Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I routinely see people with Mac computers as old as 10 or even 12 years still functioning perfectly well (with the obligatory upgrades to ram and swapping out the HDD for an SSD of course). This is essentially unheard of in the Windows, Android or Chromebook world.
That's just wishful thinking. There are plenty of people using old PCs and laptops of all makes and systems. There are plenty of charities that take old PCs and recycle them for school, charity and third world use.

The idea that Apple's products have some sort of magical, built in longevity is a croc.
 
That's just wishful thinking. There are plenty of people using old PCs and laptops of all makes and systems. There are plenty of charities that take old PCs and recycle them for school, charity and third world use.

The idea that Apple's products have some sort of magical, built in longevity is a croc.
"On average MacBooks last between 3 and 6 years with many users reporting their devices have lasted significantly longer; meanwhile, PC users have reported their devices lasting 2 – 4 years."

"While the life expectancy of a Macbook versus a PC cannot be determined perfectly, MacBooks tend to last longer than PCs. This is because Apple ensures that Mac systems are optimized to work together, making MacBooks run more smoothly for the duration of their lifetime. PCs are made of parts from various manufacturers that, over time, may run into compatibility issues, ultimately shortening their lifespan." - Do MacBooks Really Last Longer? And Why?
 
"On average MacBooks last between 3 and 6 years with many users reporting their devices have lasted significantly longer; meanwhile, PC users have reported their devices lasting 2 – 4 years."

"While the life expectancy of a Macbook versus a PC cannot be determined perfectly, MacBooks tend to last longer than PCs. This is because Apple ensures that Mac systems are optimized to work together, making MacBooks run more smoothly for the duration of their lifetime. PCs are made of parts from various manufacturers that, over time, may run into compatibility issues, ultimately shortening their lifespan." - Do MacBooks Really Last Longer? And Why?

Sounds like an opinion piece with no data.
 
Sounds like an opinion piece with no data.
What exactly is opinion about:
*Apple ensures that Mac systems are optimized to work together
*PCs are made of parts from various manufacturers?

More over anadotal statements to the same effect abound; Which has longer term reliabilty, Mac or PC? and my personal favorites IBM says Macs save up to $543 per user and Switch to Macs from PCs reportedly saves IBM $270 per user. Back when Gartner did TCO studies of Mac vs PC every time the Mac beat the PC and had a longer retention rate and a good number of those studies were back in the 68k/Power PC days when CPU crossover was nil.

"The message should be clear: anyone whose primary focus is on the initial price will be making a BIG financial mistake.

If you are in the unfortunate situation where your school (or business) is seriously considering switching from Macs to Windows/PCs, then ask the MIS people (or whoever is promoting this change) to:

1 - Please provide a written detailed calculation as to the Total Cost of Ownership of Macs vs PC computers, which should (as a minimum) include:
a) initial hardware cost,
b) annual maintenance expenditures,
c) usable lifetime of the computer,
d) software costs (license, support, upgrades),
e) networking expenses (hardware, software, licenses, maintenance, etc.),
f) operating costs (e.g. electricity),
g) teacher training costs,
h) teacher preferences, satisfaction and efficiency,
i) ability to provide student with an enjoyable and productive learning environment.
2 - Please provide a written detailed explanation as to how using Windows/PC computers will guarantee a discernible benefit over using Macintosh computers:
a) for the students
b) for the teachers
c) for the technical support staff
d) for the taxpayers.
Their written answers will provide you with information as to how to proceed. [And, if they say something like they don’t know how to do a Total Cost of Ownership Calculation, then suggest they check out Taking TCO To The Classroom written by the independent Consortium for School Networking.]
---------------------------

Essentially every survey that has taken these factors into account {e.g. one by IDC (PDF)} has shown that Macs are less expensive to own than comparably equipped PCs — typically by something like $400 per year per computer." - “PCs are Cheaper Than Macs...”

With the M1 Macs out and their kin in the pipeline the only reason to stick with x86 is legacy software.
 
What exactly is opinion about:
*Apple ensures that Mac systems are optimized to work together
*PCs are made of parts from various manufacturers?

More over anadotal statements ...

Well, it’s an opinion as it is not verified with data and is taken straight from Apple’s marketing department.
Mac btw are also made of various parts from various manufacturers- that Apple orders and then screws together.

In the same Foxconn factory potentially.
 
Ironically paper production is not a threat to trees in the US and Canada as Sustainable Forests are the rule. The major downside with "paperless" is that if one is not careful it can result in more paper than before as there is always the possibility you may need the paper backup due to a human error. I had such situation as I paid my mortgage about 3 months ahead of time but the bank changed its system and if I hadn't had my paper copies the "cushion" I had built up would have been gone.

Resource Conservation is complicated. Yes replacing something takes energy but if it is more energy efficient is it making that much a change? Is is really beneficial to be able to keep expanding an old computer and use 100 watts to power the thing or get a new computer that takes 20 watts to do the same or even more?

You are not taking into account the negative things about “sustainable” forests and any sort of paper transport issues, toxic waste issues, issues with wildlife who don’t like sustainable forests, many many other negative things about recycled paper and paper in general.

It’s always deeply complicated.

And no - a paper backup is not necessary for your mortgage - you can scan documents. Blue ink signed copies are still sometimes needed for corporations but whatever - 99% paper free
 
You are not taking into account the negative things about “sustainable” forests and any sort of paper transport issues, toxic waste issues, issues with wildlife who don’t like sustainable forests, many many other negative things about recycled paper and paper in general.

It’s always deeply complicated.

And no - a paper backup is not necessary for your mortgage - you can scan documents. Blue ink signed copies are still sometimes needed for corporations but whatever - 99% paper free
Documents that are on paper. Also as I noted the bank totally changed its system and I had to convince them the error was on their end and without the physical paperwork it is unlikely I would have gotten anywhere.
 
Last edited:
Documents that are on paper. Also as I noted the bank totally changed its system and I had to convince them the error was on their end and without the physical paperwork it is unlikely I would have gotten anywhere.
That sounds like a bummer - but your point about needing some paper is strengthened by your unfortunate experience. If I had to go through it I guess it would be with scanned ocr’d pdf documents and that would have to do.
 
That sounds like a bummer - but your point about needing some paper is strengthened by your unfortunate experience. If I had to go through it I guess it would be with scanned ocr’d pdf documents and that would have to do.
But you would have to have an ocr scanner (which I didn't and I don't think the average person does) and if you had only a desktop and they (for security reasons) only had computers that were little more then dumb terminals (ie no USB) you would be basically SOL. As I said the only problem with "paperless" if one is not careful it can result in more paper than before as there is always the possibility you may need the paper backup due to a human error.

More over a totally digital system can allow unscrupulous individuals to doctor the files to cover up the fact they screwed up.

This along with system incompatibility is why the medical field generates an insane amount of paper. Physical forms to sign, forms of any transit, physical copies of medical records, and so one. And that is nothing compared to the US government - you wouldn't believe the amount of physical paperwork my brother had go through to qualify for his veteran benefits.
 
But you would have to have an ocr scanner (which I didn't and I don't think the average person does) and if you had only a desktop and they (for security reasons) only had computers that were little more then dumb terminals (ie no USB) you would be basically SOL. As I said the only problem with "paperless" if one is not careful it can result in more paper than before as there is always the possibility you may need the paper backup due to a human error.

More over a totally digital system can allow unscrupulous individuals to doctor the files to cover up the fact they screwed up.

This along with system incompatibility is why the medical field generates an insane amount of paper. Physical forms to sign, forms of any transit, physical copies of medical records, and so one. And that is nothing compared to the US government - you wouldn't believe the amount of physical paperwork my brother had go through to qualify for his veteran benefits.
I’m probably assuming everyone has a smartphone here, but didn’t Apple intro a scanner mode to the camera? And if not Apple’s version; there’s an abundance of OCR apps around.
OTOH; I’ve also had some occasions where a hard copy of some bank statement or bill was required. Companies with paperless billing generally allow a single free request for each statement, so just takes a little more planning.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Maximara and ericwn
Well, it’s an opinion as it is not verified with data and is taken straight from Apple’s marketing department.
Mac btw are also made of various parts from various manufacturers- that Apple orders and then screws together.
How about data from one of Apple's PC competitors? Namely IBM.
* IBM says it is 3X more expensive to manage PCs than Macs Saving up to $535 per Mac per four years in comparison to PCs (2016)
* IBM seeing great returns on over 277,000 Macs and iOS devices issued to employees (2018) - "Macs make up 25 percent of IBM's 537,000 active laptops, with 150,000 new laptops provisioned each year."
* IBM: Our Mac-Using Employees Outperform Windows Users in Every Way (2019) - "IBM CIO Fletcher Previn declared that IBM saves anywhere from $273 to $543 when its end users choose Mac over PC." (2019). The efforts of the PCphile that wrote this to explain away these results is sad.
* IBM: ‘Mac users are happier and more productive’ (2019)

It is going to be fun to see that the results for the M1 Mac in the successive years. When the company that set the standard for what, hardware wise, a PC even is (IBM) says it is cheaper in the long run it's long past time for the intel world to wake up from the dream world that per the Gardner group's was saying back when Apple was still using incompatible hardware they have been living in since the early 1990s.

The reality is in terms of long term durability a Mac not only outlasts a PC (back then it was nearly twice as long) but is cheaper. The reality is a computer still being used isn't either in a landfill or being disassembled overseas in horrific conditions (Computer recycling West Africa style )
 
I was looking around at prices for the Apple Watch battery repair and I feel this where the article is correct

If my searching was right, if I wanted to replace by AppleWatch battery, it’ll be over £250?

At that stage after 3 years or so you might as well get a new one. A lot of people would rather just replace the battery or at least have that option.
 
But you would have to have an ocr scanner (which I didn't and I don't think the average person does) and if you had only a desktop and they (for security reasons) only had computers that were little more then dumb terminals (ie no USB) you would be basically SOL. As I said the only problem with "paperless" if one is not careful it can result in more paper than before as there is always the possibility you may need the paper backup due to a human error.

More over a totally digital system can allow unscrupulous individuals to doctor the files to cover up the fact they screwed up.

This along with system incompatibility is why the medical field generates an insane amount of paper. Physical forms to sign, forms of any transit, physical copies of medical records, and so one. And that is nothing compared to the US government - you wouldn't believe the amount of physical paperwork my brother had go through to qualify for his veteran benefits.

You make some reasonably good points, but still I push my own life workflows to 99% paperless and damn the torpedoes. If I get a problem, I’ll deal with it. I’m saving hours or days of life by letting the OCR robots do their thing
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.