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

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

-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:

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

On 2024-11-27 11:13, Joel wrote:

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

you don't buy an SSD just to have one on a shelf.

>
In other words, because Apple requires these payments, you rationalize
that you didn't really need so much empty space, anyway.  Congrats.
Meanwhile, I already had that much empty space, going back years.  Is
it superfluous?  Maybe.  But then again, it's elite.

>
No, that's not what I said or meant at all.
>
You buy a computer SYSTEM.
>
It's value to the end user is what the whole SYSTEM can do.
>
Does Apple charge a premium for expanding the storage? Absolutely.
>
Is it worth it in order to get a personal computer system that works as
well as a Mac does? Absolutely.
>
And 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.
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?
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.

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?
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.
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?
-hh