[HN Gopher] Design quirks, limited parts, and other ways Chromeb...
___________________________________________________________________
Design quirks, limited parts, and other ways Chromebooks frustrate
repairs
Author : PaulHoule
Score : 79 points
Date : 2023-04-22 14:17 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (arstechnica.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (arstechnica.com)
| dotcoma wrote:
| Crapware. Just like Android.
| soulofmischief wrote:
| Android is an entire family of devices. Surely your comment is
| made in jest.
| dotcoma wrote:
| I'm not saying Apple is perfect, but I strongly dislike
| companies that stop supporting their operating systems after
| only a few years.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| Chromebooks are an entire family of devices; what's your
| point?
| casion wrote:
| I wonder how many people will use the headline to defend
| chromebooks without reading the article itself...
| katherin_231 wrote:
| [dead]
| no1groyp wrote:
| You get what you pay for
| rolph wrote:
| Schools bought millions of Chromebooks in 2020 -- and three years
| later, they're starting to break
|
| https://www.theverge.com/2023/4/21/23691840/us-pirg-educatio...
| [deleted]
| TOMDM wrote:
| I may be out of touch, but do people really expect a $200
| laptop to last more than a few years?
| rolph wrote:
| i have a number of laptops, purchased, new 250-300$ range,
| all ACER brand. more than a decade old. worst problem is
| wearing a hole through the touchpad on my "console" machine.
|
| just to be fair, kids are rough on stuff, especialy if they
| didnt pay for it.
| jeffbee wrote:
| In daily use by children! Both of these articles, by the same
| author, fail to engage with the economic design point of the
| Chromebook. Only the most bozotic k-12 IT department is
| scrounging keyboards on eBay. The normal people bought their
| Chromebooks from CDW with 4-years repair or replace
| contracts, and they don't care where the parts come from. And
| nobody wants to be upgrading machines piecemeal the way the
| author suggests. Absolutely nobody. You upgrade by replacing
| fleets.
| 908B64B197 wrote:
| > fail to engage with the economic design point of the
| Chromebook
|
| And that the only reason Chromebooks are deployed there in
| the first place is that they are inexpensive.
| Nullabillity wrote:
| Even buying new you're often _far_ better off buying a low-
| spec device and upgrading it than buying a laptop with the
| specs you want.
| jeffbee wrote:
| True for individuals who are unable to value their time,
| but I doubt you'd find an IT industry professional who
| agreed. You buy the machine with the support contract and
| you get the supported parts and you don't touch them.
| Modern designs don't even have replaceable RAM, for good
| reasons and not as some kind of conspiracy.
| ghaff wrote:
| Yeah. The article tosses out this one anecdote of a Windows
| laptop being easy to fix but I guarantee no K-12 IT
| department is doing bootleg ChromeBook repairs. Also the
| main alternative here is probably a tablet not a Windows
| much less a Linux laptop.
|
| As for the life cycle I think laptops are on something like
| a 3 or 4 year refresh cycle where I work though in practice
| it's pretty loose.
| carlivar wrote:
| I would expect companies that might say they care about
| things like climate change to understand the benefits of
| repairability towards that end.
| Saris wrote:
| Well, like the article says the biggest issue is it's
| difficult to even get parts to repair them, I imagine most
| hardware used in schools will need some repairs in a few
| years, so having access to parts is important.
| Gigachad wrote:
| Especially in the hands of students. My school deployed
| MacBook airs to everyone which are perfectly capable of
| lasting just about forever but a good chunk of them were
| dropped, destroyed, liquid damaged, etc by the end of the
| year.
| ncphil wrote:
| "The sample size could have been larger". Yeah, like _way_
| larger. So could the institutions represented. _Scarsdale_?
| Really? What about NYC, LA, Chicago? As others have written here,
| you would have to be insane to think a $200 device like that
| would last more than a couple of years. Or a school administrator
| who got and keeps their job by sucking up to an even more
| clueless district superintendent, under the not-so-watchful eye
| of an idiot school board. "A fool and his money are soon parted".
| chasil wrote:
| Google should really be forced to unlock the firmware on _all_ of
| their abandoned devices.
|
| I foolishly purchased my parents a "reconditioned" Google
| Chromebook from Lenovo.
|
| The device was covered in black plastic sheets to conceal
| scratches and markings on the casing. When we activated the
| device, it was out of support.
|
| I gave them a fresh HP Chromebook to replace it.
|
| Avoid "reconditioned" Chromebooks.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| > Google should really be forced to unlock the firmware on
| _all_ of their abandoned devices.
|
| I'd like that but it appears this software could damage devices
| if not properly implemented.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35603573
|
| I wonder what's the best way to mitigate these risks.
| asmor wrote:
| And also, it doesn't change that in the case of ARM
| Chromebooks, they run one hard branched Linux tree from 5+
| years ago (more if you're dealing with Mediatek) and nothing
| else.
| qbasic_forever wrote:
| It's no different than the risk of upgrading your
| motherboard's bios. If the update fails to finish writing
| (like if the power goes out during the update) it will leave
| the firmware in a broken state and won't boot.
|
| Some systems mitigate this risk by giving you two different
| bios regions so you can write to one and leave the other
| pristine as an emergency backup if the update fails. Other
| systems put the bios on a removable chip so if an update
| fails you can pull it out and rewrite it with dedicated
| hardware or another working computer.
|
| For inexpensive laptops that are built to the cheapest price
| possible and where 99% of users will never mess with the bios
| they don't include those kind of features. So you just have
| to accept the risk that you could destroy the machine if the
| update fails, and try to take reasonable precautions like
| making sure the battery is charged up and it's plugged in
| while updating the firmware.
| qbasic_forever wrote:
| They are generally unlocked, you can easily get into developer
| mode and flash a new coreboot bios on most of them:
| https://mrchromebox.tech/#fwscript Once flashed they can boot
| right into Linux natively and are a regular old EFI booting
| laptop. You will never be able to run ChromeOS on it again
| though (and could perhaps permanently brick or destroy the
| device) so it's not something Google is going to tell people to
| do.
| nimbius wrote:
| yup. this "arent built to last" quip feels like a
| reinforcement effort from on high to ensure planned
| obsolescence doesnt encounter any defeat along the way. total
| malarkey.
|
| I run arch on a couple of chromebooks with wayland. the
| install path was pretty easy because under the hood these
| things are just computers. They last as long as you want them
| to because you decide what they do, not Google.
| qbasic_forever wrote:
| Yep and Linux usually runs perfectly well on Chromebooks
| since chrome OS is based on it so you rarely get weird
| bleeding edge opaque binary driver peripherals. My Acer
| Chromebook runs Arch too and everything works out of the
| box--wifi, sound, media buttons, etc. It's way better than
| getting Linux on a super cheap Windows laptop IMHO.
| jeffbee wrote:
| Wait. The whole reason that ChromeOS works correctly is
| _because_ they are not doctrinaire about binary drivers.
| ChromeOS has working touchpads and working wifi and
| working webcams due to their acceptance of the need for
| vendor blobs.
| qbasic_forever wrote:
| Yeah but the peripheral has to have a Linux driver or
| support, and for a cheap laptop a manufacturer is
| definitely not going to hire someone to custom port a
| Windows driver to Linux. They're going to pull something
| off the shelf that already works with Linux.
| jeffbee wrote:
| But things like MIPI cameras don't work in any Linux
| other than ChromeOS. The open source partisans are still
| faffing around with their obsolete APIs, while ChromeOS
| discards the political aspect and just ships Intel's
| blob. That's why machines like the Thinkpad X1 Carbon Gen
| 10 are not on the ChromeOS Flex certified models list,
| and their webcams don't work in any other distro either,
| but there are tons of Chromebooks with MIPI cameras.
| qbasic_forever wrote:
| It sounds like Intel is dragging its feet releasing an
| open source driver for those cameras. But as usual if you
| use a bleeding edge distro like Arch it's just mashing in
| a few AURs and you'll have support:
| https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=280559
| Aaron2222 wrote:
| The firmware's already open source, and you can reflash it by
| either opening the device to remove a write-protect screw (for
| older models) or with a debug cable. https://mrchromebox.tech/
| has UEFI firmware for many models, and many also support BIOS
| boot without needing to remove a write-protect screw or use a
| debug cable. Also, all support running custom Chromium OS
| builds via the usual ChromeOS boot mechanism.
| jones6ofMont wrote:
| [dead]
| hugelgupf wrote:
| I don't really get their headline.
|
| Google extended the AUE to 8 years. They're complaining that most
| Chromebooks only have 4 years of software life left. Are they
| buying devices released 4 years ago? Or refurbished devices?
| quag wrote:
| I bought a chromebook in 2017 that I love. AUE is up in a few
| months. The OS has improved leaps and bounds since I got it. I
| wish it would keep getting updates.
|
| Sadly it's hard to flash a new boot loader as the write protect
| screw is in a difficult place and I'll likely break something
| trying to get to it. I don't know what I'll do when AUE hits.
|
| I guess it'll be like my first gen iPad which I'm forced to use
| as a clock as there is little else I can do with the great
| hardware with locked down software.
| jeffbee wrote:
| This is a deeply stupid paper that isn't supported by the sources
| it cites. According to the source data, the only Chromebook with
| a firm number for greenhouse gas emissions from manufacturing is
| the Pixelbook, and according to the same data it has the least
| embodied carbon of any laptop in their database. Other laptops in
| their list have as much as five times as much embodied carbon.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| It's weird to see Google getting picked on for this. Other
| manufacturers are a lot worse and provide a lot less guarantees
| about updates.
| ZGDUwpqEWpUZ wrote:
| [dead]
| izacus wrote:
| No they're not, remember that EoL Chromebooks don't even get
| Chrome update anymore.
|
| On other OSes, Chrome gets updated for more than a decade.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| You can fix that by installing Linux. I'm talking about
| unavoidable stuff like firmware updates. Other manufacturers
| drop support for devices much sooner.
| easton wrote:
| Google was working on a way to ship Chrome updates to older
| versions of Chrome OS, is that still not out yet?
|
| https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/l.
| ...
| izacus wrote:
| Nope :/
| Saris wrote:
| Yeah most smartphones don't even come close to 4 years. And
| many other laptops don't get any BIOS/Firmware updates pretty
| much right after launch.
| pjmlp wrote:
| They should be compared to Laptops, including OS updates.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| Yeah, the smartphone situation is quite dramatic. I was
| surprised to see GrapheneOS recommending Google phones but I
| bought a Pixel when I learned why.
| sundvor wrote:
| Still getting updates for my OG Gen 1 Lenovo X1 Carbon from
| 2012... i7/8/256 config.
|
| It still works too, solid as.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| _Firmware_ updates?
| pjmlp wrote:
| My 2009 bought laptops keep getting updates.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| _Firmware_ updates?
| mardifoufs wrote:
| If you're using linux (though you could on chromebooks too)!
|
| Otherwise, that's only until 2025, when Windows 10 support
| stops. Considering microsoft decided that throwing away tens
| of millions of devices is worth it in the name of security
| (while touting how green Windows 11 is, lol).
| DelightOne wrote:
| And some much better.
| denton-scratch wrote:
| > having to replace an entire Chromebook keyboard because a
| single key doesn't work.
|
| Stopped reading there.
|
| I'm typing on a Lenovo Thinkpad L430; it has a couple of
| defective keys - they're arrow keys, the keys I use most often,
| because I like to scroll using the keyboard.
|
| I bought replaccement keys online, and had to buy them from
| Poland (Lenovo don't sell them). You have to go through a
| rigmarole to select your model, and then you have to select the
| key you want, and then eyeball the key and compare it to closeups
| on the order form.
|
| Two weeks later they arrived; they look OK, but they don't fit.
| They're too big. You can't tell just by looking, but they're a
| fraction of a millimetre bigger than the hole they're supposed to
| fit in.
|
| I gave up, and replaced the Thinkpad (a replacement keyboard
| would have cost as much as the Dell Inspiron I bought second-
| hand).
| dazc wrote:
| I have two Chromebooks, both over 8 years old. The eldest, an
| ASUS, I gave to my dad and he uses it everyday. Aside from the
| odd security issue (he'll install any extension he's told to) it
| works just as well as it when it was new.
|
| The other, a Toshiba, I've dragged around the world with me, has
| had one repair, a battery replacement, and, again, works fine.
|
| Chromebooks are cheap but reliable devices that ought not to, in
| all honesty, last as long as they do.
|
| I've had two ThinkPads in the same time, one was stolen and the
| other I use daily without issue. I buy reconditioned so the cost
| scale is comparable, as is the utility and reliability.
|
| Non-story!
| carlivar wrote:
| So you have a data point of 2 Chromebooks versus the school
| I.T. admins in the article that manage thousands, and you think
| your sample size wins?
|
| How about the pointless bezel changes illustrated in the
| article? Drop your Chromebooks on the floor to crack the bezel,
| try to replace them, and get back to us for further data in
| your sample.
| dazc wrote:
| Obviously, I'm not a school admin but I would wager replacing
| a fleet of cheap Chromebooks with Macbooks (or any big brand
| Windows machines) would not work out cheaper, or less
| burdensome, or anywhere close.
| carlivar wrote:
| The point is that it shouldn't have to be binary like this.
| Why can't there be less pointless parts changes and thus
| more parts availability?
| Retric wrote:
| The issue is they where marketed and sold for an
| environment where they don't work.
| dazc wrote:
| The original laptop for kids in a school environment was
| the Intel Classmate and that was a serious piece of crap.
|
| Then came the iPad, less said about that the better.
|
| Chromebooks are many times better than this and have the
| added benefit of being cheap and, dare I say it,
| disposable.
| Retric wrote:
| Needing expensive parts or being forced to replace a
| Chromebook early means it's no longer cheap.
|
| US schools have spent over a billion dollars on
| Chromebook's, it's a significant expenditure that isn't
| lasting as long as expected.
| makeitdouble wrote:
| FTIW iPad in school seem to survive better. There's a lot
| more limitations (screen size in particular, and keyboards
| being an accessory), but looking at the number of school
| working with fleets of them, from a sheer price/durability
| ratio they're probably doing well.
| mardifoufs wrote:
| Considering how bad and dubiously sourced the article is...
| yes, actually, anecdotes might very well be just as good.
| makeitdouble wrote:
| I think this illustrate pretty well the gap between how adults
| use their devices and see as "normal" use, and what the same
| devices go through in the hand of kids using them day in day
| out and shuffling them around like they do for their books.
|
| My kid also destroyed the plastic around the hinge of an HP
| chromebook, and there was no way to find replacements part
| anywhere, locally, Amazon or AliExpress.
|
| That's where it really hurts that there are so many variations
| and models of chromebooks, as even the most popular ones will
| be a small fraction of the market and third-party support is
| just non existent.
| smoldesu wrote:
| 4 years isn't that bad. I'd wager the average Intel Macbook is
| going to run out of support sooner.
| wewtyflakes wrote:
| I'm typing this reply on 2013 Macbook Pro; maybe I got lucky
| with this one, but it doesn't show signs of stopping.
| gpm wrote:
| It is however no longer receiving updates
|
| https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/07/some-macs-are-
| gettin...
|
| As the article points out, Google's promise of 8 years of
| updates is actually longer than the average mac receives.
| ericpauley wrote:
| No longer receiving _feature_ updates. Monterey is still
| receiving security updates.
| Saris wrote:
| That would be really bad if true, a high end laptop like a
| Macbook should have support for a long time.
| smoldesu wrote:
| I agree. My 2009 Thinkpad still gets security patches, it
| would be a shame for premium devices to lose first-party
| support so soon. Goes to show the importance of an unlocked
| bootloader, I guess.
| augment003 wrote:
| [dead]
| ghaff wrote:
| My 2015 Intel Macs supported new OSs until the last version.
| They still get some updates and I make a point of basically
| just using them as browsers.
| NikolaNovak wrote:
| My 2012 t420 runs windows 10 and is nowhere near out of
| support.
| tonyedgecombe wrote:
| Lenovo won't sell you a new battery for it.
| pjmlp wrote:
| Plenty of other ones will gladly sell compatible ones.
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| Apples policy is 7 years according to the article.
| alphabettsy wrote:
| Pretty sure 8 year old Macs are still getting the latest OS and
| prior versions still get security patches so probably not.
| katbyte wrote:
| My 2015 MacBook Pro last got an update mid 2022 iirc
| mikestew wrote:
| You don't need to wager, you can look this stuff up. Which is
| probably what you should have done before posting.
| ghaff wrote:
| Not quite. 2015s didn't get Ventura. (Don't know if that's
| across the board or not but is with my two models.) Still
| getting some minor updates.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-04-22 23:01 UTC)