What is the expected shelf life of the SoC M series devices?

[TightLines]

I am wondering if anyone has tried to calculate the expected shelf life the Apple devices that are equipped with the M series chips? My concern is when the components that were once upgradeable and replaceable, and often times by the more tech savvy and capable user themselves, now, with everything being locked down and soldered to the chip, that if a storage component goes bad, or a memory module goes bad (and we all know they do from time to time) that it will render the whole device as junk because the only viable replacement/repair option is going to be replacing the processor itself… and in my book, thats not good. Its not just the lack of ability to upgrade outside of Apples ridiculous pricing model for such things, but the repairs that will ultimately be needed on some machines will become exponentially more expensive…

Surely someone with a knack for figuring things by analysis out have tried to figure this out… i am very curious as to what people may think… and it hasn’t been long enough since the roll out of this new SoC stuff to get a clear picture… and I can’t imagine Apple sharing its internal data on what they are seeing as failures come back to them…

Thoughts?

 

[leman]

Same as any other premium modern computer. Average lifespan should be somewhere around 5-6 years. Integrated nature of the components probably increases the reliability, not decreases it, but it does significantly increase the price of an eventual repair. Which is why I think it's important to have an extended warranty for your device if you intend to keep it for a long time. In the USA, Apple offers extended warranty on a subscription basis, which is a great thing to have. Other countries unfortunately don't seem to have this option. I hope the subscription-based warranty will become a global service soon, it's a great solution to minimising the risk of ownership.

 

[Bodhitree]

My experience has been that when chips fail, like the graphics card or the ram, that most of the time the computer is so old that it cannot be repaired with parts that are easily obtainable by the average person. The usual response is to buy a new computer. The exception is when the hard drive fails, that can often be replaced. Usually you’re looking at 10 years or more of service.

On the whole, I expect the M-series Macs to be more reliable, because the integrated components lend themselves easily to integrated testing, and the smaller process sizes lead to an all-in-one component with a low thermal envelope that is less likely to fail.

However, there are also hobbyist users, who like to upgrade processors, clean thermal paste, replace ram with maxed out amounts and so on, to keep using a computer way past its original point of failure. I think for that crowd, the M-series computers will be a bit of a watershed, because so little of the computer is upgradeable. The PowerPC and Intel machines could be fixed with some technical know-how to have a lifespan of 20 years or more. I don’t think the M-series will stretch to that.

I don’t think a computer’s lifespan is massively affected by warranty. Warranty is just to catch manufacturing defects or a bad batch of machines, faults near the beginning of the life of a computer.

 

[leman]

I don’t think a computer’s lifespan is massively affected by warranty. Warranty is just to catch manufacturing defects or a bad batch of machines, faults near the beginning of the life of a computer.

What do you mean? Having warranty essentially insured you against the risk of hardware failures. Maybe the word “warranty” is a bad choice. It’s really just extended manufacturer insurance. A hardware failure is the insured risk.

In fact, I think that this type of extended device insurance is an elegant answer to the modern problem of device repairability. Ideally, providing this kind of service should be mandatory by law for device manufacturers, with the maximal premium capped at some sort of reasonable level (like 5% of the device cost per year). This would amortise high repair costs for the consumer, while giving them a piece of mind, while at the same time force the manufacturer to improve their quality as well as optimise the repair processes without hampering their ability to innovate. I would prefer this model to the one currently pushed by the Right of Repair advocates, which places all the burden on the customer while allowing the manufacturer to arbitrarily increase their profits.

 

[Bodhitree]

What do you mean? Having warranty essentially insured you against the risk of hardware failures. Maybe the word “warranty” is a bad choice. It’s really just extended manufacturer insurance. A hardware failure is the insured risk.

Well, all the computers I have worked with to date, and there have been quite a few because I did software development, if they failed they failed within the bedding-in period, sort of within six months of getting them from the manufacturer. If they last through that they generally lasted many years.

The one exception has been my stepfathers 27” iMac (2009), which had a graphics card that failed after about seven years because of thermal issues. That machine had had a series of issues though.

 

[leman]

Well, all the computers I have worked with to date, and there have been quite a few because I did software development, if they failed they failed within the bedding-in period, sort of within six months of getting them from the manufacturer. If they last through that they generally lasted many years.

Oh sure, a big proportion of failures will occur in the first year or two. That's exactly why we have the mandatory warranty.

But I am talking about something else, the risk that your machine will fail afterwards. Estimates show that there is more or less a 5-8% chance of failure per year. So if you made it past the base warranty period (let's say 2 years in the EU), there is still at least a 10-15% chance that your laptop will fail before year 5. And repairs on the devices, due to their integrated nature are expensive. So that's the choice to make: take a 15% risk of paying an average $700 or more for a an eventual repair over a 5-year ownership, or pay a smaller lump sum per year and have the repairs taken care of at no extra expense.

 

[Bodhitree]

I would love to see a graph of computer failure percentage versus time of ownership, but such a thing doesn’t seem easy to find on the net. Probably it would be U-shaped.

But this isn’t terribly relevant to the way M-series computers are different from standard x86.

 

[leman]

I would love to see a graph of computer failure percentage versus time of ownership, but such a thing doesn’t seem easy to find on the net. Probably it would be U-shaped.

The state of the art study is still this one: https://www.squaretrade.com/htm/pdf/SquareTrade_laptop_reliability_1109.pdf

It's a bit old, but the technology has not changed significantly, so it probably still holds. And the failure rates vs. time of ownership is pretty much linear according to their findings.

But this isn’t terribly relevant to the way M-series computers are different from standard x86.

How so? Integrated circuitry is integrated circuitry. I don't see any reason to assume that they will behave any differently. Maybe the slope will be a bit more gentle as integrated systems tend to be more reliable, but I wound't expect the overall distribution shape to be different.

 

[Bodhitree]

Really interesting, thanks for that. Surprising that they say for laptops the failure rate is a steady 5-7% per year, rather than being remarkably higher in the first year and then coming down.

How do you think the lower temperatures of the M-series chips would affect things, compared to the usual hot-running Intel chipsets? I would imagine as many failures are heat-related the lower temperatures should positively affect reliability.

 

[leman]

How do you think the lower temperatures of the M-series chips would affect things, compared to the usual hot-running Intel chipsets? I would imagine as many failures are heat-related the lower temperatures should positively affect reliability.

I can only offer my personal speculation here, so please take it as it is. I would be surprised if there were any long term reliability effects attributed to the higher energy efficiency of Apple Silicon. First, it’s not like M1 series really run that much cooler temperature-wise - they just produce less heat on average. The average temperature might be lower (especially when running tasks that only push few cores), but not enough to make a difference in expected lifespan. Second, temperatures of Intel-based Macs were already below the threshold where circuitry degradation accelerates dramatically. There might be some effects on surrounding components, but users with M1 Air reported similar temperatures for battery and the SSD as those of Intel laptops. So yeah.

If there is going to be a difference in reliability, is probably because M1 Macs use less components in general. Looking at the logic board teardowns, it seems that M1 models use simpler layouts and fewer supporting parts. And I wouldn’t be surprised if the electrical properties of M1 systems are more gentle to the components as well - for example M1 doesn’t need the short bursts of high power unlike Intel CPUs - which probably means better work conditions for capacitors and friends.

 

[theluggage]

But this isn’t terribly relevant to the way M-series computers are different from standard x86.

What are you comparing?

Obviously, a full-sized desktop PC with socketed processor, RAM, GPU, SSD etc is the ultimate in repairability - and only the Mac Pro comes close to that. OTOH, all those sockets and connectors are extra points of failure.

If you're talking about ultra-portable laptops with LPDDR RAM (which has to be surface-mount soldered to the logic board anyway) there's not a lot of practical difference.

What I think is unacceptable in Apple devices is having the SSD soldered in: SSD is subject to "wear" in a way that most other solid state electronics isn't - and while most calculations says that it should be good for the expected life of the computer (and have a much better "mean time between failure" than mechanical hard drives) the potential for failure is still there. Soldered (or otherwise hard-to-replace) SSD isn't unknown in ultraportable PCs - but replaceable M.2 blades seem to be the norm.

I was reassured about buying a Mac Studio by the teardowns - the SSD may never be user upgradeable but it can clearly be replaced by a technician without needing a new logic board, and the same goes for things like the fans, power supply and USB sockets, and the only glue involved seems to be the plastic "foot". I hope some of this trickles down to other models in the future.

 

[Bodhitree]

If there is going to be a difference in reliability, is probably because M1 Macs use less components in general. Looking at the logic board teardowns, it seems that M1 models use simpler layouts and fewer supporting parts. And I wouldn’t be surprised if the electrical properties of M1 systems are more gentle to the components as well - for example M1 doesn’t need the short bursts of high power unlike Intel CPUs - which probably means better work conditions for capacitors and friends.

That was my thinking as well. A SoC, especially a low-power one, should mean fewer components and lower stress on the system, fewer points of failure and so somewhat increased reliability. Of course, if a fault develops in your SoC then you are screwed because there is no easy way to repair it. But since most often the response to a failed circuit is “replace the whole logic board” anyway I doubt it will make much difference to repairs and such.

 

[LiE_]

Same as any other premium modern computer. Average lifespan should be somewhere around 5-6 years. Integrated nature of the components probably increases the reliability, not decreases it, but it does significantly increase the price of an eventual repair. Which is why I think it's important to have an extended warranty for your device if you intend to keep it for a long time. In the USA, Apple offers extended warranty on a subscription basis, which is a great thing to have. Other countries unfortunately don't seem to have this option. I hope the subscription-based warranty will become a global service soon, it's a great solution to minimising the risk of ownership.

In the UK Apple offer the option to pay annually for AppleCare+ "until cancelled". This is a good option if you keep a device past the 3 year mark.

 

[theluggage]

Really interesting, thanks for that. Surprising that they say for laptops the failure rate is a steady 5-7% per year, rather than being remarkably higher in the first year and then coming down.

That doesn't pass the sniff test - the "bathtub curve" for product reliability (with high failure rates in early life and later life and a low risk for the middle part) is pretty well established.

Bathtub curve - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Thing is, the whole "extended warranty" business model is based on insuring products during the "middle section" of the bathtub curve... and the report comes from SquareTrade who are an extended warranty provider. I'm not saying they're bing dishonest, but their data comes from faults reported under an extended warranty. From the report:

Only malfunctions reported directly to SquareTrade are included in the data. Other malfunctions,
including software issues handled directly by the retailer, problems associated with product
recalls, and those fixed by software/firmware updates, may not be represented in this data.

So a lot of the "dead on arrival" and "infant mortality" failures that would likely make up the high first-year failure rate are excluded... and unless they are stupid their warranties will be calculated to expire before the product gets to the end-of-life stage.

Now, OK, this is anecdotal so I offer it only as a plausibility check, but of the three main laptop failures I've suffered, I have (1) the 2011 MacBook GPU fault after ~3 years - free repair by the retailer under Apple's repair program, which probably counts as a "recall" and wouldn't show up, (2) Recurrence of said fault about 5 years later, by which time the machine was beyond the reach of any extended warranty and (3) a MS Surface Book which failed within 30 days and which I returned for a refund under the retailer's no-quibble returns policy (which, again wouldn't show up in these stats).

There's also the question of how they distinguish between accidental damage and malfunction (e.g. I know of one MacBook that suffered a "malfunction" shortly after being used while sitting on a duvet which probably blocked the vents, and plenty of other "I didn't drop it, honest!" incidents)...

 

[theluggage]

So that's the choice to make: take a 15% risk of paying an average $700 or more for a an eventual repair over a 5-year ownership, or pay a smaller lump sum per year and have the repairs taken care of at no extra expense.

So, I'd crudely interpret that as an extended warranty costing $105 (15% of $700) as being an appropriate amount to spend to ward against "malfunction" - however, that doesn't account for excess fees that Apple charges for "accidental damage", or Apple's get-out clauses over "liquid damage". Nor does it account for the chance that (at least in the UK/EU) the malfunction would have been covered by consumer law or an Apple repair program (MBP GPU, butterfly keyboard etc.)

Of course, your Mac isn't going to go 15% wrong - but it makes more sense if you think about all your electronic devices and appliances and how often you've actually had to pay out for those vs. how much all the extended warranties would add up to. I know I'd be a net loser if I bought extended warranties on everything,

There's also the usually sound advice "never pay to insure what you can reasonably afford to replace/repair" - but that makes it all rather dependent on your financial situation & whether you maintain sufficient savings to deal with nasty repair bill surprises. The trite answer is to just say "put $50 in a savings account every time you buy a new toy and you'll be laughing" - but of course real life isn't always that straightforward. However, if you rely on insurance to cover your "material" risks (i.e. liability insurance is another matter) you are inevitably paying good money for the privilege of having an insurance company smooth out the bumps in your cashflow.

 

[leman]

So, I'd crudely interpret that as an extended warranty costing $105 (15% of $700) as being an appropriate amount to spend to ward against "malfunction" - however, that doesn't account for excess fees that Apple charges for "accidental damage", or Apple's get-out clauses over "liquid damage". Nor does it account for the chance that (at least in the UK/EU) the malfunction would have been covered by consumer law or an Apple repair program (MBP GPU, butterfly keyboard etc.)

Of course, your Mac isn't going to go 15% wrong - but it makes more sense if you think about all your electronic devices and appliances and how often you've actually had to pay out for those vs. how much all the extended warranties would add up to. I know I'd be a net loser if I bought extended warranties on everything,

There's also the usually sound advice "never pay to insure what you can reasonably afford to replace/repair" - but that makes it all rather dependent on your financial situation & whether you maintain sufficient savings to deal with nasty repair bill surprises. The trite answer is to just say "put $50 in a savings account every time you buy a new toy and you'll be laughing" - but of course real life isn't always that straightforward. However, if you rely on insurance to cover your "material" risks (i.e. liability insurance is another matter) you are inevitably paying good money for the privilege of having an insurance company smooth out the bumps in your cashflow.

Oh, I agree with everything you say. That’s why I would like the extended warranty option of this kind to become a legal obligation, starting after the expiration of the usual warranty. It’s not ok that Apple charges money for a “better warranty” for the time period where you are under warranty anyway. But I think these kind of insurances could be good for customers who want to keep the device for a while.

 

[JMacHack]

I’d guess the same as Intel Macs, 6-7 years of official support. Unofficial, who knows?

 

[Malus120]

I am wondering if anyone has tried to calculate the expected shelf life the Apple devices that are equipped with the M series chips? My concern is when the components that were once upgradeable and replaceable, and often times by the more tech savvy and capable user themselves, now, with everything being locked down and soldered to the chip, that if a storage component goes bad, or a memory module goes bad (and we all know they do from time to time) that it will render the whole device as junk because the only viable replacement/repair option is going to be replacing the processor itself… and in my book, thats not good. Its not just the lack of ability to upgrade outside of Apples ridiculous pricing model for such things, but the repairs that will ultimately be needed on some machines will become exponentially more expensive…

Surely someone with a knack for figuring things by analysis out have tried to figure this out… i am very curious as to what people may think… and it hasn’t been long enough since the roll out of this new SoC stuff to get a clear picture… and I can’t imagine Apple sharing its internal data on what they are seeing as failures come back to them…

Thoughts?

View attachment 2018374

It's honestly just not possible to calculate these things without access to data that only Apple, and to a lesser degree third party Apple Authorized Service Providers under NDA, have access to. Apple Silicon is still so new that even anecdotal data on failures is pretty scarce.

That said, honestly speaking most Macs haven't been what I would consider "user repairable" for the better part of a decade now. The unfortunate fact of the matter is if your Mac breaks and you don't have some kind of warranty or insurance you're going to be unhappy.

That said if I were to guesstimate i'd reckon the most likely parts to fail are in order as follows:
Internal display (if applicable), Built in Keyboard/Trackpad (if applicable), Ports, Speakers (if applicable), Power supply/delivery subsystem, cooling, SOC (CPU, GPU, RAM, Storage.)

Honestly speaking, I feel like ram/storage related failures are pretty uncommon these days although Apple does seem to prefer to run their SOCs pretty hot (rather than let the fans run louder,) so if longevity is something you care about and you don't want to pay for extended coverage you may want to set a manual fan curve. There's a small part of me that worries we could have a repeat of the 2013 "nMP" but given how much more the MBA/MBP sell I doubt they'd want that level of liability.

 

[Pugly]

I don't have any reports, just anecdotes and observations. As computers have gotten more integrated, I've had much fewer problems. My first Mac was a white polycarb MacBook and I appreciated the ram and hard drive being upgradable. But that Mac also had failures in both ram and hard drive. It continued to work after repairs though. I also had a gaming pc built from parts, and I had an unexpected failure that took out the motherboard and cpu. Plus many other random hardware going bad.

I have an Air bought in 2016 and that still works, despite the battery being useless. And I don't think I've known anyone to have an iPad with chip hardware problems.

With the M1, and especially the M1 Air... the hardware is basically an iPad level integration. And I expect it to last as long as any iPad... My work is still using iPad 2s!

My one area of concern is the SSD, because that is a part that will fail eventually. It's just how SSDs work they have a limited capacity. But with regular usage the time it'll go bad is like 20 years.... so while that's a shame there's probably just as likely going to be a failure in the screen or keyboard or battery in that time.

I think the bigger problem is the hardware is more reliable and useful than they are given software updates. The M1 is on the right side of the Apple transition purge... but there's always a cutoff point somewhere in the future.

 

[theluggage]

Oh, I agree with everything you say. That’s why I would like the extended warranty option of this kind to become a legal obligation, starting after the expiration of the usual warranty. It’s not ok that Apple charges money for a “better warranty” for the time period where you are under warranty anyway.

...but in the EU/UK 99% of what you get with AppleCare is "accidental damage" cover which the "usual warranty" doesn't provide.

Well, the US (although I presume it varies between states in the US) need to beef up their consumer rights, but once you have UK/EU-level rights* I don't think a "compulsory warranty" would add anything, and I certainly don't think its reasonable for accidental damage cover (which is probably best handled through household/personal insurance) to be obligatory: at the end of the day it's all going to be rolled into the retail price and I'd rather not subsidise people who can't take reasonable care of their stuff (sorry, but the 'very careful owners who just had an unlucky accident' are going to be a minority). Once you rule out accidental damage any failure is either "reasonable wear and tear" (which wouldn't be covered) "abuse" (wouldn't be covered) or "manufacturing defect" (covered by consumer rights).

Maybe an extended warranty makes it easier to claim your rights - but even warranties have small print (e.g. water damage for AppleCare) and if a company doesn't care about their reputation they'll still give lousy service and quibble over providing repairs whether it's called "consumer rights" or "statutory warranty".

One of the problems in the UK/EU is that the retailer is responsible for dealing with consumer rights which can lead to disreputable retailers and/or manufacturers playing pass-the-buck. Also, although I think Apple needed a bit of prodding from the authorities to clarify what you actually get with Applecare+ for electronics/electrical in general it's some of the big retailers who have been mis-selling extended warranties (because they get a commission). So, picking a good retailer (or maybe just dealing direct with Apple) is an important start.

Companies will always be able to offer extras over and above what is either obligatory or the minimum acceptable standard - free pick up, instant replacements, on-site service, free lollipop with every new screen... so there will always be scope for such mis-selling. One of the problems I have with AppleCare+ is that it really doesn't seem to offer much in terms of "premium" service.

* 6 months with any fault presumed to be a manufacturing defect, up to 6 years if you can prove it's not fit for the purpose sold - and that includes being reasonably durable considering the price and purpose so it's not such a high bar for any £2000 computer that 'just breaks' within a couple of years.

 

[jerryk]

I am wondering if anyone has tried to calculate the expected shelf life the Apple devices that are equipped with the M series chips? My concern is when the components that were once upgradeable and replaceable, and often times by the more tech savvy and capable user themselves, now, with everything being locked down and soldered to the chip, that if a storage component goes bad, or a memory module goes bad (and we all know they do from time to time) that it will render the whole device as junk because the only viable replacement/repair option is going to be replacing the processor itself… and in my book, thats not good. Its not just the lack of ability to upgrade outside of Apples ridiculous pricing model for such things, but the repairs that will ultimately be needed on some machines will become exponentially more expensive…

Surely someone with a knack for figuring things by analysis out have tried to figure this out… i am very curious as to what people may think… and it hasn’t been long enough since the roll out of this new SoC stuff to get a clear picture… and I can’t imagine Apple sharing its internal data on what they are seeing as failures come back to them…

Thoughts?

View attachment 2018374

I quit worrying about upgradability a while back. Because by the time you upgrade the memory, drive, the processor, GPU, etc. are slow compared to current and you are restricted to what works with your other components.

Repairability is a somewhat more real issue, but how likely do you need to repair things like a SSD, memory, etc. It's not often unless you are planing on keeping something for quite a long time. And as someone pointed out the bathtub curve show how things that don't fail initially usually have a good period of reliably and then start failing in the out years. And by then the entire system is obsolete.

 

[satcomer]

Over the years especially on older Mac Book Pros dust was the largest problem because I still gave the advice on old intel Book Pro pros to open their Mac and tip it and blow the dust out of it!

 

[jav6454]

An M-series chip can easily reach 10+ years. Several Macs here using Intel chips are lasting that long.

 

[Alex Cai]

I am wondering if anyone has tried to calculate the expected shelf life the Apple devices that are equipped with the M series chips? My concern is when the components that were once upgradeable and replaceable, and often times by the more tech savvy and capable user themselves, now, with everything being locked down and soldered to the chip, that if a storage component goes bad, or a memory module goes bad (and we all know they do from time to time) that it will render the whole device as junk because the only viable replacement/repair option is going to be replacing the processor itself… and in my book, thats not good. Its not just the lack of ability to upgrade outside of Apples ridiculous pricing model for such things, but the repairs that will ultimately be needed on some machines will become exponentially more expensive…

Apple products won’t break down easily, and apple silicon are fast processors that can last at least 8+ years

 

[TightLines]

Apple products won’t break down easily, and apple silicon are fast processors that can last at least 8+ years

Thanks to everyone who has replied up to this point… I just want you to know that I value your opinions, even if I don’t totally agree with them; but in this case and question, I don’t think I’ve read one reply yet that I totally disagree with.

Just like the post I am quoting and replying to here, I don’t disagree that Apple products won’t break down easily, and the M series Apple Silicon are fast processors… I don’t disagree with any of that. However, that said, I have been around a while, and have been an Apple advocate since their inception and have worked with, on, or even owned many of their models over the years… my first one, as listed in my signature, was literally the Classic… the one without the internal HDD and I had to boot it using floppy disks. I can’t remember the OS version, but it was without a doubt MacOS in it’s infancy. Over the years since I have had the opportunity to be part of and a member of a few different MUG’s and even was a sys admin for a MUG running a BBS where I managed a modem bank filled with 14.4k modems to start and oversaw upgrades to that all the way up to the 56k days… Anyone remember the FirstClass BBS’s? - what fun that was and the memories it brings - priceless. Doing that offered me the opportunity to get hands on experience to a very wide variety of the Macintosh computers and other Apple products, such as the way before its time, (iPhone prodigy) Newton. Needless to say, over that time I also got to experience what i would classify as junk produced and made by Apple too… some of their models and configurations were hideous at best and manufactured with lower quality components… so I’ve seen plenty of hardware failures in nearly every part of the computer. Some widespread that affected huge batches of computers, and some not so widespread. Failing HDD’s back in the day was not uncommon, and I would venture to say was very common… no matter who the vendor manufacturing them was over the years. Apple has also been extremely inconsistent and all over the board with its upgradeability and expansion capabilities of the products in its lineup. Some have been easy to upgrade and work on to expand, and some have down right difficult and almost as if Apple put in place booby traps designed to mangle the hands that dare go inside those boxes to remove and add something different for the purpose of upgrading and giving the customer more capabilities without the need or cost to buying a whole new system. Some people claim that Apple would purposely make RAM, and Graphic Card modules that had always worked fine in previous models, suddenly become incompatible with their next gen computers of the same model/type… So it’s been a love/hate relationship with their more tech enthusiast type of customer.

And now we have this… where things have changed once again to the point where the whole system is essentially locked down tight… even if the component is removable and not soldered onto the chipset, (such as the SSD’s in the Studio) its not upgradeable or repairable, and if you want more capabilities later down the road or something fails, then one is basically being forced into paying for a whole new system and paying the extorting prices Apple charges to increase the capabilities of these new computers with the M series SoC design. While some think that failures aren’t going to happen or be common with things such as the SSD’s and graphics processors, I suggest they are not giving the industries history of such as much importance as it maybe should be given… and thats not to leave without mention the owner of these very expensive products, not being able to improve them at their discretion. Nobody is asking for the ability to install “non-Apple certified” components… I have been on the sideline for a while now, ever since they rolled out the new SoC systems to see how this type of thing shakes out… with Apple almost playing games and thumbing their noses at the “prosumer“… look at what they’ve done to try and get out in front of the ”right to repair” movement for the iPhone’s and the “repair kits” they are supposedly making available to the general public to rent… it’s almost as if its a joke to them. I just don’t know how funny people are finding it though. The system I currently have has been in my end of life window for a couple years now… I am holding off to see how they treat these “pro” machines still running the intel chips and if they will give those customers who spend north of $7000 on their production computers…. Machines that have always been designed to be expanded and upgraded as time and newer technologies evolved… I guess we will see how that rolls out come sometime in the fall of 2022… and that may be the time when I purchase my last new computer system… or maybe not… my current system still serves me well, and have no reason to think it won’t continue to do so, for the foreseeable future… I usually refresh my systems every 4 - 6 years depending on whats in current lineups… I am in year 5 and in holding pattern. A wait and see!

Again, thanks for all the good replies to the OP… keep them coming. I don’t think this topic is going away anytime soon, especially if we start seeing and hearing about large amounts of premature component failures…