Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> wrote at 18:10 this Tuesday (GMT):

I deleted Nemo and could not get a boot to cinnamon desktop.

What the fuck?

What does fart have to do with the left temple?... Linux is indeed
immature, Mr. Flud :)

Probably because it relys on nemo-desktop for the icon set.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote at 00:11 this Wednesday (GMT):

candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
wrote:

Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> wrote at 18:10 this Tuesday (GMT):

I deleted Nemo and could not get a boot to cinnamon desktop.

What the fuck?

What does fart have to do with the left temple?... Linux is indeed
immature, Mr. Flud :)

Probably because it relys on nemo-desktop for the icon set.

He must have an Apple SSD, they're still selling brand new machines
with 256 GB. He needed to reclaim that space. ;)

Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/nvme0n1p2 958802032 199874016 710149828 22% /

I won't be deleting anything, unless I simply have zero conceivable
use for it. Space is endless.

Not bad.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Le 2024-11-13 à 00:40, candycanearter07 a écrit :

Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote at 00:11 this Wednesday (GMT):

candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
wrote:

Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> wrote at 18:10 this Tuesday (GMT): >>>>

I deleted Nemo and could not get a boot to cinnamon desktop.

What the fuck?

What does fart have to do with the left temple?... Linux is indeed
immature, Mr. Flud :)

Probably because it relys on nemo-desktop for the icon set.

He must have an Apple SSD, they're still selling brand new machines
with 256 GB. He needed to reclaim that space. ;)

Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/nvme0n1p2 958802032 199874016 710149828 22% /

I won't be deleting anything, unless I simply have zero conceivable
use for it. Space is endless.

Not bad.

Apple selling machines with 256GB of storage is bad, but the fact that
many machines until this year had no more than 8GB of RAM is way worse.
The lack of RAM will force the use of swap which will destroy the non-user-replaceable SSD in no time.

--
CrudeSausage
Paleoconservative, Catholic, Christ is king.
Trump is a legend.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote at 07:21 this Wednesday (GMT):

candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
wrote:

Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote at 00:11 this Wednesday (GMT):

candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
wrote:

Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> wrote at 18:10 this Tuesday (GMT): >>>>>

I deleted Nemo and could not get a boot to cinnamon desktop.

What the fuck?

What does fart have to do with the left temple?... Linux is indeed
immature, Mr. Flud :)

Probably because it relys on nemo-desktop for the icon set.

He must have an Apple SSD, they're still selling brand new machines
with 256 GB. He needed to reclaim that space. ;)

Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/nvme0n1p2 958802032 199874016 710149828 22% /

I won't be deleting anything, unless I simply have zero conceivable
use for it. Space is endless.

Not bad.

With Apple, you have two basic choices: pay too much for a machine
with 256 GB, or pay *FAR AND AWAY* too much for a machine with
anything like a modern quantity, of storage. What a piece of shit.

Yeah, I'm just saying its nice that they can get it. The pricing model
is still very frustrating.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

candycanearter07 wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:

Yeah, I'm just saying its nice that they can get it. The pricing model
is still very frustrating.

Nice X-Face!

--
Will stain.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Joel wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:

Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:

candycanearter07 wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:

Yeah, I'm just saying its nice that they can get it. The pricing model
is still very frustrating.

Nice X-Face!

Agreed, his is better than yours! :P

Oh, I'm even uglier now!!! :-D

(I'm just trying to support the
younger generation, particularly in this dark corner of Usenet, candycanearter07 is of special value to the group.)

--
Lighten up, while you still can, Don't even try to understand,
Just find a place to make your stand, And take it easy.
-- The Eagles, "Take It Easy"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote at 16:33 this Wednesday (GMT):

candycanearter07 wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:

Yeah, I'm just saying its nice that they can get it. The pricing model
is still very frustrating.

Nice X-Face!

Thanks, I drew it myself :D
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

% <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote at 19:07 this Wednesday (GMT):

candycanearter07 wrote:

Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote at 16:33 this Wednesday (GMT): >>> candycanearter07 wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:

Yeah, I'm just saying its nice that they can get it. The pricing model >>>> is still very frustrating.

Nice X-Face!

Thanks, I drew it myself :D

we learned how to do x faces in grade 4 too

Hey, that's pretty cool!
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 13 Nov 2024 08:43:05 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:

Apple selling machines with 256GB of storage is bad ...

Obviously not, if their customers are willing to buy such.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 13 Nov 2024 14:30:04 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:

[Apple’s] pricing model is still very frustrating.

I don’t see why. Nobody is forcing you to buy their products.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 13 Nov 2024 22:38:18 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Wed, 13 Nov 2024 08:43:05 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:

Apple selling machines with 256GB of storage is bad ...

Obviously not, if their customers are willing to buy such.

https://www.theregister.com/2024/11/13/ifixit_mac_mini_teardown/

"Apple drops soldered storage for 2024 Mac Mini"

Of course just because it's not soldered in doesn't mean it isn't a
proprietary format.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Le 2024-11-13 à 18:59, rbowman a écrit :

On Wed, 13 Nov 2024 22:38:18 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Wed, 13 Nov 2024 08:43:05 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:

Apple selling machines with 256GB of storage is bad ...

Obviously not, if their customers are willing to buy such.

https://www.theregister.com/2024/11/13/ifixit_mac_mini_teardown/

"Apple drops soldered storage for 2024 Mac Mini"

Of course just because it's not soldered in doesn't mean it isn't a proprietary format.

I'll say this much: for the price, there is no beating the M4 Mac Mini
if having a small PC is what you're looking for. When you consider the
amount of power you get and how quiet the unit will operate, you can
overlook certain shortcomings.

--
CrudeSausage
Paleoconservative, Catholic, Christ is king.
Trump is a legend.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote at 07:24 this Thursday (GMT):

On 2024-11-13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Wed, 13 Nov 2024 08:43:05 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:

Apple selling machines with 256GB of storage is bad ...

Obviously not, if their customers are willing to buy such.

I think they expect to get more money by forcing you to use their cloud for adequate storage. Greed short circuits the brain.

I guess many Mac users connect extra SSD drives to their machines.

Except you also need to buy dongles to get more than one port..
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 11/14/24 2:31 AM, RonB wrote:

On 2024-11-13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Wed, 13 Nov 2024 14:30:04 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:

[Apple’s] pricing model is still very frustrating.

I don’t see why. Nobody is forcing you to buy their products.

Which completely misses the point. It's obviously frustrating to candycanearter07 because he would like to buy a Mac with a reasonable
amount of RAM at a reasonable price. Or at least have the option to add more RAM at a later date.

Sure, but architecture design decisions change with the times. RAM
modularity was the choice ~50 years when RAM was relatively expensive.

Today, Apple's M- architecture employs a unified memory configuration.
The tight integration significantly improves performance, but the
trade-off is that it isn't "old school" modular anymore. I guess that
if you really wanted a RAM upgrade, you could swap out the whole CPU
package.

Greed short circuits the brain.

There are some pricing decisions that Apple chooses which appear out of
line with the PC market (this now makes three people complaining about
Apple's high costs in just this thread), but there's also higher
performance with them, so the performance benefits of their design
decisions are contextually relevant and need to be acknowledged too.


-hh

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 14 Nov 2024 08:41:10 -0500, CrudeSausage wrote:

I'll say this much: for the price, there is no beating the M4 Mac Mini
if having a small PC is what you're looking for.

A Raspberry Pi is cheaper, smaller and much more versatile.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 14 Nov 2024 10:21:42 -0500, -hh wrote:

Today, Apple's M- architecture employs a unified memory configuration.
The tight integration significantly improves performance, but the
trade-off is that it isn't "old school" modular anymore. I guess that
if you really wanted a RAM upgrade, you could swap out the whole CPU
package.

Which is why it’s an evolutionary dead-end. A friend suggested to me,
around the time of the M1 chips, that the rest of the PC industry was
going to follow Apple’s lead, but Intel has already admitted it was a
mistake doing so, and is going back to modular memory.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 14 Nov 2024 20:19:29 -0500, -hh wrote:

On 11/14/24 7:00 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

Which is why it’s an evolutionary dead-end.

It really depends on system level trades, and lifecycle contexts.

Even as we have moved to multi-CPU machines, the amount of RAM per CPU continues to go up over time. This is why tying yourself to a fixed amount
is going to limit the life of your machine, no question about that.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 11/14/24 7:00 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Thu, 14 Nov 2024 10:21:42 -0500, -hh wrote:

Today, Apple's M- architecture employs a unified memory configuration.
The tight integration significantly improves performance, but the
trade-off is that it isn't "old school" modular anymore. I guess that
if you really wanted a RAM upgrade, you could swap out the whole CPU
package.

Which is why it’s an evolutionary dead-end. A friend suggested to me, around the time of the M1 chips, that the rest of the PC industry was
going to follow Apple’s lead, but Intel has already admitted it was a mistake doing so, and is going back to modular memory.

It really depends on system level trades, and lifecycle contexts.

For example, the need for supporting incremental upgrades after
deployment depends on the expected lifespan for which there will be
software updates that could outgrow the original hardware, so when
there's not much change in software across its useful lifespan, then
there's not much need to support hardware changes (eg, upgrade RAM).

At that point, other value metrics such as lower manufacturing costs,
higher reliability, etc, can prioritize solutions with lower parts
counts and fewer discrete points of failure. Adding a modular connector
for RAM is an increase in parts count and decreases reliability.


-hh

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 11/14/24 8:46 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Thu, 14 Nov 2024 20:19:29 -0500, -hh wrote:

On 11/14/24 7:00 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

Which is why it’s an evolutionary dead-end.

It really depends on system level trades, and lifecycle contexts.

Even as we have moved to multi-CPU machines, the amount of RAM per CPU continues to go up over time. This is why tying yourself to a fixed amount
is going to limit the life of your machine, no question about that.

That there's an upward trend isn't what matters: what matters is the
change over the product's design lifespan.

Because when resource demand growth doesn't exceed original resources by
end of life, a capability to upgrade during its life isn't needed. This
is why there's no complaints about ROM BIOS capacity.

For RAM, consider first a PC's lifespan. For corporate interests, the
tax write-off is 5 years, so that's their replacement schedule. For
home users, call it 7-10 years.

So sure, RAM demand has grown, but slowly: a decade ago, a new PC was
4GB & high end 12-60GB; today, its 8GB (to 16GB); high end 32-64GB.

Corporate will have scheduled to replace that PC at least once, coming
up on a second time. This is why corporate IT typically doesn't bother
to upgrade workers' PC (today, also a laptop) but to just replace it.

Home PCs are similar, especially with the trend to laptops: most folks
never crack open to make any hardware upgrades.

And high end systems have been capable of 1TB+ RAM for several years now
... but how many people do you personally know who have even just 128GB installed on their home PC, let alone more? Its a niche use case.


-hh

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 08:36:19 -0500, -hh wrote:

That there's an upward trend isn't what matters: what matters is the
change over the product's design lifespan.

How much of the upward trend the product can cover will limit its
lifespan.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 11/15/24 4:50 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 08:36:19 -0500, -hh wrote:

That there's an upward trend isn't what matters: what matters is the
change over the product's design lifespan.

How much of the upward trend the product can cover will limit its
lifespan.

Of course. So then, what is that trend?

As I've already said, my observation is that its ~4GB/decade or less.

Mainstream users often replace their PCs more frequently, so the
practice of "upgrade at replacement" has replaced component upgrades.

For example:

Notebook:
2017-present: Started with 8GB, hasn't changed.
(FYI: likely to replace this machine in 2025).

Power desktop:
2012-2022: Started with 24GB, never changed.
2022-present: 32GB

Post your own hardware history for the past decade.


-hh

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)