If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Windows Live Mail - now OS preferences
| Usually it was started by saying Apples were
| "overpriced" or similar comment. Yet, when someone actually sat down, | and specced out a Windows computer using comparable internal components, | the price difference dropped dramatically. Yes, Apples were still more | expensive, but there are things you get from Apple you don't get from | Microsoft and probably Linux. When was the last time you walked into a | Dell store for help? Or an HP store? How many malware issues are there | with Windows compared to OS X? | | There's more to making a purchasing decision than just money. My iMac | display is still superior to any Windows display I've seen,..... I don't think you really have to look far to see that Apple charges "through the nose". They have no direct competition. I remember when iMacs first came out. A friend bought one. He spent a total of $2,700, with the printer and whatever else he needed to set it up -- for a 1-piece box with no upgradeability other than the RAM. That was around the time that Apple stopped installing floppy drives. I asked AppleSeed friends if that didn't bother them. I always got the same party line in response: "Floppies are outdated. Nobody uses them anymore. Steve Jobs is a genius. He understood that." If Steve Jobs stole their wallet they'd call him a genius. Meanwhile, I read an article saying that including a floppy drive would have cost Apple about $7.50 per box. Then Microcenter started featuring blue, USB external floppy drives for Macs. $100. They sold like hotcakes. Every Mac owner had to have one. Their new connector design has forced people to buy new, wildly overpriced cables. I'm actually using a PC now partly because of Apple pricing. When I first used a computer it was a Mac. I shared a friend's AOL account. It was fun. When I decided to buy a computer myself I went to Microcenter. "Mac or PC?", asked the clerk. I thought they were just 2 brands. "What are the prices?", I asked. The cheapest Mac was $2,200. The cheapest PC was an eMachines for $500. What about software? The area for Windows software was like a gymnasium. Then there was a small room for Mac software, all of which cost more than the Windows version. My decision was made for me. Many apple fans are not even capable of comparing comparable components. Remember the snail ads? Apple was claiming their IBM CPUs could run circles around Intel CPUs because of their extra cache, even when it got to where PCs were running 1 GHz CPUs while Mac CPUs were still down around the 300 MHz range. Finally even Apple admitted their CPUs were nothing special, and changed to Intel. Do a search on the cost of manufacturing iPhones. The results I find are that the total cost is $200+ while the retail price is $600+. That's done with virtual slave labor in China while the income is kept offshore to avoid taxes. Apple is a sleazeball company, no matter how you look at it. But I don't mean to single them out. Microsoft has become one of the biggest companies in the world by ruthlessly maintaining a monopoly on the grossly overpriced software of Windows and Office. Pretty much everything else they do loses money. (I think XBox broke even recently, but I'm not sure the total cost of XBox since the beginning has been recouped.) Even without all the facts and figures, there's a glaring, basic inconsistency that calls the operations of many tech companies into question: They're among the top earners of all companies worldwide. Yet Microsoft just nurses their software monopoly and Apple makes gadgets. That doesn't add up. And why is Bill Gates the richest man in the world? What did he do to deserve such wealth? Last I heard Microsoft had an $8 billion yearly "research" budget. That's $100K per year for, say, 60,000 people, if you figure they somehow spend $2B on materials. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|