XPost: comp.os.linux.advocacy, alt.computer.workshop
From: canthaveanemail@fii.org
Alan wrote in news:10mea03$3bbaq$1@dont-email.me:
> On 2026-02-09 19:40, Joel W. Crump wrote:
>> On 2/9/26 10:23 PM, Alan wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>> why is the upgrade $200? What about a 512 GB SSD obviates
>>>>>>>>>> that cost?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Nothing has to.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> PEOPLE BUY SYSTEMS!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The question they ask (the rational people) is:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Do I get a whole SYSTEM that works for me at the price I'm am
>>>>>>>>> being offered?"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What is rational about giving away $200 to a corporation?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That you get an ENTIRE system that works better (for YOU) than
>>>>>>> the alternative.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But the $200 isn't for the entire system. It's specifically to
>>>>>> change from 256 GB to 512 GB. Your answer is avoiding the
>>>>>> point, that it's more than any conceivable estimate, profit
>>>>>> included, would warrant.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's exactly the POINT.
>>>>>
>>>>> The question a rational person asks is:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Is the whole system (with 512GB) worth it to me at that cost?"
>>>>
>>>> The answer a rational person has is "no", though.
>>>
>>> And once again, you resort to denigration of those who disagree with
>>> you.
>>
>>
>> Not so. They do agree with me, they're just willing to pay it
>> because they want a Mac that much. They have no choice. Price
>> gouging.
>
> The absolutely DO have a choice. There are few if any tasks you can do
> on a Mac that you can't do on a Windows PC.
>
> Ergo, they have a choice.
>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AppleCare if you pay extra? Nonstandard interface
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ports that they claim are better 'cause they say so?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What a joke. What a total cult. And you're the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ringleader.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What "non-standard" ports has Apple ever used, since ADB
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Apple Desktop Bus)?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You know, I actually have to concede something here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The EU forced them to make iPhone jacks USB-C, which was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a downgrade to make them compatible with other
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> manufacturers' chargers. So, in that respect, I actually
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think Apple was superior, albeit for the function of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charging the device, not using it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apple introduced most of the ports that advanced the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> personal computer standard.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> When IBM-style PCs had only parallel ports, Apple
>>>>>>>>>>>>> introduced Macs with SCSI that allowed up to 7 devices to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> be attached to one port.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> When the IBM-style PC was using ISA slots, Apple
>>>>>>>>>>>>> introduced Macs that used a far superior open standard
>>>>>>>>>>>>> called NuBus.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> USB: an open standard first widely available on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> original iMac.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Firewire: an open standard far faster than USB at the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thunderbolt: an open standard far faster than USB at its
>>>>>>>>>>>>> introduction.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I would mostly not challenge those points. I would point
>>>>>>>>>>>> out that the proprietary nature of some of these features
>>>>>>>>>>>> supports the idea that Apple trends nonstandard, though.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Of those, the only proprietary one was ADB.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Everything else was an open standard.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So your second sentence proceeds from a false premise.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Heh, no, dude, they pretended they were open standards. In
>>>>>>>>>> practice, they were Apple proprietary.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No...dude:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They were open standards. And ALL of them were obviously,
>>>>>>>>> objectively better than the standards that happened to chosen
>>>>>>>>> for IBM-style PCs.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you see any real numbers of other manufacturers adopting
>>>>>>>> Thunderbolt?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How is that relevant to the fact that they are all open
>>>>>>> standards (caveat ADB).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> USB qualifies, obviously, FireWire maybe, but from there it gets
>>>>>> super obscure.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope. You not knowing about things doesn't make them "obscure".
>>>>>
>>>>> NuBus was a huge step over ISA.
>>>>
>>>> For Apple.
>>>
>>> For anyone who chose to use it.
>>>
>>> ISA required configuration jumpers: NuBus was self-configuring.
>>>
>>> IS was 16-bit and up to 16MB/s: NuBus was 32-bit and up to 40MB/s.
>>>
>>> Must I really go on?
>>
>>
>> You could name another major manufacturer which actually used it.
>
> How would that change that:
>
> 1. It was a standard and NOT proprietary, and
>
> 2. That it was superior to ISA?
>
>>
>>
>>>>> Thunderbolt was developed by Intel and Apple in collaboration, and
>>>>> Sony made use of it as well as Apple...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...and Acer...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...and HP...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...Lenovo...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...Asus...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...and, of course, Intel's own PCs.
>>>>>
>>>>> And that's just the initial version of Thunderbolt.
>>>>
>>>> Well, I admit, I didn't really know a lot about all of those
>>>> brands' junk products, since I'm not an OEM-Windows drone. So, I
>>>> will take your word and concede.
>>>
>>> It didn't stop you from running your "mouth" about things you now
>>> concede you knew fuck-all about in the first place.
>>
>>
>> I actually wasn't all that wrong, if the other manufacturers using it
>> were limited to those brands, PC OEMs can be very proprietary in
>> their designs, particularly of laptops.
>>
>
> You literally just conceded your ignorance.
>
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> So asked to name an application you actually use that's
>>>>>>>>>>>>> better than the macOS equivalent...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...you surrendered.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Got it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't see why I need to name specific apps to make the
>>>>>>>>>>>> point. It's not a surrender.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Then name an app.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Just ONE app that you actually use.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Audacious. It's even better than Winamp is on Winblows,
>>>>>>>>>> IMO.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And available for macOS:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Terminal: brew install audacious.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So your argument is that this app is better than itself?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Next!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ah, but you had to use the terminal. So now every goofy nerd
>>>>>>>> using a Mac is familiar with that, as you, the exception who
>>>>>>>> actually knows shit, are? Heh.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So what?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The issue was how the software WORKS.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't dispute that you can do some significant things with
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
