Apple is under no obligation to hide the fact that the battery was replaced by an unauthorized repair center and therefore can’t be verified.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iFixit Shares Full 16-Inch MacBook Pro Teardown
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not even in the slightest....I understand your side. And I understand Apple's take on it. I worked for them for half a decade, so trust me, I understand their side better than 99% of their customer base and detractors, such as yourself.
Still have a Dell E6430 for admin purposes. I've got a repurposed headless Shuttle XPC at home for serving. So, no the problem isn't the use as much as the choice for current owners or future owners to repair to extend longevity. I can repair a Dell XPS which is similar in design much easier than the MBP. I can repair/replace the hardware in the newer MBP product line: it's just a brick though if it involves the logic board or T2 controller because it requires proprietary software/hardware which no owner or unauthorized third-party has access to. I've not actually replaced the batteries in the newer line but if they're anything like the iPhones, then it will show a failure or no information from the battery controller for new authentic Apple batteries. You'll be required to take it to Apple for them to software pair the battery controller which will cost you more money. So, they're not designing or locking down their software for security as much as it's used for a deterrence.I expect it's for "build quality" not weight-savings. By gluing and riveting everything, nothing moves so the frame remains more rigid and less chance of stuff working loose inside.
Only buying a Mac once and upgrading it forever is anathema to Apple. Heck, it is anathema to any manufacturer.
Honestly it probably costs Apple more to do these "replace rather than fix" designs. I mean there is a reason they kept tinkering with the butterfly-mechanism and it probably was because the costs of replacing the entire upper-case every time one failed was getting out of hand and having a material impact on the bottom line of the family. Apple charges what, $750 for a repair? Even if the part and labor costs Apple $250, that is probably half of the margin on a base laptop. Replace it again and they're negative on the whole thing.
Considering how many people complain about Apple not updating Macs every six months when a new CPU or GPU model is released, one would think most users do replace their machines on a very regular basis.
Update: Here's Dell's XPS 13 teardown which doesn't differ that much from the dimensions of MBP. Repair score 7 out of 10.
iFixit Dell XPS 13 Teardown
Most of the forum members who are voicing their opinion just want the RAM and SSD to be user replaceable as a minimum requirement. The battery would be nice as well as an added bonus. Apple engineers just as any like problems and to find creative solutions, glue, rivets, welding is not environmentally friendly to replace defective parts or through the users upgrade cycle.
I can afford a spec’ed our 16” MBP the fact is the principle of the matter where other users requirements and budgets grow with what they need now and down the road. Apples option is now or purchase a new machine this is not environmentally friendly and it’s a PITA to repair anything on these devices that costs more money, time and labour for Apple and the user.
Example: if my Mac laptop needs to spend tine in the shop due to a shortage of parts, I can easily remove the SSD insert into another Mac and continuing working without having to clone to an external device or retrieve from a TM backup. With these soldiered SSD an Apple tech has to plug right into the Mobo to access it to do anything with it, this is time consuming and labour intense for the benefit of whom other than Apple so they can sell you AppleCare. These things are never mentioned to many customers hence I believe most do not know about the e issue until they are personally effected. It is a lack of transparency on Apple’s part.
The Dell provided as an example a user can upgrade the RAM and SSD post-purchase.
Unless you worked in their marketing or the exec branch, I doubt you understand either side as much as you purport to do.
Oh, and if we go back to your comparing Apple and Dell, what's the "on site warranty" with Apple, it's 3 years with Dell 🤣
Last edited:
Insurance is for catastrophic losses. Like major illnesses, your home burning down, injuring yourself or another person in an accident, etc. Not for a $3,000 computer. Buying it is much more likely than not just giving free money to Apple, Best Buy, etc. Obviously for assets that require yearly maintenance like a car or a central home AC unit it is worth paying to maintain those items by replacing fluids, filters, etc., but not a computer, stereo, TV etc. that do not need regular maintenance.
Your definition of a monopolistic position is not necessarily consistent with the law.
What if Burger King was charging $50 for a Whopper—and getting it! (And upsetting true hamburger connoisseurs in the process.) Would this Whopper, at 10x the price of a Big Mac, somehow be a legal problem for Burger King? Are they abusing their monopolistic position of Whoppers?
Last edited:
Why do you keep bringing in the issue of stolen iPhones. I travel to many developing countries where theft would be likely and my iPhone has never been an issue. I do not believe the battery is locked by iCloud but rather a reset code needs to be applied within iOS. I believe this is less to do with theft rather than Apple being transparent and honest about replacement part pricing as without these lame tactics of providing a code within iOS people will just get a battery at a fraction of the cost. People have successfully replaced an iPhone battery without problems in the past with the unnecessary iOS code.
Last edited:
And you “suspect” Apple is using QLC for the 8TB BTO option yet you have have zero proof, but think you’re not speculating as well? That’s rich.
Hence RTR, why can I not purchase an authorized part and do the repair myself or find a competitive repair shop. Why do you feel Apple should not be transparent instead of overcharging for parts and labour in a free market.
That's educated guess---biggest TLC chip that I know of is 512GB, for 8TB you need 16 of those, is there space to solder 16 x 12x18mm packages?
Should be TLC since the 16" MBP uses Toshiba SSD chips in their 4- & 8-channel NVMe controllers.
[automerge]1574135255[/automerge]
Toshiba produces 2TB in TLC for NVMe an the iFixit teardown for a 512GB verifiies this manufacturer. It doesn't mean they don't source from Samsung either but they have even larger capacity for TLC. QLC is great for a lot of reading but the longevity for constant writes is not as good as TLC.
2TB in a single chip? The teardown had 5! chips to make up 512GB, like I said, for 8TB, you need 16 of 512GB chips, can you point out the space for those?
Last edited:
No, not a single chip. 2TB capacity for combined cells. I haven't looked maximum capacity of cells on a single chip.
[automerge]1574135857[/automerge]
BTW. Check out the tear downs of different MB since the '14-15 product line.
Yeah don’t try to stuff those words in my mouth. I said name-calling is unproductive, you disagreed. You’re perfectly entitled to voice your (wrong) opinion, but there’s no use arguing. Hence the “we’ll have to agree to disagree” sentiment.
I said exactly what I meant: “Apple didn’t make the machine you wanted so you bought something else. Awesome! Enjoy your machine! Life’s too short to pay good money for something that’s not going to make you happy. You did what’s right for you. Other people will choose different.”
You’re the one who proceeded to misinterpret that clear statement and respond with a straw man: “If people never voice what they want, when would they ever stand a chance of getting it? Your approach is rather naive!”
I’m not putting any words in your mouth. Two things don’t have to be juxtaposed to be put into contrast. Whether you want to own it or not, you certainly did set up a contrast between the fools who buy whatever Apple “craps out” (not you though, you’re not a fool) with your apparently wise (because you’re not a fool who buys whatever Apple “craps out”) choice of a P73.
SLC was more reliable than MLC which is more so than TLC and so on with QLC. Just the nature of the game with cramming more into less. Reliability becomes an issues but the cost benefit is available.
Hence my educated guess---there are eight smd locations for "SSD," egro for 8TB, you need at least 1TB in a single chip.
Well, yeah. SLC is EXPENSIVE still. I mentioned QLC because the other posters were bickering over it. I knew it was used in a lot read systems such as for serving static data that's rarely changed.
[automerge]1574136530[/automerge]
I'm only speculating that other models with higher capacities based upon my knowledge of TLC used up to the 2TB capacities in '16-19. However, Apple has used different SSD soldered chips since they were introduced a few years back. Some had Samsung, Toshiba, and maybe even Micron.
You're hillarious, look up what juxtaposed means, saying "Two things don’t have to be juxtaposed to be put into contrast" is a contradiction; and given your level of argument, I can't be bothered to argue (or even deal) with someone whose opening line "You’re perfectly entitled to voice your (wrong) opinion".
I never said you shouldn’t be able to buy an authorized part, that’s a different question. But I don’t think a shop should have the right to put a $2 battery in my phone and charge me $40 for an OEM battery instead of the $25 they charge for a third party. As a consumer, I appreciate that information.
The biggest TLC flash package is 1TB not 512GB. The Samsung 970 EVO 2TB used only two 1TB flash packages to achieve 2TB on a single sided m.2 PCIe SSD. The density afforded by 512Gbit flash allows Samsung to fit 1024GB (1TB) of storage on a single sixteen die flash package. With 1TB of V-NAND on a single flash package, a single-sided 2TB M.2 SSD with a conventional two-package flash array is possible. The 970 EVO uses 64-layer 3-bit V-NAND. EDIT: According to Samsung's documentation, it says the 970 EVO uses 3-bit MLC V-NAND. (https://www.samsung.com/semiconduct...msung_NVMe_SSD_970_EVO_Data_Sheet_Rev.1.0.pdf)
Read more: https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8651/samsung-970-evo-2tb-2-nvme-pcie-ssd-review/index.html
They moved to a 92-layer 3-bit V-NAND on the 970 EVO Plus.
Last edited:
There was a lot of speculation about that in '16-'19 but I've not seen a single end-user product with those chips, SKHynix is only promising to make 1TB TLC chips available in 2020. Have you seen the 2TB chips out of labs?