===================================================
= NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please =
= be more selective when quoting text =
===================================================
ok this thread wont die, and since it wont, have you seen the price on MAC's
VS DELL. Dell just ran a server deal Dual 1.(something) ghz machine, 256
meg ram, 40 gig hd, nvidia video card, $439 with OS. they ran out real
quick. but i want you to show me any new mac that comes close to that and
i'll agree that the price issue doesn't exist any more.
>
> Sorry to keep this off-topic thread going, but I have an
> obsessive-compulsive need to correct misinformation ;)
>
>
> Shawn Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Macs commanded a premium price on hardware
>
> This was definitely true in the past, but it is not any longer.
>
> The thing most people forget about the "cost" issue is that the VAST
> majority of consumers don't build their own machine, and will never
upgrade
> their computer (processor upgrade, etc.) in the future. When their current
> computer gets old/outdated, they sell it (or hand it down) and buy a new
> one. This is true of both Windows PCs and Macs.
>
> That being the case, the above statement about "Mac price premiums" is
only
> true if you build your own machine. If you buy from a name vendor, as the
> majority of consumers do, there is no longer a price premium. For the same
> money, you get as much or more buying a Mac nowadays. And you can upgrade
> most Mac processors nowadays for pretty cheap as well.
>
>
> "Alan Dowds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I use an Apple in my work as a motorcycle journalist. It's a
> >three-month-old G4 500mhz, with CDRW, 384MB RAM. I normally use it
> >for Word, Outlook, Explorer, Quark and Real Player. It crashes all
> >the time - at least twice a day, often more.
> >
> >It's less reliable than my own (home-made) Windows/AMD PC. I think
> >Apples have become less reliable over the past couple of years. The
> >old Performas were almost indestructible. The newer ones seem much
> >less so.
>
> There are two things here. The first is that the reason newer Macs are
"out
> of the box" less stable is that they now have incredibly greater built-in
> functionality than Performas of years ago had. On any platform, adding
> features reduces stability. Look what USB did to Windows ;) Objectively,
> current Macs are far more stable and powerful than older Performas. In
fact,
> from a statistical point of view, the Performa line was the worst line
Apple
> every made if you look at repair histories.
>
> That said, any operating system "out of the box" is bad. Windows, Mac,
Linux
> -- every one can be made significantly more stable with a little
knowledge.
> That sucks for consumers, but that's the way it is. I run NT, OS 9, and OS
> X, and none of them freezes, because they've all been tweaked a bit. The
> fact that Alan built his Windows PC leads me to believe that he is quite a
> bit more proficient with Windows than he is with Mac OS, which could
explain
> why his Windows machine is more stable.
>
> As was said earlier on the list, the stability of any operating system is
> directly related to how much of an expert the user is.
>
>
> "Matt Wall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Apple gives huge breaks on both software and hardware for schools,
> >studends and teachers. so i would guess that is a lot of the reason,
> >not that they want the students using an os that they will use in the
> >real world ;)
>
> First, this is a comment from someone who obviously doesn't know the
market.
> The days of "huge breaks" for schools, students, and teachers ended years
> ago. The "big break" Apple gives schools on a $999 computer? About $50.
This
> is because Apple's hardware is actually price-competitive now, so they
don't
> have the margins to work with that they once did. Heck, Dell gives bigger
> breaks to schools than Apple does.
>
> Second, as for "using an os that they will use in the real world," that's
a
> silly concept that has never been a good rule for what platform to use,
for
> three reasons. 1) Studies have shown that *learning* to use a computer is
> far more important than what operating system is used for that learning;
2)
> the major applications work exactly the same on all platforms; and 3)
> technology and operating systems change so fast that a kid using a
computer
> in 6th grade today won't be using anything remotely similar to that
> computer/OS when he's in the "real world." (Heck, Mac OS 7.x and 8 were
much
> closer to Windows 95/98 than Windows 3.1 was... even Microsoft found it
> easier for people to transition from Mac to Windows 9x than from 3.1 to 9x
> ;)). Given these facts the best thing for a school to do is buy what is
the
> easiest to teach/learn with, the easiest to support, etc. Some schools
find
> this to be Windows, some Mac.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
> "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
