From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 17 Jan 2026 19:42:00 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:

On Jan 17, 2026 at 1:31:32 AM MST, "Gremlin" wrote <XnsB3D723DD35C19HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>:

It reminds me of the old days of DOS and self contained programs.
No installer BS. Unzip into an empty folder of my choosing and away
you go.

Sort of like how macOS handles most installations.

Don’t you wish macOS had something like these Flatpak/Snap/AppImage
things on Linux? Nothing to unzip, even.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2026-01-17 15:00, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On 17 Jan 2026 19:42:00 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:

On Jan 17, 2026 at 1:31:32 AM MST, "Gremlin" wrote
<XnsB3D723DD35C19HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>:

It reminds me of the old days of DOS and self contained programs.
No installer BS. Unzip into an empty folder of my choosing and away
you go.

Sort of like how macOS handles most installations.

Don’t you wish macOS had something like these Flatpak/Snap/AppImage
things on Linux? Nothing to unzip, even.

Are you kidding?

macOS 1, external website:

Download application and move it to your Applications folder.

Not strictly necessary, but it makes everything tidier.

To that end, many companies provide their software on a ".dmg" (disk
image) file, which let's the put a soft link to the "Applications"
folder right next to their software; usually accompanied with a
background which indicates that you should drag it there.


macOS 2, App Store:

Find the application, choose "Get".

Enter your Apple Account password.

Done.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On Jan 17, 2026 at 4:00:41 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <10kh4ao$2tq7m$11@dont-email.me>:

On 17 Jan 2026 19:42:00 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:

On Jan 17, 2026 at 1:31:32 AM MST, "Gremlin" wrote
<XnsB3D723DD35C19HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>:

It reminds me of the old days of DOS and self contained programs.
No installer BS. Unzip into an empty folder of my choosing and away
you go.

Sort of like how macOS handles most installations.

Don’t you wish macOS had something like these Flatpak/Snap/AppImage
things on Linux? Nothing to unzip, even.

Apple has similar ideas -- app bundles: open, then drag & drop, Mac App store, etc.

I do not know enough about the different techs to go into deep differences,
but they all work to install software easily. Apple does have some advantages because they control the whole "stack" -- less need to worry about system libraries, UI frameworks, hardware available, etc.
--
It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> news:10kh4ao$2tq7m$11@dont-email.me Sat, 17 Jan 2026 23:00:41 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote:

On 17 Jan 2026 19:42:00 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:

On Jan 17, 2026 at 1:31:32 AM MST, "Gremlin" wrote
<XnsB3D723DD35C19HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>:

It reminds me of the old days of DOS and self contained programs.
No installer BS. Unzip into an empty folder of my choosing and away
you go.

Sort of like how macOS handles most installations.

Don’t you wish macOS had something like these Flatpak/Snap/AppImage
things on Linux? Nothing to unzip, even.

It's not even necessary to put them into an empty folder by themselves.
You could store a pile of them in say 'useful apps' and they'd do just
fine, completely self contained. No dependency hell risk, just a fully functional up to date program that didn't care which distro you were using.
I was heavily into them when I was still doing the 3D print thing. Cura
was a daily goto. And I wanted to make sure I was using the latest version
for the bug fixes and additional support for the capabilities of my
printers.

I've just never been a fan of Apple products. I don't mind working on them though. At the component level, aside from propreitary ICs and specific circuit designs, they aren't much different than other non Apple rigs.
Some of their decisions do make me scratch my head with a 'what the fuck
made you think this was a good design?' They just don't have consumer
friendly designs under the hood in many cases. If I had for example two
macs that are supposed to be the same make and model but one is dead and I have a donor board, there's a limit to which components can be pulled from
the donor board to try and get the other machine back up and running.
Apple thought it wise to mate various components to the ones already
present on the dead one for example. The IC that runs the touch pad is one
of many mated components.

Soldering the HDD into the circuit is another anti consumer thing that
Apple is known for doing with the blessing of the Apple user community for
the most part. A component that is expected to fail at some point. A
normal PC would in most cases allow you to replace the drive or change it
out for a larger one if you so desired. Apple didn't think this was
necessary in some design cases. Some Apple users think it's perfectly acceptable to resort to running the machine entirely from an external hard disk when the soldered internal HD kicks the bucket in a non take the
system down with you manner. A laptop is intended to be portable. Having
to carry around it's hard disk as a physically seperate item from the
machine takes away from the portability aspect, imo. It's a stop gap
measure to keep the machine running.

It would have made more sense, imo, to allow the user to replace the drive if/when it fails. They went and pulled this shit on some makes and models
with the RAM too. The fucking ram. Grrr. I much prefer the PCs which don't solder such components onto the mainboard - which gives me the freedom to upgrade as I like and replace bad components when necessary. Some PC manufacturers also followed Apple in this regard, but, they are typically
low end and inexpensive rigs that opted to go this route. The more
expensive, standard ones, would allow such components to be changed out.

This laptop for example doesn't have critical components like the HD or
ram soldered onto the mainboard. I'm free to upgrade as I like. This particular model will actually accomodate three internal HDs. It has slots
for two NVME as well as one SATA based laptop dimensioned SSD. It doesn't
have the access panels on the bottom to reach those specific areas though;
you have to remove the bottom of the case. Which is fine, it allows access
to the cooling assembly so you can do some house keeping while you've got
the internals exposed.
--
Liar, lawyer; mirror show me, what's the difference?
Kangaroo done hung the guilty with the innocent
Liar, lawyer; mirror for ya', what's the difference?
Kangaroo be stoned. He's guilty as the government

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> news:696c2146$0$21$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com Sat, 17 Jan 2026 23:54:46
GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote:

On Jan 17, 2026 at 4:00:41 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote <10kh4ao$2tq7m$11@dont-email.me>:

On 17 Jan 2026 19:42:00 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:

On Jan 17, 2026 at 1:31:32 AM MST, "Gremlin" wrote
<XnsB3D723DD35C19HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>:

It reminds me of the old days of DOS and self contained programs.
No installer BS. Unzip into an empty folder of my choosing and away
you go.

Sort of like how macOS handles most installations.

Don’t you wish macOS had something like these Flatpak/Snap/AppImage
things on Linux? Nothing to unzip, even.

Apple has similar ideas -- app bundles: open, then drag & drop, Mac App store, etc.

I do not know enough about the different techs to go into deep
differences, but they all work to install software easily.

When using appimage based software, you don't install it. You give it
execute permissions and a click or double click in my case brings the
program up for use. It's entirely self contained. No risk of dependency
hell or anything else.

GIMP-3.0.6-x86_64.AppImage

That file is the whole enchallata. Easy to copy to removable media and put
on other machines as you like. For those of us who use multiple computers,
this too is a handy function.

Apple does have some advantages because they control the whole "stack"
-- less need to worry about system libraries, UI frameworks, hardware available, etc.

You were right in stating that you don't know enough about the different
techs to go into deep differences. You don't know enough about it to
penetrate the surface, forget going deep. Everything that the app needs is
all within the appimage file itself; you don't install anything. Nothing overwrites what's already on your rig, or otherwise stomps on anything
already present on the rig.

When discussing appimage file containers, I really don't know what you
mean by Apple having advantages. The examples you cited don't apply to
them. Every single thing the program requires is all within that file. And
you can easily ensure that you are running the latest available version by checking the vendors website and if necessary, downloading a later release
of the appimage file. I've got kicad this way, Gimp, Cura, etc. I don't
need to use the repositories which may not contain the latest version.
with MXLinux for example, the default repositories have kicad but it's a
much older version. I have the latest release in the form of an Appimage
file and it works without any issue. This comes in handy for the creation
of gerber files. Those files and a few dollars and some time waiting on
the snail mail and I've got professionally created blank boards with
everything except the components themselves already on it. I just land
them, solder them into place and bingo; my circuit is complete on a professional PCB. It beats using a breadboard or using prototyping boards
which contain no traces of any kind to make use of so once you land the components, you also have to land the connection points in the form of
small gauge wires. Or, etching my own boards and having to drill the appropriate sized holes to accomodate the components.

If you aren't into designing your own circuits, I can see why you would
have no use for this. But, I like to design my own things on occasion and
it looks so much better when you can deliver a professional looking board created to your specifications; including the silk screen markings and component identifiers.

Granted, converting all of my schematics from tinycad over to kicad has
been a bit of a pita, but, it's my own fault. I could have and should have
been using kicad the entire time. It's cross OS.
--
Liar, lawyer; mirror show me, what's the difference?
Kangaroo done hung the guilty with the innocent
Liar, lawyer; mirror for ya', what's the difference?
Kangaroo be stoned. He's guilty as the government

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On Jan 17, 2026 at 10:27:19 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote <XnsB3D84A1C1F49HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>:

Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> news:696c2146$0$21$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com Sat, 17 Jan 2026 23:54:46
GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote:

On Jan 17, 2026 at 4:00:41 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
<10kh4ao$2tq7m$11@dont-email.me>:

On 17 Jan 2026 19:42:00 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:

On Jan 17, 2026 at 1:31:32 AM MST, "Gremlin" wrote
<XnsB3D723DD35C19HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>:

It reminds me of the old days of DOS and self contained programs.
No installer BS. Unzip into an empty folder of my choosing and away
you go.

Sort of like how macOS handles most installations.

Don’t you wish macOS had something like these Flatpak/Snap/AppImage
things on Linux? Nothing to unzip, even.

Apple has similar ideas -- app bundles: open, then drag & drop, Mac App
store, etc.

I do not know enough about the different techs to go into deep
differences, but they all work to install software easily.

When using appimage based software, you don't install it. You give it
execute permissions and a click or double click in my case brings the
program up for use. It's entirely self contained. No risk of dependency
hell or anything else.

In practice how is this different from how most macOS apps are installed (though there preferences and the like are in the User/Library folder. I am speaking from a standard user perspective. What benefits are there to each in your view?

GIMP-3.0.6-x86_64.AppImage

That file is the whole enchallata. Easy to copy to removable media and put
on other machines as you like. For those of us who use multiple computers, this too is a handy function.

Is it "portable" -- do the settings follow you?

Apple does have some advantages because they control the whole "stack"
-- less need to worry about system libraries, UI frameworks, hardware
available, etc.

You were right in stating that you don't know enough about the different techs to go into deep differences. You don't know enough about it to penetrate the surface, forget going deep. Everything that the app needs is all within the appimage file itself; you don't install anything. Nothing overwrites what's already on your rig, or otherwise stomps on anything already present on the rig.

I said nothing contrary to that (though I can make some nits on your claims).

When discussing appimage file containers, I really don't know what you
mean by Apple having advantages. The examples you cited don't apply to
them.

But can't you lose theming (consistency in look and sometimes features), lack of graphic drivers and hardware acceleration. I *think* I have seen things
like version issues with Nvidia on Kdenlive. This is by memory... so I could
be wrong. I would assume (perhaps incorrectly) there may be issues with X11/Wayland... though I have not seen it (I do little with Linux these days).

Every single thing the program requires is all within that file.

If this was true it would run on any OS. :) But you mean things that are not assumed on Linux. Fair enough.

...
--
It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On Jan 17, 2026 at 10:27:17 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote <XnsB3D84A04EA12HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>:

Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> news:10kh4ao$2tq7m$11@dont-email.me Sat, 17 Jan 2026 23:00:41 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote:

On 17 Jan 2026 19:42:00 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:

On Jan 17, 2026 at 1:31:32 AM MST, "Gremlin" wrote
<XnsB3D723DD35C19HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>:

It reminds me of the old days of DOS and self contained programs.
No installer BS. Unzip into an empty folder of my choosing and away
you go.

Sort of like how macOS handles most installations.

Don’t you wish macOS had something like these Flatpak/Snap/AppImage
things on Linux? Nothing to unzip, even.

It's not even necessary to put them into an empty folder by themselves.
You could store a pile of them in say 'useful apps' and they'd do just
fine, completely self contained. No dependency hell risk, just a fully functional up to date program that didn't care which distro you were using.

But they do not match the look and feel of the rest of the system. There are pros and cons.

I was heavily into them when I was still doing the 3D print thing. Cura
was a daily goto. And I wanted to make sure I was using the latest version for the bug fixes and additional support for the capabilities of my
printers.

I've just never been a fan of Apple products.

Fair. We all have preferences.

I don't mind working on them though.

From a user perspective, what do you think the pros and cons are?

...
--
It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On Sat, 17 Jan 2026 23:00:41 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On 17 Jan 2026 19:42:00 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:

On Jan 17, 2026 at 1:31:32 AM MST, "Gremlin" wrote
<XnsB3D723DD35C19HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>:

It reminds me of the old days of DOS and self contained programs. No
installer BS. Unzip into an empty folder of my choosing and away you
go.

Sort of like how macOS handles most installations.

Don’t you wish macOS had something like these Flatpak/Snap/AppImage
things on Linux? Nothing to unzip, even.

What I can't stand on MacOS is that it wants to force you to use the App
Store to install anything. That's probably why Microsoft tried to do the
same thing with their mediocre copy through the Windows Store.
Nevertheless, they allow you to bypass it entirely and install programs downloaded from the web much like Windows. In fact, I'm glad they do
because that's what allows a very old machine like my $30 2013 MacBook Air
to still install something. If I had to rely on the App Store, I wouldn't
be able to install iWork, Microsoft Office, Firefox or anything else (and
no, it doesn't offer you an older version automatically like what Mac
zealots claim). However, if I simply go to the website for Firefox or LibreOffice, I can download the programs and install them without issue. Hence, the otherwise useless machine becomes quite useful. Heck, I used it
to watch the Canadiens game last night through HDHomeRun downloaded from
their website.
--
CrudeSausage
John 14:6
Isaiah 48:16
Pop_OS!
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2026-01-17 21:27, Gremlin wrote:

Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> news:10kh4ao$2tq7m$11@dont-email.me Sat, 17 Jan 2026 23:00:41 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote:

On 17 Jan 2026 19:42:00 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:

On Jan 17, 2026 at 1:31:32 AM MST, "Gremlin" wrote
<XnsB3D723DD35C19HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>:

It reminds me of the old days of DOS and self contained programs.
No installer BS. Unzip into an empty folder of my choosing and away
you go.

Sort of like how macOS handles most installations.

Don’t you wish macOS had something like these Flatpak/Snap/AppImage
things on Linux? Nothing to unzip, even.

It's not even necessary to put them into an empty folder by themselves.
You could store a pile of them in say 'useful apps' and they'd do just
fine, completely self contained. No dependency hell risk, just a fully functional up to date program that didn't care which distro you were using.
I was heavily into them when I was still doing the 3D print thing. Cura
was a daily goto. And I wanted to make sure I was using the latest version for the bug fixes and additional support for the capabilities of my
printers.

I've just never been a fan of Apple products. I don't mind working on them though. At the component level, aside from propreitary ICs and specific circuit designs, they aren't much different than other non Apple rigs.
Some of their decisions do make me scratch my head with a 'what the fuck
made you think this was a good design?' They just don't have consumer friendly designs under the hood in many cases. If I had for example two
macs that are supposed to be the same make and model but one is dead and I have a donor board, there's a limit to which components can be pulled from the donor board to try and get the other machine back up and running.
Apple thought it wise to mate various components to the ones already
present on the dead one for example. The IC that runs the touch pad is one
of many mated components.

Soldering the HDD into the circuit is another anti consumer thing that

Not an "HDD" at all.

Apple is known for doing with the blessing of the Apple user community for the most part. A component that is expected to fail at some point. A

At what point? What is it's expected lifespan?

normal PC would in most cases allow you to replace the drive or change it
out for a larger one if you so desired. Apple didn't think this was
necessary in some design cases. Some Apple users think it's perfectly acceptable to resort to running the machine entirely from an external hard disk when the soldered internal HD kicks the bucket in a non take the

Nope. No one said that. What was said was that the SSD dying didn't turn
the machine into a "paperweight"...

...as you claimed.

system down with you manner. A laptop is intended to be portable. Having

We'll come back to this.

to carry around it's hard disk as a physically seperate item from the
machine takes away from the portability aspect, imo. It's a stop gap
measure to keep the machine running.

Would it have to be "physically separate"...

...or could some clever company not make one that attaches
(semi-)permanently to the bottom of the machine.

It would have made more sense, imo, to allow the user to replace the drive if/when it fails. They went and pulled this shit on some makes and models with the RAM too. The fucking ram. Grrr. I much prefer the PCs which don't solder such components onto the mainboard - which gives me the freedom to upgrade as I like and replace bad components when necessary. Some PC manufacturers also followed Apple in this regard, but, they are typically
low end and inexpensive rigs that opted to go this route. The more
expensive, standard ones, would allow such components to be changed out.

But the components that they DO solder...

...you're fine with those, right?

This laptop for example doesn't have critical components like the HD or
ram soldered onto the mainboard. I'm free to upgrade as I like. This particular model will actually accomodate three internal HDs. It has slots for two NVME as well as one SATA based laptop dimensioned SSD. It doesn't have the access panels on the bottom to reach those specific areas though; you have to remove the bottom of the case. Which is fine, it allows access
to the cooling assembly so you can do some house keeping while you've got
the internals exposed.

What laptop would that be, hmmm?

And how much does it weigh and how bulky is it?

My M3 MacBook Air weighs 2.7 lb (1.24 kg) and has a volume of just over
45 cubic inches.

Do you think that perhaps a modern
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2026-01-18 05:31, CrudeSausage wrote:

On Sat, 17 Jan 2026 23:00:41 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On 17 Jan 2026 19:42:00 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:

On Jan 17, 2026 at 1:31:32 AM MST, "Gremlin" wrote
<XnsB3D723DD35C19HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>:

It reminds me of the old days of DOS and self contained programs. No
installer BS. Unzip into an empty folder of my choosing and away you
go.

Sort of like how macOS handles most installations.

Don’t you wish macOS had something like these Flatpak/Snap/AppImage
things on Linux? Nothing to unzip, even.

What I can't stand on MacOS is that it wants to force you to use the App Store to install anything.

That is utterly false.

That's probably why Microsoft tried to do the
same thing with their mediocre copy through the Windows Store.
Nevertheless, they allow you to bypass it entirely and install programs downloaded from the web much like Windows. In fact, I'm glad they do
because that's what allows a very old machine like my $30 2013 MacBook Air
to still install something. If I had to rely on the App Store, I wouldn't
be able to install iWork, Microsoft Office, Firefox or anything else (and
no, it doesn't offer you an older version automatically like what Mac
zealots claim). However, if I simply go to the website for Firefox or LibreOffice, I can download the programs and install them without issue. Hence, the otherwise useless machine becomes quite useful. Heck, I used it
to watch the Canadiens game last night through HDHomeRun downloaded from their website.

Your whole argument is bullshit.

There are companies that choose to make their software available only
from the macOS App Store, but there is a lot of software available
directly from their respective companies' websites.

iWork from Apple no longer exists.

But Microsoft Office is still available for download direct from Microsoft.

<https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/download-office>

So is Firefox.

<https://www.firefox.com/en-CA/>

So is LibreOffice.

<https://www.libreoffice.org/download/download-libreoffice/>

So basically, your whole premise, and the examples you chose to
exemplify it...

...are bullshit!

Happy to help!
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> news:10kjmpc$3qsla$3@dont-email.me Sun, 18 Jan 2026 22:27:56 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote:

On 2026-01-17 21:27, Gremlin wrote:
Not an "HDD" at all.

SSD. Happy now? :) it doesn't detract from what I wrote though. It's anti consumer to solder such hardware onto the mainboard. It should be
replaceable.

Apple is known for doing with the blessing of the Apple user community
for the most part. A component that is expected to fail at some point.
A

At what point? What is it's expected lifespan?

That depends on their respective TBW. The heavier the usage in terms of writes, the shorter the life span. NAND isn't like other forms of memory. keyword that you used yourself is expected lifespan, though. What's expected isn't always the end result.

Nope. No one said that. What was said was that the SSD dying didn't turn
the machine into a "paperweight"...

It does if any of the NAND chips which make up the SSD short to ground. When one or more of them takes that route for an early exit, they also bring the main power lines to ground; effectively turning the mac into a paperweight. External media isn't an option when this happens.

[https://youtu.be/0qbrLiGY4Cg]

Don't take my word for it. Checkout the video and learn some things about
your beloved mac.

Would it have to be "physically separate"...

...or could some clever company not make one that attaches (semi-)permanently to the bottom of the machine.

That still wouldn't do you any good if the main power lines are shorted out. Which is the case when one or more NAND chips shorts to ground. When the NAND(s) do this, they take the main power lines with them. Rendering your laptop a paperweight. An external drive isn't going to get around this for you.

But the components that they DO solder...

...you're fine with those, right?

Your question seems a little strange to me...But, I'll play along, sure... Capacitors, diodes, mosfet transistors, etc. It's not like you would be upgrading those components, Alan. While it's certainly possible that one or more of those components could fail, it's not that difficult to troubleshoot and replace if necessary. None of them are mated to the specific board or nearby components on this PC or others that I'm aware of. That's a MAC thing.

What laptop would that be, hmmm?

It's an Acer nitro 5

I'll correct myself too - I used the term SSD when I should have used laptop size form factor drive (2.5 inch. 1.8 is for the ultra portables and this isn't one of those; but with the appropriate bracket it could accept one).
The drive could be SSD or HDD style. This machine doesn't care.

And how much does it weigh and how bulky is it?

5lbs or so. It's thinner than some other laptops I've had the pleasure of owning - those have internal optical drives though. This one does not. It's also a gaming rig (but I don't play modern games with it; On occasion I'll fire up an emulator and run Atari 2600/NES roms or perhaps a DOS native game like DOOM)

I have welders which weigh significantly more, Alan. So for me, 5lbs isn't anything to be concerned with.

My M3 MacBook Air weighs 2.7 lb (1.24 kg) and has a volume of just over
45 cubic inches.

Congrats. You own a laptop with an SSD that you can't replace or upgrade. Whatever size drive it has is all it can have internally. If you wanted
larger capacity you had to order it then. Where as this laptop has room
inside it's case for 3 seperate drives. I can replace SSD anytime I like for
a larger one, or keep it as is and add two additional drives.

Most importantly, let's say the SSD failed in such a manner on this laptop that it took the power lines to ground along with it as can be the case with yours. I can take the back cover off, remove the dead drive and remove the short condition along with it. Mine doesn't become a useless paperweight.
Like yours, mine can also boot and run from external media - that's how I installed MXLinux onto it when I got it. But unlike yours, mine won't become
a useless paperweight because one or more NAND chips which makeup the
internal SSD fail and short to ground. And that's just one awful way a mac
can die on you. They have issues with their voltage regulation circuitry too.

Did you know that some macs require those internal NAND chips to be
functional to reliably boot from external media in the first place? They do some very strange things when those internal NAND chips go south - that is when one or more of them hasn't shorted out. Mine doesn't rely on anything
on the internal drive. I could remove the drive and the machine would run
fine from external media. I see no reason to do that for any real period of time though because I can easily add internal drive(s)

How much experience do you have with component level electronics Alan? I
don't want to hazard a guess here.
--
Liar, lawyer; mirror show me, what's the difference?
Kangaroo done hung the guilty with the innocent
Liar, lawyer; mirror for ya', what's the difference?
Kangaroo be stoned. He's guilty as the government

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2