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.
Some Airlines Banning All MacBook Pros From Checked Luggage and Preventing Use During Flights
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's just silly. The numbers don't justify that sort of reaction by any stretch of the imagination.
There were only 26 reported failures out of 432,000 units sold, spread over four years. So the odds of any given device overheating in a three-hour airplane flight are about 0.0000005%, give or take a factor of 2 or so. (I don't know the actual distribution of sales over the first three years of that period, so I just assumed that they were all bought at the beginning, which is close enough for a quick estimate.). And there were only five actual fires, i.e. 0.0000001% in a three-hour flight.
To put that in perspective, if every single airline flight in the entire world carried one of these laptops, you would only expect a fire every 22 years, which is far longer than the expected service life of the batteries in question. And that assumes a 0% recall success rate. And the real odds would probably be even lower than that. After all, even if every single person who owns one of these also consistently carries it while flying, that would still mean that only about 0.1% of all airline passengers in the world would have one, so it would probably be closer to one fire per 100–400 years, in practice.
Besides, banning the use of laptops makes them more dangerous. There's about a 1% chance (seven orders of magnitude greater) that putting the laptop in the overhead bin because you aren't allowed to use it will result in it falling out on someone's head, thus causing an injury. So all else being equal, that laptop is on the order of 10 million times more likely to injure someone because they banned its use than if they had not done so!
Also, a fire occurring in someone's lap while the device is in use is far less likely to cause serious damage to the aircraft and seriously inconvenience passengers than a fire in an overhead bin. So even if you consider only the fire risk by itself, banning use of these laptops still increases, not decreases, the risk to passengers.
Finally, there's no reason to believe that not using these laptops changes the fire risk at all. Lithium ion batteries almost always catch fire while charging, not discharging. So even if the odds of a fire weren't mind-bogglingly tiny, the right policy would be a ban on charging them in flight, rather than on using them. And even that would be a gross overreaction, IMO, given the numbers in question.
This reaction by the airlines would be utterly hilarious if it didn't result in harm to half a million people over something that's about as likely to bring down an airplane as someone's aerosol hair spray.... As it is, it is just embarrassing, and yet another reminder of just how bad humans are at understanding relative risk. Just saying.
Yes it is, more then enough planes are brought down every year for various reasons these days. As previously said by another member, the airport staff are not going to entertain the trust of a customer telling them their computer is not affected by the issue or ‘mines been fixed’. These are airport check in and security staff, not Apple technicians.
Hence the understanding that it is quite reasonable. Safety is first and foremost before anyone travelling with a MacBook.
[doublepost=1567146155][/doublepost]
I have to admit I’m really struggling to see how he’s the most successful CEO in history.
That’s quite the claim to make there! A man who whilst in charge has lost massive sales numbers and now hides those sales numbers from investors. But increase profits by massively increasing prices. That’s not a sustainable plan and not the mark of someone who would be labelled the most successful CEO in history, in my books.
It’s also amusing how you proclaim Tim Cook is a better CEO then Steve Jibs, Cook the caretaker CEO who has merely runs apple is the greatest CEO in history, but Jobs who saved Apple from the brink of bankruptcy, and turned it around into the most successful global consumer electronics corporation on the planet ever, and did all that after being fired from Apple his own company in the first place, is not?
Last edited:
A strong culture/ethos whatever you want to call it, can take a decade or longer to die. I think the end of the SJ era has only recently begun. You didn't think the SJ era ended the day he died did you?
That growth was from Steve's residual legacy. I think that's pretty obvious. With his influence, culture and products he already thought of before he passed on, that residual growth can easily account for 10 years post.
Everything Apple is now is still because of Steve. All the products including AirPods were already designed when Steve was around. The new Apple may have thought of a couple newer products like the HomePod, but that failed product certainly is not a dent in that $900B.
Any above average CEO could have taken (ridden) Apple to $900B. In fact, I would bet that Apple would still have hit $600B without a CEO at all. For sure, no doubt.
They can have security throw you off if required and as said, the airline can ban you and I bet that goes around between the airlines.
I would demand from Apple a document that clearly certifies that the battery has been changed, so that you can show it if needed. It’s their mess, and it’s their job to correct it. My MB 15’ is also affected and is going soon into repair, and I do intend to ask them for that document when it’s done, as I travel internationally very often.
Apple's share price is going to be destroyed when iPhone sales fall short next quarter. Apple remains the iPhone Company and nothing Tim Cook says will change that fact. Apple is a leopard that can't change its spots. Apple stinks of falling iPhone sales and big investors are going to abandon Apple as soon as possible. After Apple lost $450B in value last year, no smart investor wants to get burned again. Nothing is going Apple's way and shareholders are going to lose out again.
In some ways, this is worse than the Samsung debacle from the user side. With the Note 7, most owners could expect to walk in with it and come out with a new device in exchange.
Because of the Everything-Glued policy, MBP owners are expected to be without their laptop for weeks while the techniciens are battling with dissolving the glue that’s keeping the batteries in place. These 15 ‘’ MB are often used for work, not for surfing Facebook, and staying without your work tools for weeks is a far bigger inconvenience that just giving in your phone and getting another one the same day.
Because of the Everything-Glued policy, MBP owners are expected to be without their laptop for weeks while the techniciens are battling with dissolving the glue that’s keeping the batteries in place. These 15 ‘’ MB are often used for work, not for surfing Facebook, and staying without your work tools for weeks is a far bigger inconvenience that just giving in your phone and getting another one the same day.
So in your opinion the risk to all of the other passengers and crew is worth the "harm" that a *maximum* 12 hour flight without the use of your macbook pro causes to you? That's what you're saying, right? I probably won't get stuck by lightning, but that doesnt mean I'm going to play golf in the middle of a thunderstorm. I have over 10,000 flight hours behind me, have been in multiple IFEs, and would have no problem asking a passenger to disembark the aircraft if they don't want to comply with the regulation. Your post sounds like a rant from an entitled individual who is only thinking about themselves.
Do you want to be on a plane with one of these laptops if it catches fire? How about your family? You can spout all the numbers you want. It's about safety and the potential for risk. The FAA has run the numbers themselves and they have determined to put out the guidance. I think they have an idea about what they are doing.
I thought so too. Who checks in a laptop? Especially a freaking MacBook Pro. Can you imagine that luggage getting "lost"?
Some Airlines Banning All MacBook Pros From Checked Luggage and Preventing Use During Flights
You forgot the second part
It’s only got to this because Apple are an easy brand to do this to. It’s one product line too. But because rather than it being Apple helping to fix an old product, they’re public enemy number one now.
That knockoff portable battery you bought from Wish? No problems mate, bring it on board with you.
That knockoff portable battery you bought from Wish? No problems mate, bring it on board with you.
yeah, because its so much fun for them banning devices and executing the ban!
[doublepost=1567156903][/doublepost]
my english is not good enough but is apple now good or bad in your opinion?
[doublepost=1567157420][/doublepost]
I consider man on the moon, a religious statement. its unproven, safe battery technology would be easy but companies want your battery to fail - PROFIT
Absolutely hilarious take. Why next quarter? iPhone sales have already slowed. iPhone is no longer the story. There are many other areas doing exceedingly well.
You're carrying it wrong! Apple fanboys will be quick to take the blame upon themselves. After all you should not be using a laptop in an airplane. You should read a book instead.
Sometimes when you need to carry two computers: a personal one and an office one. Guess which one gets to be thrown around in a luggage?
With any Apple repair you normally get a work order to sign - this details the parts replaced and any cost incurred. Surely that would be sufficient?
I'm not sure what Apple expected.
It takes time / expertise to determine which 15" MacBook Pros should actually be banned during flights.
It's much easier to ban all 15" MacBook Pros.
It takes time / expertise to determine which 15" MacBook Pros should actually be banned during flights.
It's much easier to ban all 15" MacBook Pros.
Just took a flight from Macau to Manila. They didn’t make any announcements, but at check in there was a nice sign notifying people that they cannot use MacBooks on flights. This is a bigger nightmare than Apple could have ever expected and a huge inconvenience to all MacBook users. This notice didn’t specify MacBook Pro, and if you think about it how would anyone know the difference.
Yeah, but when was the last time a new iPhone actually did something new that wasn’t a party trick and was actually affordable?
Deciding to bump the iPhone’s price from $600 to $1200 is entirely on Cook. Deciding to not give it any new features in the past five years is on Cook. Deciding to not roll out new product lines (besides the Apple Watch) in the past 10 years is on Cook.
I stopped buying AAPL a few years ago when it was clear that Apple was never going to do anything under Cook. I sold off my last shares when it was around $210. Last I knew I timed their peak pretty well... haven’t actually checked in a few months...
Please tell me how anything is an overreaction when it comes to airline safety and where IF something goes wrong and one of these batteries create a fire in the cargo bay, it results in several hundred people dying due to the plane going nose first into the ground?
Do you really want them to take that risk when you or a family member is on board of that plane?
Sure, the risk is low. Sure, it is only a very limited number of models potentially affected. But when it comes to air safety, I would personally prefer them to err on the safe side. And since it's not doable for staff to check wether or not a specific model is at risk, that safe side is to ban all.