Yes, shrinking things down has it's own costs and tradeoffs, what a surprise. Some people may find such tradeoffs suitable, in case the main features are still there. I do in this case.
Then actually state the specific costs and disadvantages when you respond if you have even a shred of interest in contributing anything remotely informative, so you're actually adding to the discussion versus consistently adding little more than noise.
Otherwise, you're just conducting a years-long, nearly endless amount of low-effort, shallow shilling of a commercial product here, as if it's the simple and pat answer to nearly every question asked, no matter how tangential or unviable, or more charitably, how particular a use case it serves.
Someone could complain about their 60 mile commute by car, and you'd say, "I really enjoy walking two blocks to work, you should buy these shoes," add nothing more, and then move on to do it to others several more times that day.
In a way it would almost be sad if you aren't getting paid by them to do this, because it's all so incredibly...measly.
Otherwise, you're just conducting a years-long, nearly endless amount of low-effort, shallow shilling of a commercial product here, as if it's the simple and pat answer to nearly every question asked, no matter how tangential or unviable, or more charitably, how particular a use case it serves.
Someone could complain about their 60 mile commute by car, and you'd say, "I really enjoy walking two blocks to work, you should buy these shoes," add nothing more, and then move on to do it to others several more times that day.
In a way it would almost be sad if you aren't getting paid by them to do this, because it's all so incredibly...measly.