Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

modestlaw t1_ja5oul5 wrote

Reply to comment by casualsubversive in Linux Now Officially Supports Apple Silicon by Avieshek

Not for Apple, more M1 Macbooks in landfills means more new M2 MacBooks sold.

But hey, at least Apple is concerned about lightning cable adapters ending up in the landfill & conveniently stopped include one in every new iphone sold /s

Edit- slight correction, it was the wall adapter they stopped including, right when they switched to USB c ends on the cables and most users would want a new adapter

29

banmanche t1_ja6ffq5 wrote

i don’t see why this was downvoted. this is spot on.

3

F-21 t1_ja74qq8 wrote

I assume it was downvoted because out of most computers, old Macbooks seem to stay in use for the longest and also tend to get updates for a long time. Sure old PCs can run many lightweight linux distros (and so can old Macs), but OEM support from Apple for old Macs is something you hardly even see with other computers (maybe some business computers...).

I think that if you don't get locked out, they stay in use for a relatively long time and are also always sought after in the used market.

8

ArtKun t1_ja7ks0s wrote

Adapters, not cables.

2

modestlaw t1_ja7pydq wrote

Yeah I definitely misspoke, that said dropping the adapter when they did was even more anti consumer than I let on because they also switched to including the USB C to Lightening at the same time. Most apple users would need a new adapter to use the included cable completely undermining their environmental excuse for eliminating the adapter in the first place.

1

alc4pwned t1_ja7q7al wrote

>slight correction, it was the wall adapter they stopped including, right when they switched to USB c ends on the cables and most users would want a new adapter

Yeah their motivation was mainly money. That said, everyone who already had an iPhone could just continue using their existing charging setup. There were a lot of people saying this move forced everyone to buy a separate charging brick anyway, which is false.

In the long term, I absolutely support not including a brick in the box.

2

Larsaf t1_ja84z0p wrote

Why should Apple provide an easy way to unlock stolen machines?

But hey, organized crime has got to live too, right?

2

modestlaw t1_ja88be2 wrote

Apple will remove activation lock on a second hand machine with a proof of purchase, but they will explicitly refuse to do it if the computer uses Apple MDM (a feature only used by enterprise) even if you can demonstrate you lawfully received the machines from the company.

Hell, I'm sure these refurbishers would even be willing to pay $20 a machine to get it done. This isn't about protecting users, it's about controlling the volume of second hand MacBooks in the market

0

Larsaf t1_ja8kt3x wrote

Oh, sure, Apple could build in a backdoor into their MDM. Surely nobody but honest buyers could ever use that. Or the FBI.

3

modestlaw t1_ja8m220 wrote

The back door already exist.

Apple can already remove the lock, they just don't do it for enterprise machines

This isn't even an instance where information security is a concern, the drives are already wiped. This is to complete the factory reset and establish a new user.

And to get ahead of your "but what if its a stolen laptop" Apple already confirms the machine hasn't been stolen before unlocking them for non enterprise machines.

0

Larsaf t1_ja8mqts wrote

Ohh, suuuure. That’s why Macs with MDM constantly get hacked, and nobody uses them anymore.

Edit: No, what Apple’s MDM has instead is a button to take all selected machines out of it. It’s the organizations using it that don’t want to use it. Stop pretending this is Apple’s fault.

3