Sixth-Generation iPad Teardown Details 'Repair Nightmare' for Education-Focused Tablet

[willmtaylor]

That shouldn't be an issue....
https://edu.google.com/intl/en_ca/k-12-solutions/privacy-security/?modal_active=none

LOL.

They’ve already been caught 2 or 3 times secretly collecting data on underage students, so it’s already an issue.

https://thenextweb.com/google/2015/...lecting-students-data-after-promising-not-to/

 

[JosephAW]

They should at least be designed to survive a fall from a tree as displayed in a commercial for the iPad Pro.

 

[Blaze4G]

So, 25% cracked screens for the iPads vs. 13% for the Nooks.

Wonder how much more USAGE the iPads get than the Nooks?

Wanna bet it's much more than the 2:1 breakage difference?

Well you see because I actually work at the school and know why nooks break less. But I can tell you're ready to defend the iPad any means necessary.

Anyway, the nooks break less because they are 6.5 inch or something along those lines. Easier for elementary kids to maneuver hence less likely they drop them. The nooks also comes with a cart to store them in.

So no, it's not because the iPads are used more or the Nooks are stronger.
[doublepost=1522784510][/doublepost]

1. Schools buy tablets/laptops for reasons other than use as an ebook reader.

2. But bound textbooks are heavy, not interactive, wear quickly, can’t be updated once printed.

iPad may not be less expensive but that shouldn’t be the criterion in education, but rather a criteria among many. Any school system that bases it’s purchases solely on cost is derelict in its chief duty to educate.
[doublepost=1522776493][/doublepost]

Then question then is why isn’t the school system ruggedizing them? Shame on the school system for not protecting taxpayer money. Stores that use tablet have them in cases. Parent have them in cases. Is the school system that lacking in foresight to not include the cost of a case in unit cost when considering buying?

They do have cases, but we are talking about elementary kids. I have seen kids purposely abuse them (sticking it with a pencil, throwing it, etc). Now do you ban these kids from using it? Well then how do you get them to read the textbooks and do their lessons that are online? Do you let the parents pay for it? Well most of the parents are at poverty level so good luck with that.

You're assuming the schools don't have them in cases based off of what? Lol sigh.

The kids abuse not only the iPads but the laptops too. However, atleast when they break it, it's easy to repair and doesn't cost the school.

 

[I7guy]

Making the screen and the battery more easily replaceable would certainly be a big step forward. Passage of these bills should also make it easier for technicians to get access to official documentation for proper repairs, and more competitive repair options for consumers.

If a couple big states like California or New York pass these bills into law, companies will probably adopt new standards, like the automakers did when a similar law was passed in Massachusetts:
http://www.autonews.com/article/20140125/RETAIL05/301279936/automakers-agree-to-right-to-repair-deal

Apple isn’t going to manufacture more repairable devices for a couple states and give the rest of us iPhones iPads and Macs with everything glued together.

The auto makers are Not manufacturing more repairable cars and I don’t expect Apple to manufacture more repairable iPads was my point. If my Ecu goes bad the third party dealer can buy an oem ecu and replace it, although I’d probably bring a warrantied vehicle to the dealer.

 

[dogslobber]

Apple tries hard to obsolete the hardware via software upgrades before the hardware can go bad. They're very good at it.

 

[I7guy]

No. The point is, with a device that is more easily opened to do repairs means any company can start a repair shop. Competition, cheaper prices.

With Apple's way, only Apple gets to repair them and you pay what Apple says.

Using third party car repair shops as an example, the price differential isn’t low enough to cause me not to bring my car to the dealer. Competition in this case is really stifled by the expense of repairing cars. I see the same with third party repair shops repairing phones.
[doublepost=1522785720][/doublepost]

Apple tries hard to obsolete the hardware via software upgrades before the hardware can go bad. They're very good at it.

My 7 year iPad 2 is still ticking. Apple tried to obsolete it but I won’t let it die just yet.

 

[Guy Clark]

Err, Steve Jobs introduced the aluminum unibody Macboks and Macbook Air (less repairable than previous Macbooks).
Also, Steve Jobs introduced the less user-repairable iMacs as well.
But yeah, keep hating on Tim Cook, the person that Jobs groomed himself.

Not so.The non Retina MacBook Pro was extremely user serviceable you just popped off the back plate following releasing twelve screws. From there you could access and repair all the internal components. Easily to upgrade the RAM. Fit an SSD or replace the existing HDD. Not to mention a full service could be carried out to the Logic Board.

The later iMacs (late 2009 - 2011) with a built in Superdrive are far easier to repair and service than the Slim Profile iMac without built in superdrive introduced in 2012.

We had a fully serviceable/upgradeable Mac mini up to and including 2012. Unlike the 2014 release with soldered in RAM and Storage not to mention the irremovable back plate.

Many Macs now have soldered in RAM. You can't access it you have to decide how much RAM you need when you order. The cost of Apple RAM is extortionate way more expensive than going down the self upgrade route.

Modern Apple under Tim Cook concentrates on screwing the consumer, money, profit and greed. If Steve Jobs knew what Tim Cook had done to Apple turning it in to a profit, greed driven parasite without direction I am sure he would not approve.
[doublepost=1522787581][/doublepost]

Most people don’t want to fix stuff. Most people don’t want to open the insides of products to upgrade them. They use the product until it doesn’t work any more and then they buy a new one.

And the old one becomes eWaste which stands a good chance of increasing the Toxic Poisons in developing countries threatening the life of children far removed from the luxury of owning an iPad.

 

[I7guy]

Modern Apple under Tim Cook concentrates on screwing the consumer, money, profit and greed. If Steve Jobs knew what Tim Cook had done to Apple turning it in to a profit, greed driven parasite without direction I am sure he would not approve.
[doublepost=1522787581][/doublepost]
And the old one becomes eWaste which stands a good chance of increasing the Toxic Poisons in developing countries threatening the life of children far removed from the luxury of owning an iPad.

Competition is great. If one believe Apple cncentrates On screwing the consumers glad there are choices aplenty for everyone.

Repair or throw out is always a balancing act.

 

[kazmac]

I don’t believe they said it was (a surprise).

I put the sarcasm /s after that comment.

 

[MacsRuleOthersDrool]

Well you see because I actually work at the school and know why nooks break less. But I can tell you're ready to defend the iPad any means necessary.

Anyway, the nooks break less because they are 6.5 inch or something along those lines. Easier for elementary kids to maneuver hence less likely they drop them. The nooks also comes with a cart to store them in.

So no, it's not because the iPads are used more or the Nooks are stronger.
[doublepost=1522784510][/doublepost]
They do have cases, but we are talking about elementary kids. I have seen kids purposely abuse them (sticking it with a pencil, throwing it, etc). Now do you ban these kids from using it? Well then how do you get them to read the textbooks and do their lessons that are online? Do you let the parents pay for it? Well most of the parents are at poverty level so good luck with that.

You're assuming the schools don't have them in cases based off of what? Lol sigh.

The kids abuse not only the iPads but the laptops too. However, atleast when they break it, it's easy to repair and doesn't cost the school.

I can understand the size-thing for little kids. Not much to be done for that.

But at least you admitted that the Nook isn't any "stronger" than then iPad. So, subjected to the same G-forces in the same axes, they would statistically break about the same percentage of the time.

I agree that the cost of repair basically can't be foisted onto the parents, especially if low-income is an issue.

I think, for that application, the "case" needs to pretty-much "house" the iPad all the time. You can get that to be a secondary advantage by making it case-with-keyboard, like the Adesso case I have for my 9.7 inch iPad 2. I'm not sure how far of a drop onto whatever it would survive in that case; but I feel that, without actively HURLING it at a wall or floor, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't break.

Like this:

https://www.amazon.com/Adesso-Compagno3-Bluetooth-Scissor-Switch-WKB-1000DW/dp/B007OX26L2/

Mine's a slightly older version, with an elastomeric keyboard; but quite frankly, although it does make the iPad a little bulky, it is really nice to have a built-in "stand", and for when I want to use it, the keyboard's battery charge lasts a LONG time. Mine hasn't been out of that case even once since I bought it about 5 years ago. The keyboard is nice; because you get REAL cursor moving and Editing keys (iOS finger-driven text-selection SUCKS!).

And if you DO lose your grip and start to drop the iPad, the case's "easel" design gives you another chance to keep the whole shebang from falling to floor, by giving you something to grab hold of...

Of course, if you wanted something a lot less bulky (and considerably less-expensive), but still good at keeping the iPad from falling face-down onto a hard surface, there is always something like this:

https://www.amazon.com/Veamor-Protective-Lightweight-Drop-proof-Shockproof/dp/B01LZMZROR/

 

[Skeptical.me]

It's the only thing I wish were different about Apple products (and I love Apple products) is upgradability and lower durability than other products. But those "other products" don't have iOS or macOS.

I just ordered an iPad Pro 12.9inch what are others thoughts about that model? Is it too big? I'm using it for a university course. I went with a larger iPad than a low spec Macbook.

 

[willmtaylor]

It's the only thing I wish were different about Apple products (and I love Apple products) is upgradability and lower durability than other products. But those "other products" don't have iOS or macOS.

I just ordered an iPad Pro 12.9inch what are others thoughts about that model? Is it too big? I'm using it for a university course. I went with a larger iPad than a low spec Macbook.

Perhaps lower durability but typically better longevity.

 

[LovingTeddy]

I didn't say anything about the Rear cameras. They have to be as high-resolution as the price-point will allow.

I was SPECIFICALLY talking about the front-facing camera. Anything more than 3 MP is really just a waste. But Apple has to keep up with the Joneses, spec-wise, at least on their main-line products.

BUT, this is a cost-sensitive model, and Apple chose to save some pennies by spec-ing a 1 MP camera module for the FRONT camera, that they could get for almost nothing.

Would you rather that they reduced the resolution of the Display or the speed of the SoC?

No. Apple is doing this exactly because it is parts that they can reuse from their inventory. That make this iPad cheaper. This is still not cheap iPad.

And yes, Apple can take 7MP camera on the iPad 2018 and it does not cost Apple any significant money. Apple can make a decent product by upgrading parts to at least 2018 standard. And I don't think it will make the profit margin from 30% to 20%. Apple just does not want lower their profit margins by tiny amount.

By the way, If this is not iPad, it will be dirty cheap. You are talking about a product with 5 years old design, 6 years old front camera, 2 years old CPU... All recycled parts... Apple can just recycle parts from iPad Pros... cost them absolutely minimum

 

[pika2000]

No. The point is, with a device that is more easily opened to do repairs means any company can start a repair shop. Competition, cheaper prices.

With Apple's way, only Apple gets to repair them and you pay what Apple says.

Err, does it matter to schools? They would have a contract with whoever providing their computing solutions with the terms and conditions of warranty and repairs, and they would not have to repair those devices (be it chromebooks or iPads ) themselves. In the end, in reality, the repairabikity of iPads don’t really matter from the school’s perspective, unless they are the ones doing repairs themselves.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

You're assuming the schools don't have them in cases based off of what? Lol sigh.

Your assuming I’m not familiar with low tax base locale school systems based off what? LOL. Sigh. I’ve worked with schools that didn’t have functioning text books for students but did have a closet full of brand new computer equipment they had not place to set up.

There exist cases made for schools (and probably military) that literally mummify a tablet. Based on your post, yes I made an inference your system does not employ those types. If they are not using those type might as well not have one.

 

[pika2000]

No. Apple is doing this exactly because it is parts that they can reuse from their inventory. That make this iPad cheaper. This is still not cheap iPad.

And yes, Apple can take 7MP camera on the iPad 2018 and it does not cost Apple any significant money. Apple can make a decent product by upgrading parts to at least 2018 standard. And I don't think it will make the profit margin from 30% to 20%. Apple just does not want lower their profit margins by tiny amount.

By the way, If this is not iPad, it will be dirty cheap. You are talking about a product with 5 years old design, 6 years old front camera, 2 years old CPU... All recycled parts... Apple can just recycle parts from iPad Pros... cost them absolutely minimum

And other companies are not doing the same, using older/lower end/cheaper components or shared chassis? What kind of spec does a $300 Chromebook have? Or do you expect schools to buy that $1500 HP surface clone that iFixIt used as comparison instead?

 

[macbeta]

Apple missed the boat, they should have made a ePad, going back to the more robust eMac idea. Something tough and easy to fix. Chrome books are going to steal apples lunch money and eat their lunch.

 

[pika2000]

Not so.The non Retina MacBook Pro was extremely user serviceable you just popped off the back plate following releasing twelve screws. From there you could access and repair all the internal components. Easily to upgrade the RAM. Fit an SSD or replace the existing HDD. Not to mention a full service could be carried out to the Logic Board.

The later iMacs (late 2009 - 2011) with a built in Superdrive are far easier to repair and service than the Slim Profile iMac without built in superdrive introduced in 2012.

We had a fully serviceable/upgradeable Mac mini up to and including 2012. Unlike the 2014 release with soldered in RAM and Storage not to mention the irremovable back plate.

Many Macs now have soldered in RAM. You can't access it you have to decide how much RAM you need when you order. The cost of Apple RAM is extortionate way more expensive than going down the self upgrade route.

Modern Apple under Tim Cook concentrates on screwing the consumer, money, profit and greed. If Steve Jobs knew what Tim Cook had done to Apple turning it in to a profit, greed driven parasite without direction I am sure he would not approve.
[doublepost=1522787581][/doublepost]
And the old one becomes eWaste which stands a good chance of increasing the Toxic Poisons in developing countries threatening the life of children far removed from the luxury of owning an iPad.

Apple under Steve Jobs never intended those to be user repairable. The only thing that Apple allowed was the accessible RAM slot on the early aluminum iMacs. The trend was already there with Jobs. Compare those to the plastic or non unibody MacBooks which have easily accessible drives, RAM, and battery. Heck, Jobs brought us the MacBook Air, and literally said that is the notebook of the future, slim, unibody, almost no ports, and no user accessible parts. Don’t be in denial.

 

[ackmondual]

LOL.

They’ve already been caught 2 or 3 times secretly collecting data on underage students, so it’s already an issue.

https://thenextweb.com/google/2015/...lecting-students-data-after-promising-not-to/

interesting. Push come to shove, schools still have budgets, and Chromebooks still have around 50% marketshare, so they gotta be coming out good overall.

 

[pika2000]

Apple missed the boat, they should have made a ePad, going back to the more robust eMac idea. Something tough and easy to fix. Chrome books are going to steal apples lunch money and eat their lunch.

The one who is truly worried about Chromebooks is Microsoft since Chromebooks are easier replacements to Windows laptops. iPads imo is a different kind of device.
Personally, it’s okay either way . I mean prior to this, we all thought the regular iPad won’t even support Apple Pencil, but lo and behold. Who knows, an updated mini might be next.

 

[Mousse]

Apple under Steve Jobs never intended those to be user repairable. The only thing that Apple allowed was the accessible RAM slot on the early aluminum iMacs. The trend was already there with Jobs. Compare those to the plastic or non unibody MacBooks which have easily accessible drives, RAM, and battery. Heck, Jobs brought us the MacBook Air, and literally said that is the notebook of the future, slim, unibody, almost no ports, and no user accessible parts. Don’t be in denial.

Aye. T'is that mentality at Apple now that is driving me away. If the smallest thing breaks out of warranty, either you live with it or buy a new machine. Ridiculous. $300 isn't exactly pocket change for a lot of people. Hail, my $100 microwave oven stopped heating just yesterday. Instead of dropping another $100 on a new oven, I fixed it by replacing a $3 door switch. (Microwave ovens have 3 door switches.) A while back I fixed a flat panel $300 TV by replacing a $3 fuse and 2 25 cents capacitors.
The disposable mentality today is utterly bizarre. Knowledge is freely available and tools are more accessible than ever before.

 

[AtomicGrog]

Gonna stick my head out and say most of the apple products have the appropriate level of 'repair-ability' and where repairable it's not end user outcome, more repair-shop/vendor driven.

- Pad's: Very hard to repair, pretty much a return to base, likely outcome replacement item
- Phones: High/volume product, repairable by shops/manufacturer
- Macbooks/iMacs/MacPro/MacMini: All designed to be repairable by shops/manufacturer to varying degrees

I'm also in line with expansion where required...

- Pads, phones non upgrade-able.
- Macbooks/iMacs etc. variable according to their form factor... the slimmer they are the harder to upgrade but a decent subset can upgrade memory and add external storage (bandwidth/latency of Thunderbolt being more than sufficient).

 

[Guy Clark]

Apple under Steve Jobs never intended those to be user repairable. The only thing that Apple allowed was the accessible RAM slot on the early aluminum iMacs. The trend was already there with Jobs. Compare those to the plastic or non unibody MacBooks which have easily accessible drives, RAM, and battery. Heck, Jobs brought us the MacBook Air, and literally said that is the notebook of the future, slim, unibody, almost no ports, and no user accessible parts. Don’t be in denial.

Not so. The facts are clear to see glancing at the relevant iFixit tutorials as to the repairability of older generation machines

MacBook Pro Unibody non-Retina 13" 2009-2012
https://www.ifixit.com/Device/MacBook_Pro_13"_Unibody

All Easy

MacBook Pro Unibody non-Retina 15" 2009-2012
https://www.ifixit.com/Device/MacBook_Pro_15"_Unibody

All Easy

The 2011 iMac 21.5" received an iFixit repairability score of 7/10 which dropped to 3/10 upon the release of the 2012 slimline iMac profile and dropped even further to 1/10 in 2015 due to soldered in RAM
https://www.ifixit.com/Device/iMac_Intel_21.5"_EMC_2428
https://www.ifixit.com/Device/iMac_Intel_21.5"_EMC_2544
https://www.ifixit.com/Device/iMac_Intel_21.5"_Retina_4K_Display_(2015)


The 2012 Retina 13" MacBook Pro received an iFixit repairability score of 2/10 which has fallen to 1/10 (present day) due to soldered in RAM
https://www.ifixit.com/Device/MacBook_Pro_13"_Retina_Display_Late_2012
https://www.ifixit.com/Device/MacBook_Pro_13"_Touch_Bar_2017

 

[pika2000]

Not so. The facts are clear to see glancing at the relevant iFixit tutorials as to the repairability of older generation machines

MacBook Pro Unibody non-Retina 13" 2009-2012
https://www.ifixit.com/Device/MacBook_Pro_13"_Unibody

All Easy

MacBook Pro Unibody non-Retina 15" 2009-2012
https://www.ifixit.com/Device/MacBook_Pro_15"_Unibody

All Easy

The 2011 iMac 21.5" received an iFixit repairability score of 7/10 which dropped to 3/10 upon the release of the 2012 slimline iMac profile and dropped even further to 1/10 in 2015 due to soldered in RAM
https://www.ifixit.com/Device/iMac_Intel_21.5"_EMC_2428
https://www.ifixit.com/Device/iMac_Intel_21.5"_EMC_2544
https://www.ifixit.com/Device/iMac_Intel_21.5"_Retina_4K_Display_(2015)


The 2012 Retina 13" MacBook Pro received an iFixit repairability score of 2/10 which has fallen to 1/10 (present day) due to soldered in RAM
https://www.ifixit.com/Device/iMac_Intel_21.5"_EMC_2544
https://www.ifixit.com/Device/MacBook_Pro_13"_Touch_Bar_2017

The fact is that even under Jobs, the trend was towards less user accessible parts. Again, look at the MacBook Air. Those “repairability” you pointed out are a far cry from the non unibody MacBooks. And those products are already in the pipeline even under Jobs. Apple don’t just suddenly come up with new design overnight. Again, don’t be in denial. m

 

[Horselover Fat]

I find it strange how some people dismiss the role of ifixit. Even if this new iPad is as (un)repairable as the old ones, it is still important for customers/schools to know to get a more complete picture. No one should base his buying decision solely on what the manufacturers tell you.