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

On 2024-11-28 16:52, Joel wrote:

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
 

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

>
By considering the actual performance of a USB 3.2 storage device?
>
You read exactly like the superficially "expert" 1337 Linux dweeb you are:
>
"USB???? Uggh... ...USB sux, man!".

>
It doesn't suck for an external drive, using an external drive sucks
as a continuous solution.

>
Why?

  If I want two drives, I want them both internal.  However, since I
have no wish to dual-boot Winblows, I don't need a second drive.

1. That's not an answer. That's saying the same thing by different words.
2. Having two drives has nothing to do with whether or not you are dual-booting. I would have thought an "expert" would have understood that.

 

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.

>
So you have no actual backup solution at all beyond, "I'll copy the
files over manually"?

>
Is there supposed to be a more straightforward way?

>
Yes. Use proper backup software that keeps track of everything that
needs to be backed up, and does so on an automated schedule.
>
Kind of like Time Machine does on a Mac.
>
I meant, EXACTLY like Time Machine does on a Mac.
>
:-)

  I would wager I could install something equivalent under Linux, but
it's not a vital need.

It IS a vital need to anyone who is serious about his or her data.

 

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

>
Because it's against your religion, or... ...what?

>
Well, optical drives are basically unneeded, and SATA storage drives
are outdated.  The NVMe is the only internal media, I install Win/Lin
from USB media, and my external hard drive is for backups.

>
That doesn't make SATA devices worse.

  NVMe is state-of-the-art.

Still not an answer.

 

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

Are you, though?
>
:-)

>
It might not be precisely the same, but is it really something I'd
notice?  When I initially installed Win10, it was effortless.  Doing
cumulative updates is where it gets slow (a drawback of Winblows,
unless that's gotten better in the last year).

And yet you won't use a SATA drive even if you wouldn't notice the
difference...

  Using SATA when NVMe is an option isn't elite enough, right.

It's seems you're looking for "bragging rights", not utility.