[throwaway85825]

The people that complain about the number of screws are very counter productive. The important thing is that repair is possible at all without permanent damage. Framework and some of the 'repair optimized' designs seem to assume that the device is going to be repaired daily and that it needs to be as easy as possible.

[StingyJelly]

The bar should be higher than "Better than glue". While repair is possible, the number of screws with many different screw types still make it needlessly time consuming / expensive.

[throwaway85825]

The ease of repair only needs to be in proportion to the likelihood of needing repair and frequency of occurrence.

[StingyJelly]

Yes and given that keyboard replacement is really common repair (probably most common repair on butterfly models but still quite common now), the ease of repair is extremely disproportional. In case of OP's Macbook Pro: the rivets, the number of screws, the need to disassemble everything, even having to lift the glued in battery - all just to get to the keyboard.

[throwaway85825]

I agree that the rivets and glued in battery is an issue that ideally would be dealt with by legislation. Some disassembly is always going to be required and I don't see that as a negative. I see a keyboard replacement as an, on average, once in a device lifespan event.

[al_borland]

I would think there is a middle ground between a toolless design and 40+ screws. When I saw the IFixIt review of the Neo, it seemed like an excessive number of screws. I'd like to be a fly on the wall in the design meetings that led to all those screws.

While a single device for a single user will not need daily repairs, when you think about these devices being deployed in a school system, there very well could be a steady supply of repairs to perform. Streamlining that process does matter.

It's almost like Apple was trying to comply with new EU laws while still making the repair seem a little intimidating, to push users toward professionals.

15 years ago Apple was making unibody laptops with great build quality, and changing out the battery, hard drive, and RAM was trivial[0]. The argument that they made for removing replaceable batteries and making things less reparable overall, was always space constraints. Mounting brackets take up space they didn't have. I don't think that argument holds up. Since 2010 the large optical drive is gone, SSDs are now much smaller, and RAM is integrated and also smaller. They should have plenty of room to work with to bring back reparability, for the few things that can still be meaningfully serviced.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mU44Ay7Q0b8

[throwaway85825]

More screws means more chassis stiffness. A desireable feature.

If I was streamlining the process I'd use an electric screwdriver and a 3d printed screw holder.

You dont need a 'professional' repairman to screw things in. Most people aren't intimidated by screws, that's silly.

SOCAMM2 is a great form factor for user upgradeable DRAM. The fragile pins are all on the relatively cheap interposer. Id like to see an equivalent standard for NAND. M.2 uses more z height than necessary. Especially for 2 sided support.