this is a terrible idea. will run slower than the internal HDD.
also did you buy the $1099 iMac or the $1299 iMac.
The $1099 iMac is pure junk and a complete rip off. its so slow, its pathetic.
The $1299
this is a terrible idea. will run slower than the internal HDD.
also did you buy the $1099 iMac or the $1299 iMac.
The $1099 iMac is pure junk and a complete rip off. its so slow, its pathetic.
this is a terrible idea. will run slower than the internal HDD.
also did you buy the $1099 iMac or the $1299 iMac.
The $1099 iMac is pure junk and a complete rip off. its so slow, its pathetic.
An USB 3.0 SSD will absolutely not run slower than an internal magnetic drive.
The $1099 iMac is actually none of those things that you used to describe it. It serves the needs of a huge segment of the population that doesn't need a huge workhorse and doesn't want to pay a huge sum of money for a desktop computer. I wouldn't recommend it for a power user, but that's merely a segment of the population.
No, he said external SSD, not HDD. Bold added for emphasis.He told the guy to clone his internal HDD and boot and run his OS from a USB 3 external HDD all the time.
That IS a terrible idea and yes it WILL be slower than the internal. USB 3 can not read and write data at the same time.
As a test, I'd suggest trying a SSD drive via USB 3.0.
I'd clone the current drive and place that copy on the SSD, and run the OS etc. from there. It would be interesting to see the results. I'd but it would be fast.
Ugh, I'll keep my opinions and ideas to myself. I used to think forums were about communicating ideas and possible solutions. Clearly I'm wrong...