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

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

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.

>
It's an answer to Apple's arbitrary hand-holding of what you can do
with your expensive device from them.

>
I asked you why using an external drive on a computer that isn't going
anywhere "sucks"...
>
...and you can't come up with a single actual reason.

 
It's just not as elite, the computer should have capacity for all the
internal hardware you might want, Apple's only option for that is
their starting-at-7-grand Mac Pro.

>
So the best reason you can muster is a child's brag about "eliteness"?

Do you want to be the "child" with the second-rate toy, or the king of
the hill?

Intel and/or M$ failed me, with regard to Win11 and the CPU video with
the new monitor, I admit that.  But the NVIDIA card largely solved
that problem.  It was the right tactic under the circumstances, a
useful upgrade to the system, giving me more options, as well as
support for the monitor in and of itself.

Excuses.
>
Those you are expert at.

It's not an excuse, it's an explanation of what happened.  I couldn't
anticipate the CPU video so poorly handling 4K, but when it did, I
knew the solution.  Big F'ing deal.

--
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.