Reply to post: Re: idiotMagnet as long as Memory and Storage not modular

Re: idiotMagnet as long as Memory and Storage not modular

Not FISH - a contextual argument about gradual adoption of once-unpalatable concepts into the mainstream e.g. heating most homes in Europe without using Gas, or driving a car without a seatbelt, or I dunno, Smartphones without user-replaceable batteries or 3.5mm headphone jacks..?

Unique offering being the hardware/software COMBINATION developed alongside each other and exclusively for each other - even you cannot deny the amount of work that's gone into making macOS a lot more mainstream consumer-friendly than <insert_a_distro_name_here>. Surface has arrived (relatively) recently from Microsoft and is effectively a concession about the need to apply internal controls and standards on both the hardware and software.

Market-influencing technology integrations refers to being right at the top of the "how do we take the best of what's out there and wrap it up in a useful, attractive, performant mass-market product" chain.. What component did Apple include in the original iPhone that didn't exist on the market prior? Probably none. Had ANYONE managed to package the same 'existing' technologies in such a compelling way prior to Apple? No, and yet now EVERYONE folows the formula - give Apple THAT if nothing else. I'm not on top of the entire Catalina hoopla but the little I understand is that a lot of outcry is about 32-bit applications no longer being tolerated (after repeated warnings from as far back as what, Lion or earlier) - sorting application compatibility before upgrade has been common sense since upgrades existed..

I concede that Apple products are not 100% recyclable, user-repairable or upgradable, but no comparable product is - even a dead ASUS motherboard is a dead motherboard.. As a business in a market where their most lucrative expertise appears to be (I hate to go there again) 'Market-influencing technology integrations', they have to strike a balance between GIVING their advantage away and doing the best they can to limit environmental impact. I note you don't defend the injection-mould plastic casing on a £299 bargain-basement laptop - if you took the 2019 MacBook Pro and the £299 PCWorld/BestBuy loss-leader brand new and buried them in the ground, which degrades more kindly for the planet after X years? They're not perfect but my personal opinion is not many are even close..

I'm sure most security experts will tell you if someone has physical access to your machine, you've got greater things to worry about than whether mashing return will give them root access.

The T2 issue i think you're referring to is the 3rd party component management capability - my perspective aligns with the business value of trusting that the replaceable hardware components one bought with their server are still in situ, vs possibly having one's components replaced with a dodgy device that does a hell of a lot more than the original was intended. T2 didn't make it impossible to replace certain components with 3rd party - it just required the involvement of Apple or certified resellers to (arguably) ensure what is being fitted is at known risk and with visibility to the manufacturer (who might get blamed when that 3rd-party SSD upgrade sends all your blueprints to <insert_h4ckor_here>)

I stand by my original arguments - it's all about context