Nowhere in my comment did I present a dichotomy. Actually, I went out of my way to
avoid a dichotomy.
Beyond that, my argument, more simply, is the following:
1. Apple has a set of philosophies and priorities in design. Within these, repairability is a lower priority than Vice and some customers would prefer.
2. From those priorities comes expertise and processes that result in the creation of new products and entirely new product categories.
3. Apple has seen success unlike any other company from those resultant products. Not just successful, but the most successful ever. No other company has replicated some of those products.
4. Given the above, Apple sees no reason to make any changes to their design priorities. Even if those priorities have resulted in missteps, they have been overwhelmingly rewarded by their decisions. Indeed, it is plainly obvious that it would be foolish to change those priorities based on the voices of Vice and Louis Rossman who look at a part of the design but not the whole. This is akin to fans asking LeBron James to take fewer shots because he missed a single game-winner.
That is to say, even if the "thin and light" priority has resulted in missteps (I think this is objectively true, re: keyboards, MBP screen cable, etc), Apple would not have been able to create a product like the Apple Watch without the expertise and processes that flow out of those priorities.
I think Apple can, and most likely will, make adjustments to the processes that come from those priorities to correct and prevent those missteps, without changing the priorities themselves.