XPost: comp.sys.mac.advocacy   
   From: crude@sausa.ge   
      
   On Tue, 10 Feb 2026 03:37:56 -0000 (UTC), Gremlin wrote:   
      
   > Alan  news:10lk4ep$2lvee$4@dont-email.me Sat, 31 Jan   
   > 2026 05:37:29 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 2026-01-29 20:15, Alan wrote:   
   >>> On 2026-01-29 19:14, Gremlin wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The NANDs Apple is using aren't standard. They are a proprietary   
   >>>> design. Those video links I shared previously go into greater detail   
   >>>> concerning that as well as the issues they tend to develop which   
   >>>> renders the computer a paperweight.   
   >>>> It's a problem which has not been fixed.   
   >>> ...and you're quite wrong.   
   >>>   
   >>> Apple uses standard NAND chips sourced from various suppliers.   
   >>>   
   >>> They do you proprietary CONTROLLER chip designs.   
   >>>   
   >>> Oops for you, huh?   
   >>   
   >> Convenient when you chose to stop replying to me...   
   >>   
   >> ...isn't it?   
   >>   
   >>:-)   
   >   
   > I'm aware of your interest in the game of semantics as well as a few   
   > other Snit like qualities you have. with that,   
   > We have one snit already and that's more than anyone needs. Unlike Snit,   
   > and possibly yourself?, I continue to work for a living and am not on   
   > usenet every day. There could be days if not weeks or more between   
   > replies.   
   > Especially if my job requires me to go out of state. So slow your roll   
   > and don't have a PE here. No girl appreciates that, btw. :)   
   >   
   > Semantics and a few other things are your goto for trolling. The subject   
   > change was funny. A very adult thing to do. Especially if you didn't   
   > 'win' the arguement. Just so you know though, I never considered this to   
   > be an arguement. You were years behind concerning Apple and I've brought   
   > you upto speed in so far as what you can/cannot do when the internal SSD   
   > dies on you. I wasn't writing about no longer being able to write to it   
   > reliably (at all); I was specific in stating when it dies. As in   
   > hardware failure dies. When that happens you have a paperweight.   
   >   
   > For a PC it's almost always no big deal. Replace drive, go on about your   
   > day. If the drive is soldered and you have a shorted NAND, remove the   
   > NANDS and replace with new if you want; there's no specialized firmware   
   > or mating process that has occured making the new chips unable to   
   > function on the board. Unlike with Apple. You can't just do that. They   
   > don't like keeping things standard/normal. Even if it was originally   
   > before they got their hands on it. Pesky semantics. You probably thought   
   > you had something there; as you thought you did when you googled 'can I   
   > use an external drive to boot my mac' (sure, but, on a modern mac, the   
   > internal SSD has to be functional) - that's one hell of a special design   
   > decision. That you're required to have a working internal drive in order   
   > to boot from an external drive.   
   >   
   > I've stated this several times, I've supported my statements. Your   
   > efforts to ignore them and place conditions on how you will review the   
   > evidence or that you don't appreciate the formats provided and demand   
   > they be provided in another or it didn't happen in the first place -   
   > really doesn't matter. At this point, We're just going in circles here.   
   > There's no point or advantage for either of us to do this. It makes   
   > about as much sense as -hh did when he brought up capacitors being   
   > soldered onto the mainboards of PCs and Mac. Of course they are - and a   
   > lot more electronics. They have several possible uses. Quite common   
   > components actually. Nothing to do with the subject I was writing about   
   > though. I give them a rocking A for effort concerning the troll by doing   
   > that though. It was very creative! And not in the least bit sarcastic or   
   > made to be insulting. I respect that.   
   > It was good.   
   >   
   > I work on PCs as well, mostly PCs. I've never stated that they were   
   > perfect. I've replaced blown components on them too. I've changed the   
   > display panels, touchpads, keyboards, power jacks. Soldered SSD drive on   
   > some real cheap bastards, as well as the socket style where changing was   
   > easy. I'm not sold on the method a lot of them use to actually hold the   
   > SSD in place though. I think it's a dumb thing to do. Replaced blown   
   > diodes, Mosfets, resistors, etc. The important thing and only reason I   
   > even mentioned them is that those components fail on anything and are   
   > not that difficult or expensive in many cases to replace. Most   
   > importantly, the PCs which had these issues, didn't require many   
   > components to be replaced and were all put back in service- they didn't   
   > blow up anything MATED or that would otherwise totally screw you. FFS,   
   > you could replace the damn CPU if you needed to do so. Lack of   
   > proprietary is a good thing.   
   >   
   > Btw, changing the subject line? C'mon. I know you aren't a total lamer.   
      
   I should mention that I recently found out that Apple is not the only   
   company soldering NVMes onto the motherboard anymore. Dell decided to   
   imitate, and they're having similar problems: computer won't boot, data   
   can't be retrieved. Unfortunately, Apple has way too much influence in the   
   computing world.   
      
   Going forward, I'll always be checking whether the machine I'm purchasing   
   has components which can be removed and replaced. After all, I've had to   
   replace the NVMes in my old MSI and the wireless chip in the Zephyrus G14   
   I use at home (it was an awful Mediatek MT7921). It makes absolutely no   
   sense to have a machine in 2026 the same way it was a bad idea in the late   
   90s.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)