[NTLK] FW: iFixit: Apple ¹ s Diabolical Plan to Screw Your iPhone
minicapt1 at mac.com
Sat Jan 22 21:20:04 EST 2011
If Apple wished to prevent you from opening up an Apple product, they would not be using screws on their outer cases, and the inside bits would all be soldered in place. Including the battery. In other words I am disagreeing with the postulate that Apple, for the past 30 years, has devoted time, money and personnel resources to making it difficult for a user to gain access to the interior of an Apple product. This is not the same postulate as the one which holds that Apple has expended no time, money or personnel resources to ease the plight of the Apple user who desires access to his Apple product.
My only conspiracy theory at present holds that someone somewhere is fiddling the number chooser for the Loto 6/49; this serves to explain my absolute lifetime lack of success in this endeavour.
minicapt1 at mac.com
On 22 Jan 11, at 17:20, Lord Groundhog wrote:
> ~~~ On 2011/01/22 21:50, J.M. Heinrichs at minicapt1 at mac.com wrote ~~~
>> See my second last sentence, it's a design decision.
> Phillips-head screw are
>> inferior fasteners and are prosaic to point of ugly. You can get away with
>> using undersized drivers , and even no-srewdrivers on occasion. Imposing the
>> 5-lobe head does not prevent one from opening the Mac; it merely requires one
>> to acquire the proper tool in advance. They could have chosen another type of
>> screwhead: would you be content with 'Torx' again? And the original
>> 'anti-disassembly measures' on the original Macs was less the use of the Torx
>> but rather the unnecessarily extra long screw holes put in the case, plus the
>> case spreader. Dell, HP and other computer makers may be content with the
>> Phillips screw, but that's no recommendation for Apple.
> The 5-lobe screws are
>> actually quite attractive, but my concern is whether they will holdup during
>> disassemblies 'to see what's there'.
> Hi again John. First, you'll notice I *never* argue in favour of Phillips
> head screws. I dislike them and any other kind of cross-head screw. Ugly
> and prone to damage because noobs can't always tell *which kind* of
> cross-headed slot they have and use the wrong screwdriver.
> Second, as I said before, yes, I wouldn't mind some variety of Torx. To me
> they're the right balance of "this screw isn't for casual tinkering" with
> access if you have the right tools. I haven't tried working with the
> pentalobes yet but I like the sureness of grip I get with Torx.
> On a side note and speaking merely of aesthetics, IMO the Torx heads are
> nicer looking than the pentalobe: I like the kind of symmetry you get from
> an even number of points/lobes over an odd number. Also, when tightening
> the screws I think it'll be easier to achieve a uniform arrangement of heads
> while still securing the screws properly. (OK, so I fuss over the details
> of appearance when I do things; as long as I get "hold" without
> over-tightening, why not?) That's just down to geometry: a six-pointed
> shape has a higher order of rotational symmetry.
> Now, on a side-note of absolute relevance to us here, if Apple had
> instituted the kind of control over access on the Newtons that they're
> putting in place on on iPhones, iPads, and even MacBooks, where would we be?
> Should we start with routine repairs of the kinds of little things that can
> go wrong and just need servicing, like that pesky retaining clip for the
> stylus? An then should we go on to talk about all the hardware mods
> (display/digitizer replacements, accelerated processors, updated ports,
> enhanced size of storage, added connectivity of Bluetooth and wifi, etc.)
> that would be extremely hard or impossible for the majority of Newt-owners
> to do if it were locked up like an iPhone? What about all the battery
> rebuilds folks have done, with some folks even experimenting with higher
> capacity battery cells than the original specs? The Newt would've died by
> the turn of the millenium. And as we can see, there's just nothing else
> quite like it out there, even 13 years later.
> And I'm not even writing as someone who does all my own Newton work
> (although truth be told they haven't needed much), just as someone who has
> the option to learn from things like Frank's excellent guided tour through
> the guts of a machine and tips posted here from time to time. For the rest
> of the time I would rely on the subset of our group whose expertise will
> continue to blow someone like me away until I become more knowledgeable in
> all things Newton.
> Still just my two small and nearly worthless copper coins. :-)
> ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
> “Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from a Newton.”
> -- ref.: Arthur C. Clarke
> (With thanks to Chod Lang)
> ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
> Fight Spam. Join EuroCAUCE: http://www.euro.cauce.org/
> Get MUGged and love it: http://www.oxmug.org/
> Join today: http://www.newtontalk.net/
> The NewtonTalk Mailing List - http://newtontalk.net/
> The Official Newton FAQ - http://splorp.com/newton/faq/
> The Newton Glossary - http://splorp.com/newton/glossary/
> WikiWikiNewt - http://tools.unna.org/wikiwikinewt/
More information about the NewtonTalk