I believe the solution here is to get an SSD for your os. There is no reason in this day and age not to have one.
However, I do agree with the other people commenting. SSDs shouldn't be a requirement for a desktop. An OS can have all the fancy features in the world, but there shouldn't be any reason for a computer to use all your resources for an OS-level operation. I've been waiting for the day when a OS can boot itself then trickle in the rest of the startup features in a way to minimize the impact on performance. Windows does a lot of maintenance in the background when you're not using it, causing a lot of people to complain that "Windows is using 4GB of RAM just for itself!" But when another program requests that memory or that CPU time, Windows gives it up and delays whatever it was doing. Why can't this be universal, and why can't it apply to booting the OS as well?
Was requiring a mouse/a hard disk/a MMU/16 megabytes of RAM/2 gigabytes of RAM/etc also a disgrace?
If not, what is different about this change? The only thing I can think of is that Apple is selling machines with hard disks and Lion.
I upgraded to Lion though, and I must agree with the OP. It is slower to start, boot, run, etc. even with an SSD.
As I sit here, I have over 4TB of external storage hooked up to my MacBook Pro already, another 2TB standing by, and a few TB more available over my gigabit LAN, but when I'm not at my desk, where exactly do you think all that storage is? Floating weightlessly beside my head ready to jump into action at a moment's notice?
You want me to have to pull out and hook up an external drive in Starbucks or a conference room or wherever?
What do you want me to do when I don't have that option, and instead have to wait around for that critical video, or virtual machine, or whatever, to copy off my external HDD onto my tiny, overpriced internal SSD on which it may not even fit? Even just managing the placement of files and keeping track of which versions are current or not is a pain in the ass, but what do you want me to do when I have 30 seconds to copy 40GB?
Think real world, not some bizarre happyland where those ports on the side of your laptop mean you can do anything with it anywhere.
For 99% of users, an SSD and some sort of data drive is a perfectly workable solution. You're the outlier here.
Not needing 9TB and an optical drive to do it? Really, you have specific needs. That's fine. But it's fairly egotistical to think that a consumer company like Apple will make something to meet your simple needs.
What I said stands. What you apparently lack is the ability to put it together.
I'd be interested to hear about any "tricky technology" that would let you put two regular hard drives in a Macbook Air.
Yes.
> As I sit here, I have over 4TB of external storage hooked up...
I'm not talking about external drives. Why are you?
You do realize that computers can have more than one drive, right? I mean, even laptops?
> You want me to have to pull out and hook up an external drive in Starbucks or a conference room or wherever?
I don't know. What do you do now when you already have 4TB of external storage. I mean, please, share with me what you do now when you have that 4TB file that you need with you at all times, how do you handle that now?
> What do you want me to do when I don't have that option,
When you don't have the option to connect 4TB of external storage?
Really, you should spend a few minutes reading your post. Your coming across like a self-entitled ignorant ass with noting to contribute. Check yourself.
So 'some' of use have constraints which make this not a good solution ... so what?