I give you the instructions for replacing the trackpad on my Macbook. It is an easy 44 steps. Well, 87, since you have to do it all in reverse to put it back together.
Also, it's $450 just for the parts and tools. More if you don't like to buy refurbished.
Funny, the TrackPad I replaced in a friend's 2009 13 inch MacBook Pro was like 4 steps, if. Remove screws from bottom pan. Remove battery connector. Remove battery. Remove 4 screws holding Trackpad. Done.
Well, I see that it IS a bit more involved for that model (you did pull the wrong guide though. Here's the right one). But the tools needed are more like $20, and the TrackPad can be had for around $60 online. FAR less than the $450 that you quoted (without citation).
First, they are not Phillips head. They are five-lobed Torx-like screws which require a special tool to open. A Phillips head will round them out.
Second, you have to heat the battery in order to remove it, as it is slathered with glue. Too much heat... it expands and destructs. Too little, and pulling it out might cause it to destroy itself.
Third, the Apple drive is not a standardized format. You can't just replace it unless you can bribe an Apple employee to use a drive just for that model. If you order 256 gigs, you are stuck with that. RAM? Soldered on.
The grandparent is right. Apple's laptops are scoring a 1/10 for repairability on iFixit with newer models.
Funny that the same site, iFixit, that whines about "repairability" seems to always manage a COMPLETE teardown without having to bribe anyone for special tools, take a bandsaw to the product, etc., eh?
My point being that, if you assess "repairability: on ANYONE's modern consumer devices, especially the things like phones, tablets and laptops, and restrict your "toolbox" to the one your Dad had, you will be frustrated. But a modern bench-tech should really have things like Torx screwdrivers and even Tri and Pentalobe screwdrivers. They just aren't that "special" in the computer-tech world (and certainly are NOT a "special tool", available only from the manufacturer, like you might have to have to work on some cars), and are certainly not found just with Apple gear. Open a Dell, Samsung or many other lappies and you will find the EXACT same construction techniques.
As for using adhesives, again Apple is CERTAINLY not alone in that regard. That has been standard manufacturing practice for nearly 20 years now. I don't like it much, either; but it isn't even close to be the exclusive province of Apple, not by a long shot.
As far as soldered-in RAM, this is also an industry-trend in laptops. I don't like it either; but connectors are expensive and huge (especially huge), and it is a royal pain to make the data-paths to the RAMshort while still keeping the RAM accessible; so I understand.
I welcome Samsung's excellent cost/size value proposition! I just wish their drives were solid enough for our actual use.
Then how is Apple having such good luck with them? Granted, Macs aren't generally used as high-transaction-count Servers; but people who do media creation/editing can sure churn through some R/W cycles in a hurry.
Unlike Apple, the dinosaur PC makers are refusing to move on.
Thank you for stating that correctly!
Just like with the Floppy Drives, Serial Connectors, and VGA, then DVI...
But now, cue the Apple haters that will whine incessantly about no eSATA and the USB-C connector on the new MacBook (hey, I think they should have at least kept the MagSafe, too!).
I suppose there are a few 5 pound laptops out there for power users that still use the 2.5" form factor, but they're disappearing rapidly. Things are moving fast in the SSD storage area and many are moving to the M.2 format. Though I suppose any increase in density is good as it means higher cap small format drives and cheaper options*.
*so that Microsoft and Apple can increase their profit margins on storage. The great thing about impossible to open PCs is that they can charge whatever the fuck they want for storage no matter how cheap it gets.
If you are referring to Apple (especially Apple laptops) with your "impossible to open" comment, that hasn't been true for quite some time now. Remove the 10 Phillips-head screws holding the bottom "pan" on, and the battery, RAM (on replaceable-RAM models) and Drive(s) are readily-accessible and replaceable, even on the newer models with the PCI(?) SSDs. Even the Trackpad is easily replaced.
Ironically enough, when Apple went to the Unibody design for laptops, the only thing that became an absolute BEAR to replace was the keyboard; which USED to be the easiest thing to replace!
I remember when the G5 Tower was first introduced, to demonstrate the compute-power of the G5, they had some guy come on stage and show a real-time animated display of all the (I assume unclassified) objects in Earth orbit.
IIRC, it was announced that the software that did this was going to be available... And then, nothing. I just assumed the MIBs put the kibosh on the release for some "National Security" type-excuse.
Glad to see that this is becoming available.
So nice to see that we live in a coun-- Hey! Who are you! You can't come in h
Apple users are the ones who require the computer to intervene where their brains cease function. Normal humans are able to complete a single thought all the way through and use computers to aid in this. Computers are not meant to replace our brains, but rather to augment them.
And so, that's why iTunes lets you have it either way. All it takes is unchecking a couple of checkboxes in iTunes Preferences.
Or do you need to consult someone online to help you through that?
I used to care how the files were organized too, until I realized it was pointless if the software can do it for me. It's not about "the Apple way", it's about letting computers do the job for us, like it's supposed to be.
That's known as 'vendor lock-in' and if IBM or Microsoft were doing it, you and yours would be screeching. Or sneering, more likely.
Oh, so NOW it's "Vendor Lock-In" to have a preferred Directory Structure???
GTFO, asshat.
All you have to do is Uncheck a couple of Checkboxes in iTunes Preferences, and you can have ANY Directory Structure you want with iTunes.
No "Lock-In", asswipe.
Boy do I wish sometimes for IRC's Ban/Kick/Nuke tools...
I'm the same way. If the music management program can tell the difference between 2-3 versions of the song, but are different remixes, as well as not overwrite the lossless version of a song with a MP3, I'm happy.
I used to worry about tags... but these days, I have so many other things on my plate that if some software can do the grunt work, so much the better.
iTunes is more than happy to have multiple entries in the "Library" database that have the same song name, but which point to different copies/versions of the same file. In fact, it was kind of a pain to avoid duplicate entries when creating "decimated" versions (downsampled) of songs to put on your phone, etc., before Apple created a function in iTunes to do that.
Just remember, there are two parts to iTunes: The Database part (the "Library") and the Media part (the songs). And the Database records are NOT "keyed" simply by Genre/Artist/Song. The Primary Key appears to be something on the order of a simple "ID" (which isn't displayed), with Secondary Keys for Genre/Artist/Album/Song, etc.
What you told me was that iTunes doesn't manage the files the way I want and that I have to do it myself. Of course I complain. Plus, the option you gave me isn't really 'managing files'. It manages them to the extent that they will be organized in the UI but they will not be managed in directories.
They are orgainized BOTH in the Database (iTunes "Library") AND in the Artist>>Album>>Songs-in-that-album Structure, UNLESS you UN-Check the "Let iTunes keep Folder Organized" AND the "Copy to iTunes Folder". THEN you can have you own private Directory Structure.
BUT, if you are SANE, you will simply let iTunes use its Artist(Folder)>>Album(Folder)>>Songs-for-that-album(Files) structure.
Why should people have to create playlists to play an album in the order it was delivered? For example, the album of a musical performance - It's in order as presented, NOT waiting to be alphabetized!
Um, you don't have to do that. In fact, the only reason to create a Playlist is if you want to REORDER the songs on an album, include songs from multiple albums, or EXCLUDE certain songs from an album.
By default, iTunes organizes Songs-from-an-album in TRACK order, just like if you stuck a CD in a player and played it.
Why, oh, why are you people bending over backwards to be obtuse? ITunes has been around for WELL over a decade. Can you REALLY be surprised at its databasing?
and what about when i dont want to use itunes anymore? i have thousands of songs in a single directory with no logic behind it???
Well, if you ever looked at the iTunes directory Structure you'd instantly realize what an idiotic statement that is.
The Directory Structure is simple: Artist >> Album >> Songfiles-for-that-album.
Do you have a better suggestion? Genre is a Metadata grouping. Doing otherwise with Genre would cause much unnecessary confusion and ambiguity in the Filesystem.
I used to care how the files were organized too, until I realized it was pointless if the software can do it for me. It's not about "the Apple way", it's about letting computers do the job for us, like it's supposed to be.
Yes, but don'tcha know? "Easy" is anathema to most Slashdotters. Afterall, they'd rather have an OS that requires constant tinkering than something that "Just Works".
It's called PROPER ORDER OF CATEGORIZATION, which iTunes DOES NOT HAVE.
Genre>artist>year>album>track number (starting with 01, not 1)
All of that is within ID3. If iTunes KNEW HOW TO SCAN A FUCKING ID3 TAG PROPERLY you wouldn't be talking about this right fucking now, now would you?
Ah, but WHICH Genre?, WHICH Artist (if it's a Compilation)?
You REALLY think that people who develop iTunes can't figure out how to Parse an ID3 tag? No, the problem is that ID3 tags are UNRELIABLE PIECES OF SHIT, and you should be down on your knees thanking Apple for NOT using them to "categorize" music.
And oh, BTW, you are free to have your music Categorized any way you want. Simply UNcheck the "Keep iTunes Folder Organized" and "Copy to iTunes Folder" in iTunes Preferences, and then iTunes won't touch your precious private categorization system.
Different artists happened to have released albums with the same names. I do agree that this isn't the norm so iTunes should default to accepting the information in the ID3 metadata.
ID3 Metadata is "iffy" at best. It is OFTEN misleading, incomplete, or just downright SHIT.
So be glad that iTunes DOESN'T rely completely on ID3 tags,or most people's iTunes Libraries would be an absolute fucking MESS.
So it's not smart enough to realize that being in the same folder likely means it's on the same album.
As if it couldn't fucking scan the ID3 tag and learn this?
What a shit piece of 'advanced' software.
Even shitty old Winamp and AIMP2 can manage to get this right, with TWO clicks.
iTunes fixed this years ago with the Compilation Tag (because some people actually DO want it to "sort" one way, and some people want it another way), and it works just fine. Get over yourself.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't why anyone who wants to tinker with things complains about difficulty of repairs when it comes to fasteners.
Because this is Slashdot; where ANY excuse to Apple-Bash (no pun intended) is considered a good excuse.
Even the Trackpad is easily replaced.
I give you the instructions for replacing the trackpad on my Macbook. It is an easy 44 steps. Well, 87, since you have to do it all in reverse to put it back together.
Also, it's $450 just for the parts and tools. More if you don't like to buy refurbished.
Funny, the TrackPad I replaced in a friend's 2009 13 inch MacBook Pro was like 4 steps, if. Remove screws from bottom pan. Remove battery connector. Remove battery. Remove 4 screws holding Trackpad. Done.
Well, I see that it IS a bit more involved for that model (you did pull the wrong guide though. Here's the right one). But the tools needed are more like $20, and the TrackPad can be had for around $60 online. FAR less than the $450 that you quoted (without citation).
Incorrect, especially the latest gen ones:
First, they are not Phillips head. They are five-lobed Torx-like screws which require a special tool to open. A Phillips head will round them out.
Second, you have to heat the battery in order to remove it, as it is slathered with glue. Too much heat... it expands and destructs. Too little, and pulling it out might cause it to destroy itself.
Third, the Apple drive is not a standardized format. You can't just replace it unless you can bribe an Apple employee to use a drive just for that model. If you order 256 gigs, you are stuck with that. RAM? Soldered on.
The grandparent is right. Apple's laptops are scoring a 1/10 for repairability on iFixit with newer models.
Funny that the same site, iFixit, that whines about "repairability" seems to always manage a COMPLETE teardown without having to bribe anyone for special tools, take a bandsaw to the product, etc., eh?
My point being that, if you assess "repairability: on ANYONE's modern consumer devices, especially the things like phones, tablets and laptops, and restrict your "toolbox" to the one your Dad had, you will be frustrated. But a modern bench-tech should really have things like Torx screwdrivers and even Tri and Pentalobe screwdrivers. They just aren't that "special" in the computer-tech world (and certainly are NOT a "special tool", available only from the manufacturer, like you might have to have to work on some cars), and are certainly not found just with Apple gear. Open a Dell, Samsung or many other lappies and you will find the EXACT same construction techniques.
As for using adhesives, again Apple is CERTAINLY not alone in that regard. That has been standard manufacturing practice for nearly 20 years now. I don't like it much, either; but it isn't even close to be the exclusive province of Apple, not by a long shot.
As far as soldered-in RAM, this is also an industry-trend in laptops. I don't like it either; but connectors are expensive and huge (especially huge), and it is a royal pain to make the data-paths to the RAMshort while still keeping the RAM accessible; so I understand.
I welcome Samsung's excellent cost/size value proposition! I just wish their drives were solid enough for our actual use.
Then how is Apple having such good luck with them? Granted, Macs aren't generally used as high-transaction-count Servers; but people who do media creation/editing can sure churn through some R/W cycles in a hurry.
Unlike Apple, the dinosaur PC makers are refusing to move on.
Thank you for stating that correctly!
Just like with the Floppy Drives, Serial Connectors, and VGA, then DVI...
But now, cue the Apple haters that will whine incessantly about no eSATA and the USB-C connector on the new MacBook (hey, I think they should have at least kept the MagSafe, too!).
I suppose there are a few 5 pound laptops out there for power users that still use the 2.5" form factor, but they're disappearing rapidly. Things are moving fast in the SSD storage area and many are moving to the M.2 format. Though I suppose any increase in density is good as it means higher cap small format drives and cheaper options*.
*so that Microsoft and Apple can increase their profit margins on storage. The great thing about impossible to open PCs is that they can charge whatever the fuck they want for storage no matter how cheap it gets.
If you are referring to Apple (especially Apple laptops) with your "impossible to open" comment, that hasn't been true for quite some time now. Remove the 10 Phillips-head screws holding the bottom "pan" on, and the battery, RAM (on replaceable-RAM models) and Drive(s) are readily-accessible and replaceable, even on the newer models with the PCI(?) SSDs. Even the Trackpad is easily replaced.
Ironically enough, when Apple went to the Unibody design for laptops, the only thing that became an absolute BEAR to replace was the keyboard; which USED to be the easiest thing to replace!
Clearly you're not a gamer. 60 GB installs are the norm these days.
Or video editor. Unless you are fastidious about getting rid of stuff, you can stack up some serious GB on each project.
I remember when the G5 Tower was first introduced, to demonstrate the compute-power of the G5, they had some guy come on stage and show a real-time animated display of all the (I assume unclassified) objects in Earth orbit.
IIRC, it was announced that the software that did this was going to be available... And then, nothing. I just assumed the MIBs put the kibosh on the release for some "National Security" type-excuse.
Glad to see that this is becoming available.
So nice to see that we live in a coun-- Hey! Who are you! You can't come in h
or use excel under wine
and then you aren't locked into Apple's ecosystem
WINE is a joke. Always was, always will be. It is fighting a losing battle, trying to reverse-engineer a moving target (Windows APIs).
Can't imagine that you would actually propose that as a long-term solution.
Oh, wait. I forgot this is Slahdot; where the more kludgy a "solution" is, the better they like it.
Sorry, my experience has been that the default settings are NOT track order.
Sure, because Apple would figure that you wouldn't want to listen to an album in track order..
You do know that that little stylized "criss-cross"-looking symbol down near the bottom of the screen in iTunes means "Shuffle", right?
retart? look in the mirror lol
"Retart" was used to avoid insulting retards.
LOL! GREAT comeback!!!
Apple users are the ones who require the computer to intervene where their brains cease function. Normal humans are able to complete a single thought all the way through and use computers to aid in this. Computers are not meant to replace our brains, but rather to augment them.
And so, that's why iTunes lets you have it either way. All it takes is unchecking a couple of checkboxes in iTunes Preferences.
Or do you need to consult someone online to help you through that?
I used to care how the files were organized too, until I realized it was pointless if the software can do it for me. It's not about "the Apple way", it's about letting computers do the job for us, like it's supposed to be.
That's known as 'vendor lock-in' and if IBM or Microsoft were doing it, you and yours would be screeching. Or sneering, more likely.
Oh, so NOW it's "Vendor Lock-In" to have a preferred Directory Structure???
GTFO, asshat.
All you have to do is Uncheck a couple of Checkboxes in iTunes Preferences, and you can have ANY Directory Structure you want with iTunes.
No "Lock-In", asswipe.
Boy do I wish sometimes for IRC's Ban/Kick/Nuke tools...
I'm the same way. If the music management program can tell the difference between 2-3 versions of the song, but are different remixes, as well as not overwrite the lossless version of a song with a MP3, I'm happy.
I used to worry about tags... but these days, I have so many other things on my plate that if some software can do the grunt work, so much the better.
iTunes is more than happy to have multiple entries in the "Library" database that have the same song name, but which point to different copies/versions of the same file. In fact, it was kind of a pain to avoid duplicate entries when creating "decimated" versions (downsampled) of songs to put on your phone, etc., before Apple created a function in iTunes to do that.
Just remember, there are two parts to iTunes: The Database part (the "Library") and the Media part (the songs). And the Database records are NOT "keyed" simply by Genre/Artist/Song. The Primary Key appears to be something on the order of a simple "ID" (which isn't displayed), with Secondary Keys for Genre/Artist/Album/Song, etc.
What you told me was that iTunes doesn't manage the files the way I want and that I have to do it myself. Of course I complain. Plus, the option you gave me isn't really 'managing files'. It manages them to the extent that they will be organized in the UI but they will not be managed in directories.
They are orgainized BOTH in the Database (iTunes "Library") AND in the Artist>>Album>>Songs-in-that-album Structure, UNLESS you UN-Check the "Let iTunes keep Folder Organized" AND the "Copy to iTunes Folder". THEN you can have you own private Directory Structure.
BUT, if you are SANE, you will simply let iTunes use its Artist(Folder)>>Album(Folder)>>Songs-for-that-album(Files) structure.
Got it?
In any case, if you don't want iTunes to manage the files, simply uncheck the option "Keep iTunes Media folder organized".
I really can't understand why people are bitching about this so much.
ESPECIALLY since iTunes debuted in what? 2001 or so, and hasn't changed its organizational structure (or options for same) since then?
thats exactly what i am referring to. im glad to hear they dont do that anymore however
iTunes hasn't changed its organization, nor the options for same, since its inception. You really need to try and keep up.
And slashdotters say Apple users are technically illiterate. Sheesh!
maybe now, Ill admit i havent looked at itunes since about 2007 but at the time it was folder heaven with no logic behind it
You're full of shit. iTunes hasn't changed its folder structure for, well, for forever.
Why should people have to create playlists to play an album in the order it was delivered? For example, the album of a musical performance - It's in order as presented, NOT waiting to be alphabetized!
Um, you don't have to do that. In fact, the only reason to create a Playlist is if you want to REORDER the songs on an album, include songs from multiple albums, or EXCLUDE certain songs from an album.
By default, iTunes organizes Songs-from-an-album in TRACK order, just like if you stuck a CD in a player and played it.
Why, oh, why are you people bending over backwards to be obtuse? ITunes has been around for WELL over a decade. Can you REALLY be surprised at its databasing?
and what about when i dont want to use itunes anymore? i have thousands of songs in a single directory with no logic behind it???
Well, if you ever looked at the iTunes directory Structure you'd instantly realize what an idiotic statement that is.
The Directory Structure is simple: Artist >> Album >> Songfiles-for-that-album.
Do you have a better suggestion? Genre is a Metadata grouping. Doing otherwise with Genre would cause much unnecessary confusion and ambiguity in the Filesystem.
I used to care how the files were organized too, until I realized it was pointless if the software can do it for me. It's not about "the Apple way", it's about letting computers do the job for us, like it's supposed to be.
Yes, but don'tcha know? "Easy" is anathema to most Slashdotters. Afterall, they'd rather have an OS that requires constant tinkering than something that "Just Works".
Does iTunes now have the capability to group songs by album in the directory structure?
That's been the default behavior since iTunes was first launched about 13 years ago. Do try to keep up.
It's called PROPER ORDER OF CATEGORIZATION, which iTunes DOES NOT HAVE. Genre>artist>year>album>track number (starting with 01, not 1) All of that is within ID3. If iTunes KNEW HOW TO SCAN A FUCKING ID3 TAG PROPERLY you wouldn't be talking about this right fucking now, now would you?
Ah, but WHICH Genre?, WHICH Artist (if it's a Compilation)?
You REALLY think that people who develop iTunes can't figure out how to Parse an ID3 tag? No, the problem is that ID3 tags are UNRELIABLE PIECES OF SHIT, and you should be down on your knees thanking Apple for NOT using them to "categorize" music. And oh, BTW, you are free to have your music Categorized any way you want. Simply UNcheck the "Keep iTunes Folder Organized" and "Copy to iTunes Folder" in iTunes Preferences, and then iTunes won't touch your precious private categorization system.
Different artists happened to have released albums with the same names. I do agree that this isn't the norm so iTunes should default to accepting the information in the ID3 metadata.
ID3 Metadata is "iffy" at best. It is OFTEN misleading, incomplete, or just downright SHIT.
So be glad that iTunes DOESN'T rely completely on ID3 tags,or most people's iTunes Libraries would be an absolute fucking MESS.
So it's not smart enough to realize that being in the same folder likely means it's on the same album.
As if it couldn't fucking scan the ID3 tag and learn this?
What a shit piece of 'advanced' software.
Even shitty old Winamp and AIMP2 can manage to get this right, with TWO clicks.
iTunes fixed this years ago with the Compilation Tag (because some people actually DO want it to "sort" one way, and some people want it another way), and it works just fine. Get over yourself.