I was talking about a textbook, not the devices. I think that was made pretty clear by my use of the word “textbook”.

> the tuition fees are that, doesn't mean that's the price.

Seeing as I’m talking about what people have to pay, that’s irrelevant. What even is your comment? You’re taking what I said and responding to entirely different things. That’s not how we have a productive, good faith conversation.

> Hard to find sources, but the actual price/student in Germany seems to be ~10k Euro/student/year.

There are more countries in the EU besides Germany. In some, you don’t pay at all.

Furthermore, each college has different costs, there’s not just a fixed cost for student for everything. The costs per student for philosophy are not the comparable to the costs per student for veterinary medicine.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47806249

Points: 3

# Comments: 1

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47804719

Additionally, the page says:

> more than 50 Playdates have been provided to students

Provided. To me that doesn’t seem like the students are paying for them. From other comments in the thread of former Duke students using iPods, it seems Duke lends you the hardware.

Furthermore, “tuition is expensive so buying expensive hardware is the least of your problems” is not a good argument. There’s a reason people in the USA drown in student debt. Whatever you can save is good.

To be more precise, the people want to live within a certain standard. I can’t think of anyone¹ who really wants a job. Purpose, something to do, money (which translates to standard of living), recognition, sure, but those don’t really necessitate a job, as in something you have to do on the regular to be able to survive through the indirection of money.

The distinction is important because those who have the power you described are also the ones who have the biggest incentive to perpetuate this notion that everyone needs a job and that there’s no other way the system could work. Thus, by framing it in the context of jobs we’re discussing on their terms and have already lost.

¹ For sure there’ll be someone, but not enough to be meaningful.

And not everyone on HN is in Duke, or North Carolina, or the USA.

As someone from the EU who was always curious about the Playdate, I never got one because the price becomes even more absurd once you factor shipping and taxes. It easily goes to double or more. I wish Panic all the luck with the console, but I think we can agree that paying Switch 2 / PlayStation 5 prices for one is hard to justify.

The weird choice is having a belt and suspenders. That only works as a fashion choice, which makes little sense for an explorer.

It seems like every thread talking about Firefox always has someone asking that question, so if you search back you should find plenty of reasons. Unfortunately, it’s been my observation that valid and polite criticisms always get downvoted. I don’t understand why. It’s not like downvotes are going to make the problems disappear.

Most of us would like Firefox to succeed, and it’s none of our faults that Mozilla is constantly neglecting it and going off on wild goose projects which get promptly abandoned.

Which is why I used a normal consumer as an example.

> None of the information you're responding to is false, and it's perhaps worth asking yourself why you're here defending Apple.

I’m not defending Apple, I’m defending accuracy. When someone says something inaccurate about someone or something I oppose, I try to correct that too. It’s important that arguments are based on truth, because when they are not people start dismissing the true with the false.

My comment history shows I’m an Apple user but am constantly criticising its current state and Tim Cook. You’ll find more comments of mine criticising than praising them.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

Perhaps it’s worth asking yourself why you see someone making an argument once and immediately assume they may have ulterior motives, and why you’re actively ignoring the arguments which do not feed your view, including my clear and repeated assertions in the thread that Apple should absolutely do better.

> There's an easier argument that is simply "But Samsung!".

Which was not once my argument. I abhor whataboutism.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

I’d appreciate if you didn’t straw man.

Also in the link I shared:

* Google Pixel 10: 6

* Nothing Phone 3: 3

* Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7: 3

* Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge: 5 (Provisional)

And many more.

So clearly Apple does not “score the lowest”.

> Isn't that what the scores above tell

So no, it’s not what the above scores tell, because you were actively selective. If you scroll down the list in good faith (with is sorted from Newest to Oldest) what you see is that Apple is not the worst and has been getting better starting with the 15.

> Polite reminder that companies don't care about us if we love them or support them or not. Especially online.

You don’t have to tell me that, I’m an active critic of Tim Cook and the current state of Apple.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

I’m also pretty vocal about not shilling for corporations and billionaires which would sell your nuts in a heartbeat. But I do care about criticism being valid, because when it’s not people ignore the valid points.

Again, Apple should absolutely do better and so should other companies. But lets call them out on what they actually do (or don’t), false accusations don’t help.

Not true at all. I have a close friend (not an electronics or programming nerd in any way) which has replaced the battery (and a screen) on multiple iPhones with nothing more than iFixit instructions.

> you can't safely expand their life

Again, not true. See above.

> with so many untaped opportunities.

Which is obvious I agree with, since I said they absolutely should be better at repairability. But consider the dismissive tone of the original comment, which is justified with false information.

To give you an exaggerated example, let’s say someone is telling you about all the awful practices Nestlé engages in. All of them are true, but then they end with “and their CEO is literally Hitler, who survived and changed his face due to an agreement with the Beelzebub, and is going to control humanity through chocolate”. At that point most people would dismiss them as a nut job and ignore the other true valid points as fabrications too.

Which is why we should criticise, yes, but based on truth, not lies and rage bait.

Tell that to iFixit.

https://www.ifixit.com/repairability/smartphone-repairabilit...

I’d trust their assessment more than a vague “everyone knows”. There’s nothing “everyone knows”.

Should Apple be better at repairability? Absolutely! But let’s criticise accurately and in good faith. When we don’t, points are easily dismissed and no one takes the valid parts seriously.

I suspect the OP made a mistake and forgot the word “not” in “I'm accusing Apple of lying, but I'd like to get more context than” (otherwise the “but” makes little sense).

I expect they are asking in good faith if there are audits, not accusing the auditors of being corrupt.

https://www.apple.com/environment/pdf/Apple_Environmental_Pr...

To see previous ones, simply change the year in the URL.

You can get to that from apple.com/environment or apple.com/2030 (which redirects to the former). Near the end, right before and in the appendix you can find third-party independent reviews and assessments.

Now, are those trustworthy? I don’t know. But it gives you the context to start looking. The broader document will also probably help answer the other specific questions.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47786794

Points: 56

# Comments: 26