Do you mean the 2019 macbook pro that can't use the iGPU for multiple monitors so it overheats every time I plug in an external monitor? Or do you want the older macbooks that the keyboard would break from dust exposure requiring the entire laptop to be replaced?
Or the airpods with non-replaceable batteries so you have to get new airpods for $49+ a piece every couple years?
They aren't perfect and IMO haven't been in a long time. That said, the build quality is good, and I chose to get a macbook as my work computer as a software developer and don't regret it, but I wish people would stop putting apple on a pedestal as the example of perfection.
All products have defects, and the Apple hardware defect rates are some of the lowest in the industry. That doesn't change their commitment to product quality and service, and how it compares to their peers. Take a look at eBay and compare any Apple products resale values to any other (and no, it's not just about brand).
Three in a row for me. I experience the exact same problems OP describes with three MB Pro laptops since 2018. More than 7000 bucks down the drain not calculating the 2100 for repairs.
The company I work for had 1-2 percent of devices in repair every week.
Not sure if this is just a strange coincidence, but I know of at least one other company in our town with the same scope of the described problem.
I know this isn't a popular sentiment with some people, but from experience, I am done with Apple after 28 years of experience. My first was a beautiful Macintosh Classic I still have. Together with a SE 30. Somehow I miss my pre 2018 Macbook Pro.
They prioritize form over function in their Lightning cables. Inadequate strain relief is a far more consequential problem in an airplane wing. I can't see Apple practices being applicable to mission critical fields like transport engineering (with high regulatory burden). They're different worlds. Apple also simply has a huge amount of money from hardware and software (App store etc.). I suspect they're far looser with resources for their teams than Boeing, whose mechanical/aerospace engineers have salaries a fraction of most Apple engineers.
Edit: Overarching point is that Apple has a focus on aesthetics that is far less important in aerospace engineering, and has no experience on ensuring human safety.
But it’s better than almost everyone else, including Boeing because it does one thing very well. It doesn’t ship products unless they meet a high bar. It never puts schedule first over product quality.
Example: original iPad was canceled by Steve Jobs because he didn’t think it was good enough. Instead he had the team enter the Apple phone competition, where it best out the iPod team with its design for the iPhone. Five years later they got to apply all their improvements to make and release a much better iPad.
Apple canceled their AirPower charging mat rather than release something that didn’t meet their standards, even after pre-announcing it.
When I ran an product development organization, I made it clear that QA wasn’t responsible for our schedules. Sure they needed to test well and quickly to ensure that Product Management had the necessary info to make good release decisions. But their job was journalistic, to fairly and honestly report all issues. It was up to the engineers to find ways to meet quality goals in our schedules.
Boeing had test pilots misleading regulators to hide known issues. That’s the exact opposite of a test Organisation should be run.
I'm not sure if the years of poor and failing keyboards on the MacBook or the ongoing stage light screen failures due to the poor decision to permanently connect the ribbon to the screen (turning a $5 repair into a $500 repair) bare this out.
Do you mean the 2019 macbook pro that can't use the iGPU for multiple monitors so it overheats every time I plug in an external monitor? Or do you want the older macbooks that the keyboard would break from dust exposure requiring the entire laptop to be replaced?
Or the airpods with non-replaceable batteries so you have to get new airpods for $49+ a piece every couple years?
They aren't perfect and IMO haven't been in a long time. That said, the build quality is good, and I chose to get a macbook as my work computer as a software developer and don't regret it, but I wish people would stop putting apple on a pedestal as the example of perfection.
All products have defects, and the Apple hardware defect rates are some of the lowest in the industry. That doesn't change their commitment to product quality and service, and how it compares to their peers. Take a look at eBay and compare any Apple products resale values to any other (and no, it's not just about brand).
Three in a row for me. I experience the exact same problems OP describes with three MB Pro laptops since 2018. More than 7000 bucks down the drain not calculating the 2100 for repairs.
The company I work for had 1-2 percent of devices in repair every week.
Not sure if this is just a strange coincidence, but I know of at least one other company in our town with the same scope of the described problem.
I know this isn't a popular sentiment with some people, but from experience, I am done with Apple after 28 years of experience. My first was a beautiful Macintosh Classic I still have. Together with a SE 30. Somehow I miss my pre 2018 Macbook Pro.
What's your source for the low defect numbers?
2 replies →
People still buy over a decade old thinkpads.
1 reply →
Are claiming the lack of replaceable batteries stopped the AirPods from becoming the biggest selling headphones in the world?
Because they are.
They prioritize form over function in their Lightning cables. Inadequate strain relief is a far more consequential problem in an airplane wing. I can't see Apple practices being applicable to mission critical fields like transport engineering (with high regulatory burden). They're different worlds. Apple also simply has a huge amount of money from hardware and software (App store etc.). I suspect they're far looser with resources for their teams than Boeing, whose mechanical/aerospace engineers have salaries a fraction of most Apple engineers.
Edit: Overarching point is that Apple has a focus on aesthetics that is far less important in aerospace engineering, and has no experience on ensuring human safety.
Apple isn’t perfect, no one is.
But it’s better than almost everyone else, including Boeing because it does one thing very well. It doesn’t ship products unless they meet a high bar. It never puts schedule first over product quality.
Example: original iPad was canceled by Steve Jobs because he didn’t think it was good enough. Instead he had the team enter the Apple phone competition, where it best out the iPod team with its design for the iPhone. Five years later they got to apply all their improvements to make and release a much better iPad.
Apple canceled their AirPower charging mat rather than release something that didn’t meet their standards, even after pre-announcing it.
When I ran an product development organization, I made it clear that QA wasn’t responsible for our schedules. Sure they needed to test well and quickly to ensure that Product Management had the necessary info to make good release decisions. But their job was journalistic, to fairly and honestly report all issues. It was up to the engineers to find ways to meet quality goals in our schedules.
Boeing had test pilots misleading regulators to hide known issues. That’s the exact opposite of a test Organisation should be run.
Yes, but they make consumer products and not airplanes. Why would you assume they’d build an airplane the same way they’d build a cheap cable?
> Think about the quality of their hardware products.
I thought about their butterfly keyboards and didn't want to think further.
I'm not sure if the years of poor and failing keyboards on the MacBook or the ongoing stage light screen failures due to the poor decision to permanently connect the ribbon to the screen (turning a $5 repair into a $500 repair) bare this out.