Recent comments in /f/BuyItForLife

JohnDoeMTB120 t1_jarm4wk wrote

I think there's a difference between maintaining something and replacing a part every now and then (resoling a boot for example) vs. replacing literally every part over time so that eventually there are zero parts of the computer that are from the original purchase. Just my 2 cents, but I don't think computers are BIFL. Technology advances too quickly and makes every part in the computer obsolete in 10-15 years.

3

Walkop t1_jarlvhx wrote

I don't own a single Apple product and I never will , at this point. But you can't deny the facts, M1/2 are great designs. They're just ludicrously expensive and will never see the light of day in a product that isn't thousands of dollars. Not the full die, at least.

They also aren't meant to compete with AMD and Intel and the majority of cases. They never will be able to.

2

FamiliarWin4833 t1_jarjmy3 wrote

I actually was thinking a longer period of time than from the 90’s until now. Not sure when the washer & dryer were invented, but I would guess they go back further than the 90’s. Also I think it depends what kind of clothing you’re referring to, sure coats and sweatshirts hold up pretty well and probably always have, but that isn’t the case with underwear or some of the clothing made of finer fabrics.

1

US_Dept_Of_Snark t1_jarjefy wrote

I bought a refurbished Dell laptop in January 2011 for less than $500. I still use it daily. It's working fine. It's on for probably ~12 hours a day everyday. I would do it again -- except that it doesn't look like I'll be needing to for a while.

I don't think that Dell has anything wrong with people upgrading their own computer. I swapped out the hard drive for an SSD. I upgraded the RAM.

Frame work sounds pretty expensive, compared.

Glad it's working well for you though.

2

handymanny131003 t1_jargvk5 wrote

While this is true the idea behind this device is that certain pieces, like the keyboard or trackpad, don't go obsolete as fast as the CPU or GPU do. They also encourage you to use your old internals as a mini PC when you upgrade, which eliminates even more e-waste. That, combined with the fact that it's so damn easy to repair, means that while it might not be BIFL, it's certainly not "cry when the screen breaks"

5

Walkop t1_jarfvlx wrote

Apple didn't convince anyone of anything. The only reason that the M series chips are good is because they are ludicrously expensive to produce, and a massive die. It's not because they broke some boundary.

The M1 Max is the size of an AMD 5950X, and a 30 series GPU PUT TOGETHER. It's not some Apple magic sauce. It is on the most advanced node you can get manufacturing wise, it is incredibly large, which means it is ludicrously expensive to make. The only reason it works is because it's in an Apple device that is integrated top to bottom. It would never work for an off-the-shelf component. And it would also never work in a cheap device.

Don't get me wrong, it's a very well performing, very efficient chip. But it's that way because it's incredibly expensive to make, more so than any dedicated desktop CPU on the market right now, with the most advanced manufacturing.

To top it all off, there's no reason that a chip like this could not be socketed. It could easily be designed that way. If they wanted to, which they obviously do not.

−1

Walkop t1_jarfl9f wrote

What is buy it for life, then? Only things that never break? Repairability is a big factor, most things that are by it for life require maintenance. Look at boots, any high quality boot in this sub will require regular maintenance, resoling, all sorts of things in order to keep it buy it for life item.

11

Walkop t1_jarf64n wrote

It's not them, it's you who doesn't understand the conversation.

The conversation isn't talking about performance. It's talking about how the frames and boards aren't designed to be future proof.

For example, Intel could have designed a CPU interface that had a thousand unused pins. Buses that have massive extra unused width. Then these interfaces would last much longer, and it does not really increase cost of manufacture.

There's no need to constantly be replacing and upgrading interfaces. Interfaces themselves aren't complex to manufacture. They're nothing relative to the chips themselves. The only real reason is planned obsolescence. They could easily be designed to last multiple times longer than they do, and they just don't.

It's the same thing with soldered components. Most components don't need to be soldered, and they don't benefit from it, unless you're in a hypermobile device. The only benefit is to the manufacturer.

1

ldeveraux t1_jar9pe1 wrote

Apple convinced people they want to spend too much money for a name. Sure their products are good, they aren't THAT good.

Regardless, this is designed to be a modular product, so I'd expect it to remain that way as long as Framework is viable. Just like people will keep buying the latest iPhone year after year with little improvement over the last model, people will upgrade their laptops if it's available.

3