As someone that's owned 4 Apple laptops over the last 9 years I've never, ever had to remove the battery to 'fix' any of them. That includes the Macbook Air that got sat on hard while sitting open and the 12" Macbook Pro that got dropped from 2m onto concrete.
So you wouldn't be opening them anyway, in which case it makes no difference to you. But as an Apple shareholder, I fail to see any benefit to Apple expending resources trying to stop customers who do want access to their own hardware.
There are two problems I can see, one I think is minor and one I think is major.
The minor problem is, people open Apple hardware up, violate the warranty, break the product, put it back together again, and send it back to Apple; Apple has to expend resources already to prevent that from happening (in the same fashion as all consumer electronics companies have to expend effort to detect moisture damage).
The major problem is, third party companies will open up shop performing unauthorized repairs on Apple hardware. Apple can't vouch for any of that work, many of those companies may end up damaging Apple hardware and upsetting Apple users, and Apple has a clear business interest in making it less easy for random people to enter that market.
>...Apple has a clear business interest in making it less easy for random people to enter that market.
I can see why Apple wants to do it, but wouldn't we think it wrong for Ford to seal their engine compartment with a security key that only Ford dealerships could open, preventing competing mechanics? Yes, in a frictionless economy consumers would factor this in to their purchase and not buy from Ford. But in the real world, this is a pretty easily correctable market failure (which can be traced back to the small number of competitors) which governments usually limit through competition laws.
This is a universally accepted practice in consumer electronics and not a universally accepted practice in automotives. Singling Apple out over it doesn't seem productive to me.
Sharp commentary, Thomas. One thing that sticks out to me is how Apple straightjackets their products. Apple corals the entire user experience down a narrow path. Power-users hate the constraint of this Apple straightjacket, but at the same time, new consumer-level customers -- grandma with her iPad and cousin Alice with her iPod touch -- benefit from the simplicity of the straightjacketed experience.
Once again, I'll point to Mac OS X as a counterexample to the theory that providing a good experience to normal users requires denying control to power users.
Those decisions are Apple's prerogatives. When they lock OS X down, I'll scream bloody murder right along with you for the bait-and-switch. But nobody bought an iPhone because they thought it'd be easy to tinker with.
Surely needing a special screwdriver won't stop someone who wants to set up a shop, at least in a first world country. It's going to be far more effective at stopping individuals from doing home repairs. The reason is the shop buys screwdrivers then uses them over and over so the price-per-use isn't very high, while the individual would buy them to use only once or twice so the price-per-use is higher.
You are correct! It was a PowerBook, wonderful little machine. It landed on the bottom rear corner, DVD drive broke, big dent, whole case buckled a bit but continued to work perfectly otherwise.
