XPost: comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy   
   From: brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com   
      
   On Jan 22, 2026 at 4:19:36 AM MST, "-hh" wrote   
   <10kt148$2gn3b$2@dont-email.me>:   
      
   > On 1/21/26 23:33, Gremlin wrote:   
   >> -hh  news:10kqm5t$23fv6$2@dont-email.me   
   >> Wed, 21 Jan 2026 14:00:29 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote:   
   >>   
   >> [huge snip]   
   >>   
   >>> Everything has a finite life.  The question of enabling repairability   
   >>> will logically focus on those components which have lower lifespans.   
   >>   
   >> The point remains; What I wrote about the Apples using a soldered on SSD   
   drive   
   >> has been proven to be accurate. If the drive dies, the laptop dies with it.   
   >   
   > So what?  You're trying to avoid how products are designed, as the cost   
   > to design in lower cost maintainability is never zero, so the business   
   > decision gets tied to the probability of failure of that part/subsystem   
   > and its consequence.   
   >   
   > What are the odds of your lethal 13V spike occurring in a PC's RAM   
   > and/or NVMe after its warranty period over its, say, next five years of   
   > service life?   
   >   
   > Because by your insinuation, its a common risk to customers for us to be   
   > concerned about.   
      
   I assumed he meant his point to be taken more broadly as well... but if he   
   means simply that this trade off, while having some benefits, also has this   
   weakness in this very specific case, then he is likely correct. But to suggest   
   this means Macs have a shorter lifespan overall would be wrong. The opposite   
   appears to be correct.   
      
   ...   
      
   --   
   It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with   
   you.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)