XPost: comp.os.linux.advocacy   
   From: recscuba_google@huntzinger.com   
      
   On 12/13/25 18:17, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   > 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?   
      
   Don't know, as I'm not currently in the market for new hardware.   
   What's your current PC do and when was it put into service?   
      
      
   >>>>>>> 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.   
      
   Apple has been 'pricey' since the Apple ][ shipped 45+ years ago, which   
   suggests a different value paradigm than what you're assuming.   
      
      
      
   >>> 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.   
      
   Which means that those customers will therefore gravitate to Apple,   
   despite yon "less bang for the buck" insinuations.  Since they're voting   
   with their wallet, their vote is quite credible.   
      
      
   >>> 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.   
      
   Which means that it isn't an "only Apple" thing.  And come to think of   
   it, the battery in the most recent Mac laptop that I've retired was   
   still unswollen and ~okay condition at the seven (7) year mark.  Doesn't   
     this observation also run counter to "less bang for the buck" claims?   
      
      
   -hh   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)