XPost: comp.sys.mac.advocacy   
   From: nobody@haph.org   
      
   -hh  news:10lkr4u$2q84a$1@dont-email.me   
   Sat, 31 Jan 2026 12:04:46 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote:   
      
   > On 1/30/26 23:04, Gremlin wrote:   
   > Sure, but now as Google the same question, but replace "mac" with "PC".   
   > For this, I got the following fact-check on you:   
      
   I fail to see how this is a fact check on me? I didn't say that only Apple   
   SSD would die if a single NAND went. I thought it was commonly understood   
   that's how SSD worked in the first place?   
      
   The important distinction between the two though is that the PC doesn't turn   
   into a paperweight when the internal SSD dies. The Apple does.   
      
   > Since per this source both Macs & PCs are subject to effectively the   
   > same failure chain, my conclusion is that you've committed the logical   
   > fallacy of trying to make a distinction without a difference.   
      
   Incorrect. See above. The PC doesn't turn into a paperweight when and if   
   this occurs. The Apples do.   
      
   > If a NAND chip (the storage chip) on a PC motherboard or SSD has   
   > physically shorted to ground, the device is usually considered   
   > functionally dead ("a paperweight") in terms of immediate operation.   
   > However, it is not necessarily a permanent loss of data, though   
   > repairing it is extremely difficult.   
      
   Nice try, but if the SSD on the PC is soldered; you can de solder it and   
   replace it. It's usually not converted into a propriety package as is the   
   case with Apple.   
      
   >> I've reposted all of the links I've shared along with a considerable   
   >> bit from google c/p. I hope this information is satisfactory?   
   >   
   > Now that you have, I don't see any particularly strong argument within   
   > your cites for why you're choosing to criticize one vendor, versus the   
   > whole industry's design approach.   
      
   PCs don't become bricks if the SSD dies due to hardware failure; the PC can   
   be fixed. The Apple is generally fucked as is. It'll be replace the computer   
   or the mainboard for the Apple. And if you opt to replace the mainboard,   
   don't forget that your touchpad,display panel etc are mated to the old one.   
   That will have to be corrected *if* it can be corrected.   
      
   >> I'm not sure why it was brought up in the first place concerning   
   >> protection.   
   >   
   > It wasn't raised by me, since I merely pointed it out in my question.   
      
   I didn't raise it either.    
      
   >> I wrote nothing about any protection it would offer vs soldered on. I   
   >> can't think of any protection off the top of my head from an electrical   
   >> perspective of that.   
   >   
   > Then why was it raised?   
      
   You'd have to ask the person who raised it?   
      
   > Precisely, so then why was it raised?  And associated with this?   
      
   See above.   
      
   >>> I see no logical reason why socket-vs-soldered would make any   
   >>> difference for that claimed failure mode, so I asked what difference   
   >>> it would make.   
   >>   
   >> I didn't mention it in relation to the failure mode because I too   
   >> couldn't see a logical reason why it would have made a difference.   
   >> Which is why I didn't mention it in this context in the first place.   
   >   
   > But it was nevertheless mentioned, so in what context was this done?   
      
   You'd have to ask the individual who mentioned it.   
      
   >> We shouldn't have that issue because I didn't make any claims   
   >> concerning more/less protection if socketed vs soldered. All I've   
   >> stated (and supported, thanks; sorry Alan) is that the modern Apples   
   >> effectively become paperweights if the internal soldered on SSD fails.   
   >   
   > Contemplate if their SSD had been socketed:  would they still be bricked   
   > for each of the two failure modes, or not?   
      
   The reason they become paperweights if it's not a hardware failure is due to   
   firmware that becomes no longer accessable because Apple thought it wise to   
   store such information on the same NANDs which make up the SSD drive. If the   
   NAND shorts to ground - you could fix that issue, but the laptop won't come   
   back to life by doing so. Much more work is involved and the chances of   
   success aren't that great and it would be expensive. I have the same mindset   
   when it comes to using a wear part; I won't install a used one to attempt to   
   repair a system.   
      
   There was (might still be) a 1TB storage drive available. You'd have to pay   
   for the board (600+) plus a considerable amount of bench time required to   
   tear the new board apart and manually de solder all of the necessary   
   components. Then goto the affected laptops mainboard and remove some   
   specific components and replace them with the ones you harvested. Then, you   
   have to have some way of getting critical firmware back into them. Once you   
   deal with the controller IC that doesn't recognize them.   
      
      
   >> One doesn't need to reach the max writes on an SSD in Apples case for   
   >> the machine to die prematurely and fail in a catastrophic manner   
   >> because of the way in which Apple decided to design it.   
   >   
   > Same is true for PCs too.   
      
   Not really. PCs don't have mated components. If I smashed the display panel   
   this computer is using - I can buy a new one and replace it. There is no   
   chip that's going to complain that this panel wasn't the one it was using   
   previously and refuse to let me use it.   
      
   if an SSD goes on a PC it won't usually take the rig down with it. If by   
   some chance a NAND explodes and somehow shorts the power rail out on the PC,   
   this is still a fixable condition and the SSD drive can usually be replaced.   
   If the drive cannot be replaced, it can be removed (the short cleared) and   
   the PC switched to using external media to boot and function. Modern Apples   
   cannot; they don't have critical firmware on it's own chip anymore. They   
   thought it was a better idea to store it on the NANDS themselves. PC's don't   
   do that.   
      
      
   >> One shouldn't have a paperweight if   
   >> the SSD dies for any reason in the first place, imo. The owner of the   
   >> gear should be able to replace the drive (or switch to using external)   
   >> and go about their day. Not do some serious soldering work or replace   
   >> the mainboard or buy a new computer to resolve the issue. A computer   
   >> shouldn't die when the internal primary storage drive does.   
   >   
   > That's merely your personal opinion on design priorities.   
      
   I don't think it's a good design to have to remove the cab of the truck to   
   gain access to the brake lines, either. Or have to tear into the top of the   
   engine to replace the starter. Components that you know are wear and subject   
   to failure should be accessable so that they can be replaced when the time   
   comes. Not stashed behind a pile of other stuff as is the case with the   
   vehicle examples OR installed in such a manner that it's difficult if not   
   impossible to replace - As is the case with Apples design.   
      
   >> Please explain how one gains additional security by mating the   
   >> controller for your display panel? How does being unable to just swap a   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)