XPost: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy, comp.sys.mac.advocacy   
   From: nuh-uh@nope.com   
      
   On 2026-01-05 06:27, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   > On 2026-01-04 10:48 p.m., Alan wrote:   
   >> On 2026-01-04 19:33, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   >>> On 2026-01-04 21:41, Alan wrote:   
   >>>> On 2026-01-04 18:33, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   >>>>> On 2026-01-04 19:29, Alan wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 2026-01-03 18:15, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> they can depend on to obfuscate their drawbacks and   
   >>>>>>>>> exaggerate their better features, making it seem like   
   >>>>>>>>> the investment in a Mac isn't overpaying Apple but in   
   >>>>>>>>> fact an upgrade over its competition, a proposition   
   >>>>>>>>> easily refuted by actually using the three platforms   
   >>>>>>>>> enough to see how mediocre Apple's crapware really is.   
   >>>>>>>> And yet you can never actually articulate something that   
   >>>>>>>> either Linux or Windows does better.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Servers and supercomputers for Linux, gaming for Windows.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> First: not what people care about for a PERSONAL computer.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> You asked what Linux does better (still available to quote   
   >>>>> above) and I told you.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> In the context of what APPLE provides, yes.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Do you see the difference?   
   >>>   
   >>> Theoretically, if Apple were to decide to produce a server product   
   >>> again, I'm sure that the line of processors would do the job and   
   >>> the product would be quite impressive. Nevertheless, it would   
   >>> inevitably cost more and provide little to no benefit over the lower-   
   >>> cost, more easily maintained Linux servers. I think Apple realized   
   >>> that it's not a market they can easily penetrate.   
   >>   
   >> But this discussion is about how Apple was supposedly "crapware"   
   >> compared to Linux or Windows.   
   >>   
   >> So none of what you said about servers is in any way relevant.   
   >   
   > Well, since you insist on me being on point, Apple is crapware because   
   > the moment the NVMe your machine comes from which also can't be replaced   
   > reaches its TBW, the computer becomes a literal paperweight because the   
   > component sends a signal to the rest of the machine to prevent it from   
   > turning on. I believe that is the definition of crap. I'm happy that I'm   
   > now back on point.   
      
   Where did you read that:   
      
   'the component sends a signal to the rest of the machine to prevent it   
   from turning on.'   
      
   >   
   >>>>>> Second: "more" is not "better".   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Being able to play every game under the sun and with excellent   
   >>>>> performance is a lot more important to a gamer than knowing that   
   >>>>> two or three titles Apple selected run fine on Apple's hardware.   
   >>>>> So yes, _more_ games and _more_ frames are indeed better, Linux   
   >>>>> is a better option that MacOS for gamers who don't want to use   
   >>>>> Windows, but Windows is still king for now.   
   >>>> It isn't BETTER from a computing standpoint.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> But if you want to make that your standard, then Linux is clearly   
   >>>> MUCH "worse" than Apple...   
   >>>>   
   >>>> ...because Apple provides far more of the software packages that   
   >>>> people want to use.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Same standard, you agree, right?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> (Man, you are bad at this!)   
   >>>>   
   >>>> (BTW, that was all AMUSEMENT. :-) )   
   >>>   
   >>> You're moving goal posts. You're talking about what MacOS's   
   >>   
   >> Nope!   
   >>   
   >> I adopted YOUR goalposts.   
   >>   
   >>> competition does better and I mentioned gaming which, whether you   
   >>   
   >> But the topic was how Apple COMPUTERS were supposedly worse AS COMPUTERS.   
   >   
   > My computers don't self-destruct, Apple's do.   
      
   You've yet to prove that.   
      
   You've just asserted it.   
      
   >   
   >>> like it or not, is still something people do on their _desktops_ and   
   >>> _laptops_, a segment Apple caters to. As it is, Linux has already   
   >>> conquered the portable gaming market as companies see the benefit of   
   >>> using the Linux-based SteamOS on portable devices rather than   
   >>> Windows. Still with Steam and Proton, Linux will allow you to play   
   >>> 90% or more of what's available for Windows with a small performance   
   >>> penalty on NVIDIA GPUs and better performance on AMD GPUs. MacOS's   
   >>> compatibility with the large number of titles already available for   
   >>> Windows is nowhere near 90%. In most cases, Apple users have to hope   
   >>> that someone is nice enough to port a game.   
   >>>   
   >>> So not only can Linux do everything the Mac can but it can also:   
   >>>   
   >>> 1) Run servers and provide a complete set of tools for remote access   
   >>> and maintenance. 2) Play about 90% of all games ever released.   
   >>>   
   >>> Both of those at _no_ extra charge and on hardware that costs half   
   >>> of what Apple charges.   
   >>   
   >> None of which is relevant to the topic that was being discussed.   
   >>   
   >> You're not just repeating yourself.   
   >   
   > You're right, I'm back on point and I present this as evidence of what   
   > I'm talking about. Woe is me that instead of doing everything this   
   > gentleman does to fix a dead MacBook, I can simply pull the old NVMe out   
   > and put in a new one. We're missing out on Apple's greatest feature, I   
   > suppose.   
      
   Do you think that your smartphone should have a replaceable NVMe drive, too?   
      
   No? Why is that?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)