cronk is running on http://fd.stenoweb.net/SitePages/TECT.aspx - let me know if it's weird.
Also, should there be like a server account (or should I make, like, a TECT Info account?) for announcements related to the server itself? Especially given that the server has to run updates once in a while, etc. #TECT
an nvidia jetson would make a better server in almost all respects, but doesn't have nearly the community support hte pi does, in part because they're expensive. The newer ones, even more so than the old ones, which were $192. But, they also have a lot of the same problems: no case, few or no sata ports, etc.
Thoughts on Pi, specifically, as a server:
I think it's bad for this task. (I actually am not a huge fan of the pi at all, even though I understand there's things you can do with its GPIO pins).
As with all the other tasks Pis get thought of for (thin client, home desktop, settop box) it's not packaged well to do this task and if your OS is on an SD card you're that much more susceptible to OS corruption.
Adding the storage to avoid that (i.e. wd pidrive) is costly and unwildy, physically.
LB: Interesting thread.
Why hasn't the Raspberry Pi had a larger impact on home computing?
ironically, since probably about 1998, Apple has had the best batteries in the industry. Batteries swelling inside a machine is a thing, but it's not an altogether common thing. I don't know if I've ever seen it in any PC, so I don't know why Apple does it, but altogether for any given machine from 2011, a Mac is the one most likely to have any battery left at all.
more ifixit stuff, but, replacing the battery is by and large literally impossible on most consumer laptops.
I have a Sony Vaio from 2011 that I can gaurantee you there isn't a replacement battery for. Sony won't sell me one, Vaio, the spun out PC business, won't, and nobody built a replacement for that particular model.
It only exists on Macs because they're premium computers traditionally kept for a long time. It only barely exists on business PCs because it has to.
To say it again, I'm not against serviceable laptops. I wouldn't even be against it if suddenly all laptops doubled in thickness and weight in order to become more serviceable and modular.
It's questionable that that's what the market wants, and there's other issues with the idea of, say, expecting a computer to produce service parts for their machines indefinitely (literally asked for in the "Sad Apple" article) and it would almost certainly increase costs at the inexpensive end of the market.
Calling back to ifixit: All they're really doing, in terms of their own product, is slapping a label on generic screwdriver and electronics screw sets. You can usually buy the same tools with other labels on them at local electronics stores. Parts like the two-drive adapter for the Mac mini can be bought at other suppliers, like Other World Computing, mac sales dot com. Unique tools for dealing with Macs can usually be bought elsewhere too.
More generically, I find it HIGHLY suspect when people talk about being "unable" to buy a newer MacBook/Pro because it "wouldn't last as long."
If you think your laptop still has some life left in it, that's fine, really great even! I dailied one laptop from 2009 to 2016 too! And then, it was worn out beyond reasonable repair, and the last accident it had sidelined it permanently. I replaced it and now I would never go back. Eventually parts supply for any given machine dries up, too.
On a more fun note, the machine they pictured is a Dell Adamo, which was Dell's over-$2000 MacBook Air competitor in ~2008-2010. An ultra-low-voltage Core2 machine with, if I'm remembering correctly, soldered 2 or 4 gigs of RAM and a battery that was *also* not very easily user-replaceable (and I don't think they manufactured spares, either) so it's not the best of all possible comparisons. That machine would have been near apocalyptically bad to use in 2016.
a note on the "five year" thing from two years ago: PCs before 2011? There was a HUGE, impossible-seeming performance uplift in the Sandy Bridge generation. Everything I've heard is that it was noticeable on almost anything you might be upgrading from, even literally machines built in 2010 with Arrandale/Westmere parts. So, yeah, by 2016, something from before then was really starting to look its age.
Notably, I don't think it's strictly bad that someone has taken it upon themselves to (replacing otherworld?) be the Mac parts and repair guides shop. I appreciate that someone's doing it, and I understand wanting to work towardand publicise the idea of building serviceable machines that can have longer service lives.
However, this feels more like intentionally generating controversy and outrage.
And, why is iFixit is so intent on slamming Apple at every chance they can get (keep in mind: I didn't link to things like https://ifixit.org/blog/7998/sad-apple/ where they directly slam Apple for its own sake) is that outrage gets attention, and helps them sell their screwdriver kits.
So at the end of the day, why is ifixit publishing mini-reviews and tear-downs on business laptops and high-end workstations from HP? I can think of no other reason than to slam Apple.
Especially given that once you get to the people buying a Mac Pro, whose current base price is around $4000, or an iMac Pro for $5000 or more, you're getting into the realm of people who utterly can't just go run Windows.
I know that almost anyone in the fediverse who sees this this will be like "yeah I'd buy that" but ultimately I don't think there's any real market for anything like that, especially in laptops.
I'd very very consider an upgradeable machine if it came my way and it was any good at all. I'm back to a machine with a 13.5-inch display anyway, so I've had to switch up to a backpack to carry it. At this point, it almost doesn't matter if it's five pounds and an inch and a half thick, as my ThinkPad was in 2009 when I bought it.
Or: The most lucrative market for "upgradeable" and "repairable" computers is almost certainly semi-technical home users who aspirationally buy excelboxes and workstations because they are "built better". Also, because a used machine that's 3-5 years old is cheaper than a new one and still largely usable.
The other thing to consider is employee downtime. If your workforce largely consists of people who use the computer all day and $50,000 is relatively low on your food chain, then the cost of a machine being out of service is even higher.
So, $1500 every third year to just have a new machine starts to look pretty attractive.