From: "Eric L. Strobel" <fyzycyst_at_comcast.net>
> on 6/11/02 12:34 AM, Steven at Smuro_at_socal.rr.com wrote:
> > What's it called when Apple charges TOP dollar for their products and
> > then drops them like hot potatoes?
> First off, the price difference between COMPARABLE machines (i.e., same
> speed [not same MHz], same quality and features) has never been as great
> has been played up in the ignorant press. And even when the hardware was
> relatively more expensive, that was back in the day when Windows software
> was far more expensive than Mac software, so this made up for much of the
I remember going to an IBM shop around 1984 for my father. We wanted a AT
(286 8MHz) with 1MB RAM, I think 20MB harddisk. It had an EGA monitor and a
9-pin printer (one of these beasts, that probably programmed, could used as
telegraph, that loud it was). They wanted around 15.000 DM around then,
which would be today about 7,500-8,000$. It only ran DOS 3.3. AFAIK the Mac
at this time would cost half of this.
> Second, for years nobody seemed to complain that Compaq was charging far
> more for their PCs than others. There was a reason for it, and many folks
> recognized this and bought Compaqs in spite of the price premium.
That's it. Today it has to be cheap, nothing else.
> Apple made a choice with OS X -- they could either putz around making the
> compatible with ever older machines, or they could draw a line and then
> devote resources to making the OS better. Although I'll not be running it
> anytime soon, I think they made the right decision. It does NOT force you
> to immediately put all your machines in a closet, unless you fall victim
> the assumption that you must instantly and always upgrade to the very
Backward compatibility at all cost is one really big problem of Windows.
Even XP has APIs of Windows 2.0. Do I have to say more?
> One of my two desktops at home is a clone and that's my primary machine.
> It's browsing the web (with the latest IE), running Office98, Mathematica
> playing games, and many other things, and doing them really well. And, as
> said, once I go to MacOS 8.6+CarbonLib (or to OS 9), there's virtually
> nothing that I won't be able to run. If you've put four perfectly
> functional Macs in the closet, that's your *choice*, there's no compelling
> reason that says you MUST do that. As for me, in a year or two, when I
> replace one of my Macs, that will be plenty soon enough to switch to OS X.
Yes, and I recently bought a Quadra 650 just to be able to use the Newton
development tools to their full extent. It would run up to Mac OS 8.1 (which
I don't need, 7.5.3 is still good enough for what I need it).
(Being "brought" up on an Atari 800XL).
-- Read the List FAQ/Etiquette: http://www.newtontalk.net/faq.html Read the Newton FAQ: http://www.guns-media.com/mirrors/newton/faq/ This is the NewtonTalk mailing list - http://www.newtontalk.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Wed Jul 03 2002 - 14:02:06 EDT