Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.mobile.android,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Joel won't, so I will (was Re: Bungling Apple Lost the Plot on
 Texting
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2024 13:56:49 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 123
Message-ID: <viaov1$nh0h$2@dont-email.me>
References: <vi5nh2$3lurl$1@dont-email.me>
 <02pckj9ra93ph3i2o4ukohrcb77abqsj1f@4ax.com> <vi5oj0$3lurl$5@dont-email.me>
 <80rckj1bferjoe36ukvf0hdt8eqk5561pr@4ax.com> <vi5vgn$3n6ll$1@dont-email.me>
 <9g7ekj56e3ed15bs1f434sg1bijurfru65@4ax.com> <vi7mbj$3tkm$1@dont-email.me>
 <gnrekjdbac5fsgkbqjtu2ku6grmskcruhj@4ax.com> <vi7ruv$3tkm$2@dont-email.me>
 <vi7st4$3slt$3@dont-email.me> <27vekjtp4q263gmgdo83cqar5048tujlj4@4ax.com>
 <vi82qu$3slt$4@dont-email.me> <jp4fkjpsiqkt1aij7to6svq9dudsij2p1r@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2024 22:56:50 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8eb1ee904967dcb06d200fb48331ab58";
	logging-data="771089"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19m277eWUCq7XjFAchg6sfeCdsCG/qm4MI="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:vPAi9NkzeRAiUEAMxtAO0nCzS1U=
In-Reply-To: <jp4fkjpsiqkt1aij7to6svq9dudsij2p1r@4ax.com>
Content-Language: en-CA
Bytes: 6162

On 2024-11-27 13:52, Joel wrote:
> -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?

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!".

> 
> 
>> 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.

Why is external storage for a desktop a "problem" at all?

> 
> 
>> 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.

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

> 
> 
>>>> 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.

Why? Why would that matter?

> 
> 
>> 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.

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

> 
> 
>> 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.
Are you, though?

:-)