Re: Joel won't, so I will (was Re: Bungling Apple Lost the Plot on Texting

-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:

On 11/27/24 3:12 PM, Joel wrote:

-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:

On 11/27/24 2:29 PM, Alan wrote:

>
having empty space isn't "elite".

>
Particularly since having the storage be internal is primarily only a
concern today for people who need the mobility of a laptop.

 
Utter nonsense, that's even worse rationalization than Alan's.

>
Not at all:  it is recognizing when system packaging is operationally
important and when it is not:  when one is being mobile (laptop), you're
typically willing to pay extra to not have external devices that have to
get plugged in.  Conversely, for a home desktop, it's not as big a deal.

What planet is this?  How can you pretend that a USB-connected
external drive is the same thing as an internal storage drive?

Look at it this way:  if you can save $300 by having an external SSD
instead of an internal SSD on your desktop PC are you going to pay the
extra for the aesthetics, or are you going to save a few bucks?

Not using Apple, I don't have that problem.

YMMV, but I'm willing to be frugal on my desktop system, so I have had
both internal (Apple OEM) & external SSDs from the start.  Not only did
it make migration easier, but its allowed me to have all of my 'ready'
data also on SSDs, so I have zero HDD latency issues when doing system
searches/data retrievals, etc.  Plus no fan noise.

I still have an old 1 TB external hard drive, I use for my backups.
It's remarkably simple, just use a file browser to copy files, and use
its extra space for temporary storage when doing a clean OS reinstall.
Boom.

Everyone else who's on a desktop can readily buy an external SSD,
including the URL link that Joel posted earlier today...
>
"WD_BLACK 1TB SN850X NVMe Internal Gaming SSD Solid State Drive - Gen4
PCIe, M.2 2280, Up to 7,300 MB/s - WDS100T2X0E ... $79.99"
>
<https://www.newegg.com/western-digital-1tb-black-sn850x-nvme/p/N82E16820250243>
>
and if it doesn't include an enclosure, add one:
>
"ORICO Aluminum M.2 NVMe SSD Enclosure, Tool-Free 10Gbps USB C Adapter,
USB 3.2 M.2 NVMe Reader, External SSD Case Thunderbolt 3 Compatible,
Supports 4TB 2230/2242/2260/2280 PCIe M-Key SSDs-PWM2-BK ... $11.69"
>
<https://www.newegg.com/p/0VN-0003-002G7>
>
>
Or of course, check to see if another model which comes with one is cheaper:
>
"SAMSUNG T7 Portable SSD 1TB - Up to 1050 MB/s - USB 3.2 Gen 2 External
Solid State Drive, Gray (MU-PC1T0T/AM) ... $89.99"
>
<https://www.newegg.com/samsung-t7-1tb-usb-3-2-gen-2/p/N82E16820147767>

 
USB?  Come on.  You're just lapping up Apple's spoiled milk.

>
Are you really trying to show everyone how dated your "expertise" is?

It's not dated, I don't want to have an external drive continually
plugged in.

USB 3.2 Gen 2 has a max transfer speed of *at least* 1250MB/sec (as Gen
2 2x2 is double that).  This means its 2x-4x faster than SATA-3.

I'm not using any SATA device, not even a DVD drive.

Likewise, I did ask you what your i5's SSD benchmarks in at, but you've
conveniently never provided a number, for given what you've described,
its probably around ~3000 MB/s, which is ~half of what Macs' SSDs do.
Gosh, at twice as fast, maybe that's why Apple's SSDs cost more!
>
Ultimately, what's the right performance to select comes down to what
your capability needs use case is for how much performance you need to
pay for.
>
For example, since you're trying to make fun of 1000+ MB/sec USB 3.2 G2
rates, how much would it cost you to upgrade your system to the ~7000
MB/s performance of the cheaper Mac Mini that you've complained about?

I'm reasonably sure that my SSD's speeds are comparable to Macs of its
time.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent.  States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.