XPost: comp.os.linux.advocacy   
   From: crude@sausa.ge   
      
   On 2025-12-13 4:55 p.m., -hh wrote:   
   > On 12/13/25 07:22, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   >> On 2025-12-12 11:11 p.m., Alan wrote:   
   >>> On 2025-12-12 18:36, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   >>>> On 2025-12-12 8:18 p.m., Alan wrote:   
   >>>>> On 2025-12-12 16:56, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 2025-12-12 3:20 p.m., Alan wrote:   
   >>>>>>> ...etc...   
   >>>>>>> Are Apple's storage upgrade prices really "ridiculous"?   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> No, they aren't.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Here in Canada, I changed the 1TB nvme in my laptop to a 2TB one   
   >>>>>> supporting OPAL hardware encryption for $175. It's actually   
   >>>>>> increased in price to $255 now because of issues with memory   
   >>>>>> chips. Meanwhile, upgrading the 512GB on the highest end MacBook   
   >>>>>> Air to a 2TB nvme would cost me $900. I have no choice but to do   
   >>>>>> it at purchase because Apple doesn't allow me to change the   
   >>>>>> storage after I've received the machine.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> That is ridiculous, especially since there is _no_ speed advantage   
   >>>>>> to using what Apple sells.   
   >   
   > Hmmm...reviews in years past illustrated otherwise; my recollection is   
   > that Apple has employed RAID 0 SSD boot drives, which is why my 3+yr old   
   > Mac's SSD benchmarks at ~5,500MB/sec R/W, despite its then-current PCIe   
   > 3.0 x4 tech whose bandwidth limit is ~3,500 MB/s.   
      
   What do current benchmarks show you between two comparable machines at   
   the same price?   
      
   >>>>>> I'm sure that you'll defend this practice of theirs, but I   
   >>>>>> consider their pricing to be ridiculous and many YouTubers voicing   
   >>>>>> their opinion on the matter share my opinion.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> I'm not defending the practice.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> I'm pointing out that it's what EVERY company does.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> You might be right. Either way, it is a disgusting practise. People   
   >>>> should reject any hardware company which provides too little storage   
   >>>> for the era, which demands exorbitant prices for upgrades or doesn't   
   >>>> allow future upgrades.   
   >>>   
   >>> "People should"?   
   >>>   
   >>> People do what they feel is in their best interest.   
   >>>   
   >>> People LIKE laptops that are as thin as possible and that means   
   >>> integrating components.   
   >>>   
   >>> No one is forcing them to buy.   
   >>   
   >> Yes, people should. The more people disregard that Apple prevents them   
   >> from upgrading, fixing their machines and getting a respectable amount   
   >> of storage for the time period, the more Apple will double down on the   
   >> ripoff. As it is, Apple is benefiting from the fact that customers are   
   >> looking for an alternative to Windows and enjoy the Apple experience,   
   >> especially if they own other Apple products.   
   >   
   > Or...its that Apple has an obligation to their Stockholders /s   
      
   I doubt providing less bang for the buck is part of what the Apple   
   stockholders want the company to offer. Higher profit margins, for sure,   
   but not an inevitable backlash from customers who eventually realize   
   that they're being ripped off.   
      
   >> However, it's just a matter of time before people realize that they   
   >> can get the 20-hour battery life from much less expensive Snapdragon   
   >> laptops, that they can get double the storage and RAM by paying a few   
   >> hundred less and that for the equivalent price of an Apple laptop that   
   >> can probably play a card game or two, they can get a capable gaming   
   >> machine.   
   >   
   > Assuming that Microsoft finally does a good job with MS-Windows on ARM,   
   > and gets their software vendors to follow with compiling native Apps.   
      
   Admittedly, I have yet to use an ARM-equipped machine with Windows 11. I   
   imagine it can't be that great if Dell is opting for Core 7 Ultra rather   
   than more Snapdragon X laptops.   
      
   >> Additionally, instead of the seven years an Apple laptop lasts, a   
   >> decent PC machine can easily last a decade, especially since   
   >> manufacturers are not routinely soldering components to the   
   >> motherboard the way Apple does.   
   >   
   > Wish that was the case, because I've lost some Dell laptops from swollen   
   > batteries at <3 years life:  it doesn't do much good to have upgradable   
   > RAM/SSD designs when the office IT Department then won't even touch   
   > replacing a battery: they just replace the whole kit 'n kaboodle with   
   > new, reimage it to set it up & migrate user data.  Ditto for broken   
   > smartphones too.   
      
   With batteries, that might be the result of the offending part being   
   glued to other components. My own laptop allows me to replace my battery   
   fairly easily if I choose to do so, but I notice that quite a few   
   manufacturers are imitating Apple because of the thinness obsession and   
   gluing or soldering components.   
      
   --   
   CrudeSausage   
   John 14:6   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)