycle the way they promise they will. People are lazy about that.

The e-waste problem is massive and a lot of consumers are blind to the problem because the waste doesn't end up in your soil, your water or your food. It gets shipped off to poor countries and pollutes their lives.

To be in favour of that makes us complicit in a human rights crime and an environmental crime. So I'll take less parts, less points of failure, more rigidity and reliability and easier recycling.
I see the opposite problems. For example, locking down the supply chain so on one can fix a component (such as NAND flash) failure, forcing people to throw a whole board away otherwise good logic board is hardly ecologically responsible.

For example, one’s A1398 had a dead SSD? , one have option get an original SSD blade from somewhere, or upgrade to nvme drives with an adapter. And mind you, its even faster than original.

If one had soldered on SSD, well… one is SOL.

Personally I think it had to do with streamlining production/ locking in customer to their services only than anything else (with benefit of making people pay more up front in configuration.. or pay for iCloud). Less people would pay AppleCare/buy new macbooks if Original parts are readily available for end users (and independent repair shops) to acquire, and have the ability to replace/repair their older machines.

Its not that its impossible to replace parts in todays machine. They just make it a pain or nigh impossible to do so for end users/ind. repair ppl.

Google a video about M1 Air having its on package ram and ssd upgraded. It is indeed possible, just that it would be insanely hard to source the new parts

Think about it, if say a hypothetical Macbook X from Apple have replaceable CPU, RAM, SSD, WIFI cards (these days its soldered and paired), a lot more user would pay for a minimum configuration they need, and then upgrade the parts as needed.

On the other hand, a Macbook Y with soldered on everything. It is guaranteed to generate more revenue.

One would have to “future proof” on configs when they buy. (higher margins)

People whose need exceed the config would have to trade-in/sell and buy new (more margins both ways)

If mitigation is available. (Such as storage full), the easiest choice might be their own services (iCloud storage) since they killed Back to My Mac dead.

And in event of disaster, you’d for sure need backup (no recovery for soldered on ssd)
 

metapunk2077fail

macrumors 6502a
Oct 31, 2021
634
845
I see the opposite problems. For example, locking down the supply chain so on one can fix a component (such as NAND flash) failure, forcing people to throw a whole board away otherwise good logic board is hardly ecologically responsible.

For example, one’s A1398 had a dead SSD? , one have option get an original SSD blade from somewhere, or upgrade to nvme drives with an adapter. And mind you, its even faster than original.
Your reply is frankly bizarre.

The supply chain isn't "locked down". In Apple's case they want repairs to use high quality certified components and certified repair shops. There's absolutely no reason to go to people like that YouTube troll.

I like fixing stuff, building PCs, restoring vintage machines, but I'm not such an ignorant romantic that I'll yell at the moon because times have changed and a company has decided that it's better to have easily recyclable products built with sustainability and reliability in mind.

It's not exactly a new thing really. There have been computers since the 70s and 80s that were closed systems with proprietary components. They had die hard fans too whether it was the BBC Micro, Commodore computers, Atari ST and so on. Some of the best coders, artists and musicians began on those machines and they didn't complain 'Muhhh how come they use their own parts'.
 

fakestrawberryflavor

macrumors 6502
May 24, 2021
423
569
I really wish we got the light up apple logo back with this latest update. That and a single USB-A would be my only change to this machine, as I don't mind the notch or the thickness.
 

Miha_v

macrumors regular
May 18, 2018
193
385
Damn, the difference in thickness is way smaller then I thought it would be ?
Then again, I like that Apple started prioritizing power over trying to make everything thinner at all costs. It's a pro device afterall. Nice comparison, 2006 model looks better then expected for this age.
 

dtm84

macrumors member
Oct 10, 2021
79
167
I have a powerbook 100 from 1991 (I used to play Bolo and other shenanigans on it as a teen in the 90s)
A Macbook pro A1150 from 2006
A Macbook pro from 2011
and now a macbook pro from 2021.

The powerbook 100 worked but was very technically limited.

The 2006 macbook pro was frankly pretty low quality and eventually the GPU seems to have died causing random crashes. It was fun to take apart and muck around with but it was like an Ikea cabinet where the screws no longer stayed secure after being unscrewed once making the loktite required. It was also very hot. The trackpad was not great. The start up cdrom eject noise is permanently burned in to my brain. A lot of flex on the deck. The matte screen was quite blah.

The 2011 macbook pro was very good to me. I had everything upgraded with max ram and SSD et al and the only thing forcing my upgrade was getting blocked from installing the last few OS revisions and had recently starting getting alerts that individual software would no longer support the OS I could run. It also ran hot. Unibody was an incredible improvement over the 2011.

I skipped the 2016 generation because the touch bar sucked, the keyboard sucked, and there were no significant performance gains. Y'all talking about it being the best because it was "pretty" are hilarious.

The 2021 macbook pro is crazy. Thing is cold on my lap and feels great. No complaints so far. Beautiful in space grey. Way nicer than the other two in appearance. Basically same footprint at the 2011 and a smaller height. Now that I think about it I guess there is a notch but frankly after reflecting, I haven't consciously noticed it even after seeing all those threads. Apple silicon makes it an incredible improvement over the 2011.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: chengengaun

Hammie

macrumors 68000
Mar 17, 2009
1,550
74
Wash, DC Metro
Great comparison.

I should do this with my 2013 13” MBP and my new 14” MBP. They are almost cookie cutter replicas of one another with a few newer style ports.
 

Shirasaki

macrumors P6
May 16, 2015
16,260
11,761
Look how many points of failure there were on the old machines. All those plastic parts, the tiny little rubber feet, the battery latches. They all became frayed or weak with time. PC laptops still have these numerous points of failure and fragility.

Unibody was such a game changer. It's now gotten to the point where the body doesn't have all those fragile plastic ports and antenna covers. So clean, solid and industrial.
And those sleek and beautiful machines are gonna be thrown into landfill after they reach their lifespan. Dunno if this trade off worth the gain.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pro_the_legend

mo5214

macrumors regular
Sep 20, 2019
145
102
Your reply is frankly bizarre.

The supply chain isn't "locked down". In Apple's case they want repairs to use high quality certified components and certified repair shops. There's absolutely no reason to go to people like that YouTube troll.

I like fixing stuff, building PCs, restoring vintage machines, but I'm not such an ignorant romantic that I'll yell at the moon because times have changed and a company has decided that it's better to have easily recyclable products built with sustainability and reliability in mind.

It's not exactly a new thing really. There have been computers since the 70s and 80s that were closed systems with proprietary components. They had die hard fans too whether it was the BBC Micro, Commodore computers, Atari ST and so on. Some of the best coders, artists and musicians began on those machines and they didn't complain 'Muhhh how come they use their own parts'.
What that was wrong wasn’t that Apple want people to use their quality parts. In fact, it was the opposite. They intentionally deny access to original parts. So unless you join their “independent repair program” or become an apple reseller (which will tie you down a lot. Go read about this) after which independent repairers would have to source parts from “donor machines” or other leaks.

There is no real other way to get said quality parts at all. They went out of their way to ensure that the parts are available only to them.

For example, try search for say, NAND flash for newer Macbook pros (2016 and newer) you won’t find one.

Also, back in the 80s, we don’t have companies go to a supplier, say Texas Instruments and say, “hey we dont want you to sell anyone this model of chips but us”. Some were using similar components (some runs on Z80, MOS6502, 8088, then Motorolla 68000 (not counting specifically designed ASICs of course)

Even Apple II came with schematic diagrams. One of the reason the platform sold so well into late 80s. With available third party upgrades.
 

1rottenapple

macrumors 601
Apr 21, 2004
4,757
2,774
I’m remember the older MacBook and m1 pro are total throw backs. I love the bottoms shape brings back memories of my macs in college.
 

Stevenyo

macrumors 6502
Oct 2, 2020
310
478
My 2015 MBA needed a battery replacement, so I shipped it off to SellYourMac for a few bucks. If I could have grabbed an inexpensive after market battery and popped it in without tearing into the MBA, I would have kept it. But I do agree with you that modern battery setups, even though baked in, blow the older stuff away!
It takes like 10 minutes and $30 to replace a 2015 air‘s battery. At least pretend to be honest. I had no shortage of issues with removable batteries, never had one last more than a year, plus they never lasted more than a couple hours. Sure, glued in batteries sucked when they used them (even apple agrees and has moved to better adhesive strip solutions) but having to remove a few screws to change a battery every 5 years or so is a tiny price to pay for massive improvements in the durability and battery performance.
 

randomthoughts

macrumors regular
Oct 15, 2020
220
716
This is quite a choice description of the differences. There are also many advantages of a design that’s more easily repairable and robust to modifications, and for many use cases this can last longer than a unibody design.

I had to replace the hard drives in a few MacBooks and MacBook Pros around that time. There were an insane amount of screws (like 30 or so) all different sizes and they would never all go back in correctly and a few were left over sometimes.

I’d happily will go with AppleCare+ and send in for service and replacement. Cloud storage and unified architecture is far superior. It was a very different time back then.
 

metapunk2077fail

macrumors 6502a
Oct 31, 2021
634
845
And those sleek and beautiful machines are gonna be thrown into landfill after they reach their lifespan. Dunno if this trade off worth the gain.
Apple has a recycling program and specially designed robots that makes extremely efficient use of all the parts. Unibody and part reduction has made this really easy.

Once a machine is totally old and unusable then take the Mac to the store for recycling.
 

Shirasaki

macrumors P6
May 16, 2015
16,260
11,761
Apple has a recycling program and specially designed robots that makes extremely efficient use of all the parts. Unibody and part reduction has made this really easy.

Once a machine is totally old and unusable then take the Mac to the store for recycling.
Few outside of Apple knows the inside out of those said recycle programs and where those “recycled” computer go, and how much of those are contributed to building new computers or going to landfill. As for that robot you say? How many to they have now? 2? 3? Or still that single one they showed in that video? I have seen reports saying that robot actually didn’t do much of the recycle at all, and most of those “recycle” end up going to landfill anyways. Apple won’t get to $3T while also truly taking care of the environment.
 

metapunk2077fail

macrumors 6502a
Oct 31, 2021
634
845
Few outside of Apple knows the inside out of those said recycle programs and where those “recycled” computer go, and how much of those are contributed to building new computers or going to landfill.

Apple has widely advertised the recycling program, where the parts go, how the robots are used, the details of how each component are recycled. They produce annual reports and state how much of your new computer or phone is made from recycled metals.

If you don't know that doesn't mean everyone else doesn't.



 

Shirasaki

macrumors P6
May 16, 2015
16,260
11,761
Apple has widely advertised the recycling program, where the parts go, how the robots are used, the details of how each component are recycled. They produce annual reports and state how much of your new computer or phone is made from recycled metals.

If you don't know that doesn't mean everyone else doesn't.



Care posing any source detailing how those robots works other than from Apple? Some sort of inside knowledge? Blogs? Comments? If what you know is from Apple, then I would just dismiss it.
 

chengengaun

macrumors 6502
Feb 7, 2012
371
854
Revisiting Macworld 2001 (One More Thing… starts around 1:31:20). The new MBPs do have the power and the sex. Not sure how that line will be received today, though…

 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.