XPost: comp.sys.mac.advocacy, alt.computer.workshop   
   From: nuh-uh@nope.com   
      
   On 2026-02-09 16:17, Joel W. Crump wrote:   
   > On 2/9/26 7:04 PM, Alan wrote:   
   >   
   >>>>>>>>> You don't seem to have anything negative to say about Apple.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> I have lots of negative things to say.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> You're just not paying attention.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> That's obviously a lie, you won't admit the SSD overcharging issue,   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> WHAT "overcharging issue" would that be: the alleged 13V "spike"...   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> ...which applies whether or not your SSD is soldered or socketed?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Cost, not electricity, as the rest of my sentence you split said.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>> something that is transparently price gouging, no matter how much   
   >>>>>>> it's talked about you stick to your guns, because you literally   
   >>>>>>> are an Apple employee, paid to post here.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> No. I am not.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> OK.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Charging what people are willing to pay is NOT "overcharging"...   
   >>>>   
   >>>> ...UNLESS THEY HAVE NO OPTION BUT TO PAY.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Since Apple isn't the only maker of personal computers, people are   
   >>>> willingly choosing to buy what Apple offers...   
   >>>>   
   >>>> ...precisely because it isn't about the components.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> It is about buying a whole system that they find works well for them.   
   >>>   
   >>> That's provably false.  The cost of upgrading the SSD/etc. makes the   
   >>> "whole system's" price outrageous.  256 GB even being offered is part   
   >>> of the scheme - it's fair to say it's enough for some people, sure,   
   >>> but a lot of people are gonna say "well, I can't get by with that,   
   >>> but I must have a Mac, so I'll just bite the bullet and pay $200   
   >>> extra". That's the *definition* of price gouging.   
   >>   
   >> If it's "provably false"...you really should have said something that   
   >> proves it.   
   >>   
   >> "Outrageous" is an adjective and proves nothing.   
   >   
   >   
   > OK, then, tell me straight out, answer the question for once, why is the   
   > upgrade $200?  What about a 512 GB SSD obviates that cost?   
      
   Nothing has to.   
      
   PEOPLE BUY SYSTEMS!   
      
   The question they ask (the rational people) is:   
      
   "Do I get a whole SYSTEM that works for me at the price I'm am being   
   offered?"   
      
   >   
   >   
   >>>>>>>>>>> How do you not see the point, we know Apple sells a lot, the   
   >>>>>>>>>>> question is whether this really makes sense if consumers knew   
   >>>>>>>>>>> what they were actually paying for.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> And once again, you assume that only you are smart enough to   
   >>>>>>>>>> figure out this kind of thing.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> I don't assume any such thing, actually.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> That is LITERALLY what you assumed.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> "If consumers knew" assumes that they do NOT.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> So that means I think *I* am the only one who sees through this?   
   >>>>>>> 'Cause I am not.  Lots of people hate Apple for very similar   
   >>>>>>> reasons to mine.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> "Hate"? Dude... ...HATING a company because they sell their   
   >>>>>> products at prices people are willing to pay is messed up.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> You should seek out a mental health professional.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> No.  Because I see right through what Apple is doing.  You are a   
   >>>>> nice guy, more or less, but you are a privileged, (presumably)   
   >>>>> white person with the means to afford Apple's stuff.  As such, you   
   >>>>> are a cash cow to them.  A willing victim of their price gouging.   
   >>>>> Your money to spend, sure, you may think it's worth it, I don't   
   >>>>> dispute that, but it's still completely ridiculous that half of a   
   >>>>> 512 GB SSD is $200.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> And out come the personal insults...   
   >>>   
   >>> Maybe, but you didn't refute the point.   
   >>   
   >> Because there were no points of substance to refute.   
   >   
   >   
   > Again, explain why the SSD upgrade is so expensive.   
      
   Because they can.   
      
   But people are willing to pay for it.   
      
   >   
   >   
   >>>>>>> AppleCare if you pay extra?  Nonstandard interface ports that   
   >>>>>>> they claim are better 'cause they say so?  What a joke.  What a   
   >>>>>>> total cult.  And you're the ringleader.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> What "non-standard" ports has Apple ever used, since ADB (Apple   
   >>>>>> Desktop Bus)?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> You know, I actually have to concede something here.  The EU forced   
   >>>>> them to make iPhone jacks USB-C, which was a downgrade to make them   
   >>>>> compatible with other manufacturers' chargers.  So, in that   
   >>>>> respect, I actually think Apple was superior, albeit for the   
   >>>>> function of charging the device, not using it.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Apple introduced most of the ports that advanced the personal   
   >>>> computer standard.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> When IBM-style PCs had only parallel ports, Apple introduced Macs   
   >>>> with SCSI that allowed up to 7 devices to be attached to one port.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> When the IBM-style PC was using ISA slots, Apple introduced Macs   
   >>>> that used a far superior open standard called NuBus.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> USB: an open standard first widely available on the original iMac.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Firewire: an open standard far faster than USB at the time.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Thunderbolt: an open standard far faster than USB at its introduction.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Etc.   
   >>>   
   >>> I would mostly not challenge those points.  I would point out that   
   >>> the proprietary nature of some of these features supports the idea   
   >>> that Apple trends nonstandard, though.   
   >>   
   >> Of those, the only proprietary one was ADB.   
   >>   
   >> Everything else was an open standard.   
   >>   
   >> So your second sentence proceeds from a false premise.   
   >   
   >   
   > Heh, no, dude, they pretended they were open standards.  In practice,   
   > they were Apple proprietary.   
      
   No...dude:   
      
   They were open standards. And ALL of them were obviously, objectively   
   better than the standards that happened to chosen for IBM-style PCs.   
      
   >   
   >   
   >>>>>>>   The best Mac app is Microsoft Office!  Imagine!  I hate that   
   >>>>>>> shit when it's on Winblows, but I dug the Mac version when I saw   
   >>>>>>> it in 2010.  But most of the small apps I downloaded/registered/   
   >>>>>>> whatever for then-OS X were just pathetic crapware, made by   
   >>>>>>> brain- damaged nerds. Luckily, neither Windows nor macOS are   
   >>>>>>> necessary, since GNU/ Linux gives me the same sleekness of macOS   
   >>>>>>> while improving on Windows' robustness overall, a win-win.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> You've yet to actually articulate a problem that ANY macOS   
   >>>>>> software in particular has.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> What's some piece of software that YOU ACTUALLY USE that is better   
   >>>>>> than the macOS equivalent?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Linux is a better system to run Unix software than macOS, and I   
   >>>>> prefer the average app developed for the Unix platform to the   
   >>>>> average macOS app.   
   >>>   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)