Sure any valid criticism of Apple is going to invite a pile-on from the apple haters but it does not follow that the original criticism is invalid.
Most of that is software support. Some of it is that they make few models, and sell at a premium, so there is a robust secondary market in used devices. They continue to make and sell batteries for old models, and there are plenty of counterfeits available if you want to risk it.
Apple recently (late last year) replaced the battery on my Mom's iPhone 6, which will turn seven this year. I saw an estimate that half of all iPhones 4 are still in use, mostly in developing nations. That was two years ago, but, still.
As for laptops, same basic principle applies, except I have to give a shoutout to the Thinkpad T series for sheer longevity. You have to want a Thinkpad T, but if you do, they're excellent and durable computers.
But with that one (sterling) exception, Macbooks last about twice as long as anyone else's computers. You can easily confirm this yourself by checking eBay. The butterfly keyboard era may have put an end to that, though, which is a damn shame, but we can hope the return of the scissor keyboard will bring it back.
As for the AirPods. What are we talking about on this page again?
Massive citation needed. Especially if you're going to talk about software support here since MacOS kills software support for old hardware long before Windows or Linux does.
The comment of "check eBay" isn't very compelling. Check it for what? What's your hypothesis and methodology here? Especially since you're claiming it's objectively longer lasting?
I'm not sure if you've spent much time watching Louis Rossman's youtube channel, but it is full of examples of Apple telling customers a device needs to be replaced when simple repairs are possible. [1][2][3]
Apple worked with US Customs and Border Patrol to seize replacement batteries for laptops that apple will no longer service. [4]
Rossman has a lot of videos so I did not find original sources for the following, but he has also called Apple support about replacing a charging port on a phone. Apple support told him the charging port was soldered to the motherboard and the phone needed to be replaced. But that charging port on that device is attached via a cable and is not soldered to the board. It can be replaced for a few dollars in five minutes.
Rossman also says that apple prevents third party chip manufacturers from selling to repair shops. So Rossman could repair certain macbooks with a $6 chip from (I believe) Intersil, but Apple (being an 800lb gorilla) has asked Intersil not to sell those chips to anyone else. So apple won't replace that chip on your motherboard but they also won't let anyone else do it.
It's great that apple will replace batteries, but I seem to recall there was significant consumer (or government?) pressure to offer those replacements. And I would be curious if they do that worldwide or only where legally required.
But watching Rossman's youtube channel, it is clear that repair is about much more than batteries. It's good that their products are long lasting, but at some point they will all eventually break. Millions of apple products must break each year. Apple could help extend the lives of those products, saving customers money and cutting down on waste. Instead, they seem eager to blame every problem on water damage and quote $1200 for repairs which could be done for a few dollars. (the first three video links make that clear)
I don't see the point in defending Apple here. I am sure other companies are bad too, but Apple is the industry leader and their failure to embrace repair sets expectations across the board. If it was consumer pressure that led to their battery replacement program, we may be able to apply similar pressures for right to repair. But only if we're willing to acknowledge the problems with their behavior and push back against them.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2_SZ4tfLns
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1A9y4S60kg
Everything you've objected to here falls under right to repair, which I support. I understand why Apple would want to exert control over the parts which go into their devices, because flaky secondary-market parts which fail will be blamed on Apple, not the fly-by-night chop shop which put them in; but I don't find it compelling and think the entire industry should be forced to allow it.
This is what a reply looks like, by the way. What you did wasn't so much a reply as using my post as a launch-point for your own rant.
In particular, not a word of what you said went to refute or even address the quoted part of my post. There's no if by the way: Apple has been replacing batteries since they popped out of devices, at no point has that service not been available, ever. Instead of looking this up, you used your own mental ambiguity to say a bunch of things which implied they're worse than they are. That's lazy.
However, we are never going to live in a world of repaired devices. Feature development and performance increases happen too quickly.
Most people buy new phones every two years and upgrade not because the device isn't working or its become unusuable.
The better path, the one that Apple is pursuing, is improving the reclaim-ability of materials in devices.
I'd rather trade my old laptop in and buy a new one that has been made from the reclaimed materials of my old laptop, than have my older, slower, less capable one repaired.
Citation needed. Apple claims, and I'm fine with taking it with a grain of salt, that because batteries aren't replaceable like old Nokia phones, they can make the battery larger, possibly reducing consumer costs and how often batteries are changed. It's not just Apple, either. Consumers seem to not care.
I don't know it's so clear to me that this is true that I've not felt the need to research it. By all means if you have sources to the contrary I'd be happy to read them.
To me, we could save significant environmental waste if everything we manufactured was made to be repaired. I designed several pairs of 3D printed headphones [1] which are now the only headphones I wear, and the idea that I can replace any part if it breaks seems significant to me.
I often drop my phone and it’s great not having to worry about my phone’s battery falling out making me lose my data.
I’m glad there is a small section of the market with brands like Fairphone and Lenovo still offering replaceable batteries because it is very important to some consumers, but most people dont care or think about it at all.
However, your argument about reducing environmental waste is flawed. AirPod, in total, weigh less and use far less plastic than your design.
Given the scale of production, the raw material to final product path will be short and relatively low impact. Your process involves much more packaging, transport and middle-man costs.
Feature set wise, your design is also significantly less.
I'm very supportive of people making product that is better suited to them, but the idea of this approach being somehow less wasteful is completely ridiculous.
