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.
What does Apple have against upgrading? Do you even care?
- Thread starter Evev12
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't understand how my post is biased. Biased toward what? I was addressing the OP who stated that Apple was moving in the direction of non upgradeability and if it bothered us. I said yes it would. I never said that OLDER models were not upgradeable. My Mid 2012 MBP is upgradeable and is why I bought it over the Air. But if Apple makes it to where nothing is upgradeable it would be very hard to justify staying with them. Even my mother has an old Gateway laptop with Windows Vista (I feel for my mother here) that has never been upgraded, but I am not someones mother. I am a geek....I upgrade.
What I was trying to say - the amount of geeks is probably around the amount of people who 5 years ago would still buy the Mac Pro - Apple obviously doesn't care about the small percentage of people in favor of the majority. Most of people already see a Laptop as what apple is changing them to.
My uMBP is beefed up as much as possible, and there is nothing I enjoy more than taking gadget apart.
I just wanted to shed a light on another (unfortunately more common) perspective.
I think people feel like their stuff is outdated and need to have the latest and greatest - that is the bigger problem. They get sucked into the marketing ploys and need to have something shiny and new to show off.
If you're friend really wanted something that would last 5 + years then they should have spent the extra money and invested in a pro model. You can't expect a base model macbook to be supported forever. Secondly, you're not being forced by apple to have to use mountain lion and iTunes 11. If what they have works fine, then why complain you can't upgrade? Sure it's nice to have the latest and greatest, but at least apple products last, and will continue to work. If it's something they want rather than something to fill a need, well then go buy a new machine...
I have a 2007 MBP that can run mountain lion if I choose. I'm still on snow leopard because it will run more efficiently with that hardware. I just ordered a rMBP but my old MBP still runs and I will keep it until it doesn't anymore...
the rmbp is an ultrabook, and every ultrabook by every manufaturer is a sealed appliance. this isnt an exclusive move by apple to "sucker you", its inherent in the form factor of every ultrabook. I cant upgrade the ram in my ipad either. why? because its a sealed appliance not meant to be tinkered with by a typical consumer. I dont know why i continue to see people thinking this is a conspiracy by apple.
Storage module is upgradeable and replaceable.
And new ultra-small standard SSD already exists - mSATA.
Apple uses proprietary format though, so does Asus. I don't know why (well I do). Others generally use mSATA drives.
mSATA: http://www.techspot.com/review/571-crucial-m4-msata-ssd/
Apple MBA SSD: http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/SSD/OWC/Aura_Pro_Air_2011
Apple rMBP SSD: http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/SSD/OWC/Aura_Pro_Retina_2012
I don't know why people are bitching so much about the drive, any decent vendor should be able to introduce an Apple proprietary & mSATA equivalent of the same drive.
The same story was always with GPUs on Mac Pros, it's nothing new really.
For me to keep a laptop past 3 years, I would need a motherboard/CPU/GPU upgrade. No laptop offers that.
The only two other things I would upgrade are drive space (doable in retina) and RAM (bought 16GB, don't see me needing more before I need a new GPU).
True. Maybe not as many geeks on the Mac side as the PC side, but how many of us Mac geeks support our family and friends and how many of them come to us for advice. It affect more people then we might realize. And maybe you are correct in that I am not the target audience, so Apple is fine that I would jump ship if they remove all the upgrade possibility. I hope this doesn't happen as I would miss my Macs. Thanks for your post.
Apple produces Logic Pro - my DAW of choice. Right now it hasn't been updated for Retina - or at all, for more than a year. Garage Band for iPad gets much more updates.
Mac Pro currently exists on 3 years old technology. Apple doesn't get a fraction of the money from the Mac Pro compared to the iPhone market. So they don't care. It still has only USB2.0 ports and no TB ports! Afaic thats worse than soldered RAM.
Unfortunately computer production is steering away from the power-user orientation to "idiot-proof" (locked root folder, locked os, hidden system files, restricted behind-the-gui and lowlevel access.. it started with a Locked Library folder, it will end with jailbreaking MacBooks), because the quantity just gives that bigger profit margins.
And no, most people who buy the MacBook Pros are not powerusers who service their own computers, and they prefer a fraction thinner and lighter laptop over expandability.
I ordered a retina display, mostly because I believe in external "pro" expandability and dual thunderbolt ports + discrete video out just beats the single tb/display combo of cMBP regarding external expandability, and because the Mac Pro offering is just pathetic.
It's too bad, when I was a kid and started dabbling in computers (age 7-8?) I was the only kid on the block who knew how to use one. Until recently I was pretty certain that as technology will progress more people will start to know about it - unfortunately, I'm still the only kid on the block who knows how to use one.
But 20 years ago, people who didn't know how to use computers, didn't buy them, now they do. And there is a lot of them. So everything is made for them, not for people who know how to use them.
I would guess the reason for this movement is that most of us who buy Apple products never upgrade anything--and don't consider that as an important factor when buying. This is probably not the position of many of the members of this forum but I'd guess it is for most Apple customers.
The last computer upgrade I did was to add a USB 2 card to a Dell desktop back in 2004.
The last computer upgrade I did was to add a USB 2 card to a Dell desktop back in 2004.
and i used to be able to install a new set of plugs and swap out the carburetor on my mustang in the 80's with a toolbox and a six-pack . try doing that with a 2012 model of ANY car. Engines are sealed tight. Dude, ultrabooks and tablets arent sealed because of a conspiracy theory to get your money. its just the logistics of design requirements. whens the last time you opened your TV set to upgrade the graphics chip? this is just how things are moving technologically speaking. everyones in a big uproar about this. in 5 years no laptop out there will be servicable or upgradable by the consumer. thats just how it is.
Well geekbench has very similar scores. Differences in memory performance is not reflected in them. There are hundreds of benchmarks there. And if the retina was running near max often then it would be a bit faster but its not (maybe like a turbo boost that never boosts).
Except when the only things you can upgrade are RAM and storage.
I mean... it's not even like you can change the CPU, swap the motherboard, etc...
It's just RAM and storage.
And I don't get why people absolutely need to have the ability to swap RAM and storage on their computer. Will that "future-proof" or "improve" anything when technology has moved on to RAM and storage standards that your computer no longer supports?
Imagine having a 2012 MBP when DDR4 and SATA 4 come about...
I think the problem is that people consider being able to swap RAM and storage as an "upgrade", but... personally, I don't think so. A laptop by definition is inherently non-user-upgradable, and if you can swap out a few parts, it's only to delay the eventual replacement, not to future-proof.
That being the case, I would personally put down with buying a laptop that has some parts that I can't swap in exchange for its newer technology (better higher resolution screen, thinner and lighter chassis, faster CPU and GPU, USB 3.0 ports on both sides, better cooling system, HDMI port, etc...) compared to my older laptop (2011 MBP).
Laptops - I've never upgraded them beyond RAM/HDD. Never had a need to.
Desktops, however. My iMac (2011) started life as a 2.7GHz i5, with 4GB RAM and a 1TB HDD. It now has a 3.4GHz i7 CPU, 32GB RAM, and 2 SSDs in Raid 0. It made sense doing it this way rather than buying it from Apple.
CPU: i7 cost £140 (open box from Amazon). Sold the i5 for £85. £55 total upgrade. Apple cost - higher model + CPU = £400 (I have no need for powerful graphics but the i7 wasn't an option on the base spec!).
RAM: 32GB cost me just under £100. Now it's even less. Not possible with Apple, 16GB, at the time from Apple, was £300 (I think). Now it's like £160.
HDD: Dual SSDs were not possible, a 128GB SSD (the fusion part) is £200. I bought 2 128GB Samsung 840 pros for £105 each. Plus a couple of £5 cables (total = £220) means 256GB worth of SSD space, capable of sequential reads of over 1GB/s (had to move the regular HDD to the ODD port to be sata 2, and the two SSDs in ports 0 and 1 (sata 3).
I believe you could still do all of these upgrades on the new iMac.
Desktops, however. My iMac (2011) started life as a 2.7GHz i5, with 4GB RAM and a 1TB HDD. It now has a 3.4GHz i7 CPU, 32GB RAM, and 2 SSDs in Raid 0. It made sense doing it this way rather than buying it from Apple.
CPU: i7 cost £140 (open box from Amazon). Sold the i5 for £85. £55 total upgrade. Apple cost - higher model + CPU = £400 (I have no need for powerful graphics but the i7 wasn't an option on the base spec!).
RAM: 32GB cost me just under £100. Now it's even less. Not possible with Apple, 16GB, at the time from Apple, was £300 (I think). Now it's like £160.
HDD: Dual SSDs were not possible, a 128GB SSD (the fusion part) is £200. I bought 2 128GB Samsung 840 pros for £105 each. Plus a couple of £5 cables (total = £220) means 256GB worth of SSD space, capable of sequential reads of over 1GB/s (had to move the regular HDD to the ODD port to be sata 2, and the two SSDs in ports 0 and 1 (sata 3).
I believe you could still do all of these upgrades on the new iMac
.Not mobile computing...
Not true. Closing a system has advantages, else why would you guys be using a Mac anyway? Considering all the opensource alternatives...
Mac Pro/Powermac always had so much limitations regarding upgrades. Try to replace a GPU in the Mac Pro without a hassle or some Ad-Hoc solution, flashing GPU eprom, external powersupply and crap like that. come on, i dare you...
@bma: rMBP is next to saturated with both memory throughput and and SATA throughput though.
Apple soldering RAM or not will didn't change the "use and throwaway" attitude of consumer electronics one measly bit... No vendor likes an upgradable computer that last forever. NO VENDOR LIKES THAT.
Still, my point was that Apple did more than just solder its chips. It did thought it through and through.
The only difference is at the point of purchase, not in longevity. The cMPB has the same SATA 3 controller, same RAM capacity etc. You just have to choose at the point of purchase with the retina.
Whether technology is socketed or not, you're always going to be limited when it comes to upgrading. Yes, you can put a new graphics card/PCI card into most machines (not laptops), but RAM/CPU are often limited by generation (i.e. upgrading will often require a new motherboard).
True.
And since Apple was always a PITA and expensive to upgrade I find it a tad ironic we are having this conversion.
"Oh know, Apple soldered RAM! Outrageous!"
When I still had my Mac Pro I would need to buy a very old 5870HD for 500$ to upgrade the graphics card, when PC editions went for 1/3 of that price with 2times as much RAM. And there was approximately the same amount people giving a **** about that as the amount of giving a **** about RAM now
If you wan't ultimate upgradability, don't buy an Apple, EVER.
The day I can walk into some computer store and buy a storage module for a similar price as the 2.5", I would agree with you. However, I don't buy your argument just because a single company offers some extremely overpriced reverse-engineered modules...
I am willing to accept that in mobile computing, my earlier statement is limited to RAM and hard drive / SSD.
With this in mind, I re-state that the only motivation for not allowing these things to be upgrade is GREED.
And FWIW, I did indeed purchase my MBP with 4 GB of RAM and a 320 GB 5400 RPM HD.
Technology advanced, RAM and SSD prices came down, and I upgraded my MBP.
So what are you Apple guys defending?
R
----------
Nonsense. This is a new strategy, at least for the MBP.
R
With this in mind, I re-state that the only motivation for not allowing these things to be upgrade is GREED.
And FWIW, I did indeed purchase my MBP with 4 GB of RAM and a 320 GB 5400 RPM HD.
Technology advanced, RAM and SSD prices came down, and I upgraded my MBP.
So what are you Apple guys defending?
R
----------
Nonsense. This is a new strategy, at least for the MBP.
R
You are a moron (I do not say this lightly). How in any way is OS X a closed system? You have based this on no evidence.
Remind me again what OS X is built on? Oh! UNIX! Wow!
EDIT: Oh and those complaining about non-upgradability about newer Macs, then don't buy them. Period. Vote with your dollars. You'll see the price drop fast if you guys are in the right mindset. Sorry, why not have a beautiful machine that gets the job done and maintain a resell value?
So early adopters of SATA are/were considered non-upgradable?
MacPro SAS?
Apple was never cited for it's amazing upgradeability... More so, criticized for being a closed system with few available upgrades. It's been like that a while now.
You only have *that much* room to upgrade something like a portable. RAM speed, drive bus speed.
----------
before also calling me a moron, apple is a closed system designed to work with certain type of hardware designed in-house by apple. OSX is an operating system working properly only on hardware apple produces. That's a definition of a closed system. Windows can be installed on anything thrown together, given that drivers are supplied with it. Before shift to intel this was even more prominent... They had their own version of graphics connector for crying out loud, you couldn't use any graphic cards in powermacs.
If it's based on UNIX that doesn't make it an open operating system.
I agree with you on non-upgradability though, even more, I'm claiming that this is nothing new to apple, just manifested differently. Go and search the Mac Pro forum about the GFX card that didn't work in the first gen Mac Pro. Sure, they didn't solder them in, but that doesn't mean that they were upgradable.
SATA is an industry standard and a number of manufacturers offered SATA drives right from the start of SATA adoption in 2003. Similarly, SCSI drives from various manufacturers can be bought from virtually every bigger computer online store.
In contrast, I never heard any vendor (besides) announcing or planning support for Apple format.
----------
Are you aware that OS X kernel and much of its utilities is open source? Sure, it only works on a limited subset of hardware because of drivers, but it is entirely possible to write the missing drivers or patch the kernel to run on a different CPU. Hakintosh people have been doing it for years. There is even a free open-source OS based on the OS X - http://www.puredarwin.org
I used to care, but then I realized that the only upgrades I ever made to my computers, be they self-built gaming rigs back in the day, or my Macbooks, were because I'd cheaped out when I first bought/built them. Now that I realize that, I'll just buy a configuration I'll be happy with right away, instead of effectively buying something sub-par and planning to upgrade it later. It's mildly annoying, because Apple certainly charges more for some upgrades than the local computer parts store. But, I can get over that. These computers are hardly cheap to begin with.
This only describes my preferences. I can see why others care about the lack of upgradability. But, I don't anymore.
This only describes my preferences. I can see why others care about the lack of upgradability. But, I don't anymore.