People still have 2G?

We haven’t had 2G for nearly 8 years. 3G was killed late last year.

It’s such a pain, so many devices don’t support 4G, let alone VoLTE.

Surely 2G isn’t that hard to keep running? It has far better range than 4G, meaning fewer towers are needed. Just keep one or two bands around to make voice calls easier.

Similar to ChromeOS by the sound of it

That’s half the reason I like Thunderbird. Email hasn’t changed for 20 years, and neither has Thunderbird’s interface. I don’t need shadows and 3D effects and stylised colours and buttons, I just want a white page with black text displaying the content of my incoming messages.

My uni also provided MATLAB, but I just used Octave instead for all assignments that required it and was never asked about it or told I couldn’t.

The rooster came before the egg?

I’ve been running one with a dozen or more users on bare metal at home for the last two years. A little bit of spam but otherwise fine. No deliverability issues or anything.

Oh won’t you please take me localhost??

Sadly no, because while Android is based on Linux, it is so far removed that the kernel is wildly different. Some teams such as mobian, SFOS, postmarketOS, etc. have got fair dinkum Linux running on android devices though.

I’ve been daily driving a Lenovo X230 tablet for the last four years. I use Xournal++ to take notes with the pen in classes and at work. Works great!

Cinnamon doesn’t support it yet either, so I’m also not on it :(

Haha thanks. I think it’s a lost cause! Perhaps I shouldn’t have worded the post the way I did.

I suspect this is what I’ll have to do. I was hoping to avoid it as that’ll take a weekend of copying, but I might just have to bite the bullet.

I’m not using Windows. I run Debian on this server.

The bulk of external enclosures that money can buy tell the computer they’re plugged into that the disks have logical sector sizes of 4096 bytes, apparently for compatibility with >2TB drives on Windows XP.

I do not need compatibility with Windows XP as the current year is 2024. My disk has logical sectors 512 bytes in size, but the external enclosures don’t report that. I want to know how I can mount the disk anyway, despite the enclosure’s attempts to thwart me. I know the disk is fine, as it is detected with 512 byte sectors and mounts happily via SATA.

It’s never been in a Windows machine.

The only enclosure I have that works out of the box is one of those “SATA to USB adaptors” rather than a bona fide “3.5 inch drive enclosure”. It’s not ideal for long-term use.

I wonder if there’s a place to find out if any given make/model of enclosure will report the sector size as 512 bytes. Then, presumably, one could purchase an enclosure off that list and be confident the disk will be readable.

Yes, the last code block in my OP shows the result of attempting to mount /dev/sdc1 normally: mount: /mnt: special device /dev/sdc1 does not exist.

Though I do not believe it is required as I can mount other drives to /mnt just fine, I have attempted to make /met/tmp and mount there to no avail.

No - I’ve been working on a headless server, and ideally I need this thing to be written into /etc/fstab and work reliably from the command line. I could plug the drive into my laptop to have a look in some GUI tools if you think there’s one around that can circumvent the sector size mismatch, but in the end I’ll need a CLI method.

It’s ext4.

I would argue modern MacOS is not “bad software” per se, it’s just nothing to write home about. Back in the heyday you describe, it was innovative and quite spectacular compared to the competition. Nowadays it’s rivals are better featured in many respects, but it still does everything it needs to.

They acquired K-9 Mail a year ago or so, but it’s still K-9 Mail. There’s plans and a roadmap, but not much has happened that the end user can see, yet.