Although I love working on MacOSX and with Apple hardware, I have problems justifying to my boss me getting a new one.
A little more than three years ago I got the biggest MAC-laptop (after hefty negotiations). One of my arguments where that it would last one to two years longer than a PC. It has been repaired once (the LCD screen). Now, after expired warranty, there is a new error with the screen (I'm not the only one with this error, but Apple has chosen to ignore our frustrations).
With Macs at 30 to 50 percent higher prices than PCs I could feel comfortable, but here in Norway they are sold at prices between 100 and 200 percent more!
Perhaps a vacation to New Jersey (no tax) is in order. Better yet, have your boss come instead. Kill three birds with one stone.
With Macs at 30 to 50 percent higher prices than PCs I could feel comfortable, but here in Norway they are sold at prices between 100 and 200 percent more!
Why does Apple sell at prices between 100 and 200 percent more in Norway?
Are there added costs that Apple has to pay for selling in Norway, required by Norway, that Apple passes along to the consumer? Is that before any taxes are applied? If not and Apple is just being super greedy, are there not laws in Norway regarding price gouging?
Regardless of whether you like the pay the price or not companies that thrive on premium products have to deliver adequate performance and enough style and class to warrant the premium.
Let's face it ..if Vista wasn't a boring as hell over candified OS with a plethora of annoyances Apple wouldn't exist.
If PC manufacturers differentiated themselves by deliver more than ubuquitious rectangular boxes with cheap components Apple wouldn't exist.
Don't believe the hype if someone tells you Apple doesn't pay more for their hardware.
When Macbooks have powered 6 and 9 pin Firewire and the rest of the PC industry cheaps out with nonpowered 4 pin you see the difference.
When Apple standardizes on DVI ports while the kitsch PC industry standardizes on silly card readers you see the difference.
When Apple's keyboards are backlight or they deliver buttons that don't buckle or pop off as easy. You see the difference.
When you look at a Mac Pro's internals and can't see nary a cable and drives sleds that work, you see the difference.
When you see more expensive slot loaders (but arguably safer) optical drives in laptops you see the difference.
I've been supporting Apple for over a decade. No one is going to sit here and tell me Apple doesn't spend more on their componentry without generating a look of incredulity or at least a laugh.
I've built PCs and they don't look like Macs do for the most part.
Certain people are willing to pay for a better product. Macs happen to be such a beast. This is regardless if it is the software or hardware. If we are paying for better programming then so be it, end of story. Personally I also prefer the way Apple designs their hardware. The internal components are not all there is to that equation.
If you don't like it, then stay with your Windows OS.
No no no. In the G3 & G4 days, the PowerMac was in the $1700 - $2500 range, and it only got that high with outrageous BTOs.
The price for Apple's pro desktop has been steadily rising, and is most certainly not a set price-point or even range.
As for the 60% margins, that is based on today's margins, not margins at the time of release. This can be verified yourself by building a computer using identical components as those in the high-end MacMini at RETAIL PRICES (not bulk, like Apple orders) for around $500 while Apple sells it for $800.
Quote:
Originally Posted by penchanted
This is almost comical in light of current events. Yahoo is a company with no shortage of customers - #1 portal, #1 in email, essentially tied for #1 in IM, #2 in search and advertising and also a huge player in social networks (Flickr and del.icio.us) and yet its very existence as a separate company is threatened because its shareholders are unhappy.
There are alawys exceptions, and of course it's difficult to go back to operating without shareholders once you've taken them on, but there are companies who do so. And there are plenty of successfull companies who operate without shareholders... Cargil, Toys 'R' Us, C&S, Menards... Apple could start buying back their shares and wouldn't have to be anyone's bitch.
And this is good for shareholders, not so good for customers. I passionately dislike when a company strives to hard to please shareholders at the expense of their customers.
You realize that an increase in average selling price can be done in one of TWO ways:
1. Raising prices. (Apple has not done this--pricing info is no secret. In fact they have lowered some prices relative to specs--look at the current iMac compared to the previous gen. One of their best selling lines.)
2. Customers opting more often for higher-end systems compared to low-end systems.
If people are CHOOSING more high-end machines, it's not at their "expense." Maybe more people are going for the 24" iMac than last year. Maybe more people are getting Mac Pros. Maybe people are skipping the Mac Mini and getting Apple TVs. Who knows? What we don't know is that Apple is raising prices and screwing people.
A higher average selling price doesn't necesarily say ANYTHING about the price of a Mac vs. the price of a PC with similar specs. Instead, it could be telling us that people buy bottom-end PCs more than they buy bottom-end Macs. Which makes sense, since really Apple offers no stripped-down bottom-end models at all. They start at the low mid-range in features--and are priced fairly accordingly. Look at ALL the specs and compare a Mac to a PC (note I mentioned ALL, so you may have to add a few things to both models unless you can find a close match). The Mac is often cheaper than a Dell or HP or Sony. Sometimes by a lot. But basically in the same ballpark as name-brand (not Acers with cheap parts) PCs.
There's no doubt I omitted R&D and software. I'm not denying that. Neither am I denying that the quality of Macs exceed that of Windows PCs. I'm just saying that the premium, even for a "luxury item" is a bit excessive.
Would you sell a computer with an 80GB HDD, Combo Drive, and 1.8GHz CPU for $600? My 6-year old iMac has a Superdrive and 60GB HDD! Even to the sanest of minds, buy a computer with those specs at that price doesn't even make sense, even if it does have the best software and stability available.-Clive
Perhaps and here are some old pics (http://mini-itx.com/viewer.asp?i=01&j=0421 that might help you identify some of the missing parts, but heck, why not go for it. Don't forget the case, power cord, labor, packaging, transportation (doubt that you would ever need it though), advertising, liability insurance, product support, software (better include some, otherwise you may never get an order especially if you compare it to a Mac).
Oh. forget R&D. I think that it would be a waste of money on your part.
Hmmm. Looks so easy. Wonder why somebody hasn't done it before?
I find it rather amazing that Apple has managed to increase their ASP in the last two years. While that looks good for shareholders there is a serious risk lurking just under the surface: the hackintosh.
Look at how successful the cracking community has been getting and keeping the iPhone unlocked. Estimates say 20-25% of all iPhones are unlocked.
If the same level of effort was made to make it easy for Joe Consumer to run Leopard on his $500 PC, Apple would have a huge problem on its hands. Imagine if 25% of Mac customers replaced their machines with Acer hardware running Leopard.
Like the iTunes store works to reduce file sharing by making it easy to find and buy music online, Apple needs to make Macs affordable enough that most customers don't go looking for cheaper alternatives.
Prescription:
1) continue to innovate with cooling systems to allow the MacBook Pro to carry top of the line components in an even lighter package.
2) having confirmed the MacBook Pro as a true high-end notebook at a premium price, introduce a 15" MacBook to grab a chunk of the market that currently sees nothing for them in the Mac lineup. There's no need to make this unit ultra light because the competition is often a full pound (or more) heavier than a Mac.
3) accept that the desktop market still exists and that very successful hackintosh units already exist in this space. accept that most consumer (as opposed to corporate) desktop buyers play games. Respond with a small tower packing commodity desktop components and PCI express video.
4) use the aforementioned small tower, a more aggressively priced entry-level iMac and the AppleTV to completely replace the Mac Mini.
Net result: Apple continues to sell 3 desktop models and expands selection in the growing notebook and home electronics markets.
Don't believe the hype if someone tells you Apple doesn't pay more for their hardware.
There are certain places where Apple uses better hardware, but as for the guts of the machine, it's all the same.
I too have been a Apple support for well-over 10 years, but that certainly doesn't mean they don't have flaws in my eyes. And I've also home-built PCs. Sure, they're nothing like Macs but in my experience that's because you don't get the benefits of OS X, not because I had to put my CD in a tray instead of slot-loading it, because the insides had wires, or because I couldn't see the keys in a dark room.
Sure the extra touches are nice, but surely not necessities (save for the DVI port). When I slot-load a CD into my iMac, I don't say, "ahh, I'm using a Mac. How much of a pain in the ass would it be if I had to put this in a tray?"
Perhaps and here are some old pics (http://mini-itx.com/viewer.asp?i=01&j=0421) that might help you identify some of the missing parts, but heck, why not go for it. Don't forget the case, power cord, labor[................................]
I didn't forget the motherboard. It can't really be considered a Mini-ITX as it has a much more limited set of hardware features than the Mini-ITX standard and AGAIN, only has to work with a small subset of hardware. And as for the case and power cord and all the other things you mentioned, those must be considered in the products I mentioned as well, so the only thing I'm missing is assembly.
Oh, yeah, and I already mentioned R&D a few posts up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins
Yup. In fact, didn't Apple used to sell G4 towers for $1,499? And now the Mac Pro is $2,799(!)... wow. .
They did but it was a former top-spec G4 which then became an entry-level model when new hardware came out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lantzn
Maybe you should consider moving on, why waste your life arguing?
Maybe you should read and quote my entire sentence.
They did but it was a former top-spec G4 which then became an entry-level model when new hardware came out.
Maybe, but it didn't seem like a transitional or temporary thing... I seem to remember Apple selling towers at the $1,499 price point for quite a long time, i.e. a few years.
In fact, I believe they even had a $1,299 tower out for awhile, but that was a transitional/temporary thing.
There are certain places where Apple uses better hardware, but as for the guts of the machine, it's all the same.
Sure the extra touches are nice, but surely not necessities (save for the DVI port). When I slot-load a CD into my iMac, I don't say, "ahh, I'm using a Mac. How much of a pain in the ass would it be if I had to put this in a tray?"
-Clive
Computers are hardly necessities but if I'm going to compute at home I want something a bit better than the ubiquitious Wintel fare I have to work on.
My Honda gets me from A to B but I can't help but salivate at the style and panache than an Audi A6 would deliver.
I'm in no no hurry for Audi to deliver Honda quality.
Maybe, but it didn't seem like a transitional or temporary thing... I seem to remember Apple selling towers at the $1,499 price point for quite a long time, i.e. a few years.
In fact, I believe they even had a $1,299 tower out for awhile, but that was a transitional/temporary thing.
.
I think the end of the $1499 Mac tower was the Mac G4 in Jan. of 2003 for $1499. Then in the Summer of 2003 came the G5 which jumped the low end up to $1999. Then came the Mac Pro in mid 2006 for $2499. The cheapest now is the Mac Pro single quad for $2299.
The $1499 days are gone. The choice is, if you want a truly upgradeable (not talking about processor) tower and a separate monitor, then you have have a choice of a Mac Pro with OS X or a PC made by a good number of other computer makers and run the system you want, but not OS X.
I think the end of the $1499 Mac tower was the Mac G4 in Jan. of 2003 for $1499. Then in the Summer of 2003 came the G5 which jumped the low end up to $1999. Then came the Mac Pro in mid 2006 for $2499. The cheapest now is the Mac Pro single quad for $2299.
The $1499 days are gone.
Meh. Things are only gone until they aren't, anymore.
I built my last Windows PC back in 2002 hoping that I can get high quality parts and high-end performance for less money. Well, I ended up paying more that what I paid for my current iMac. The CPU alone was more than $1200 plus 15" LCD monitor, Wireless mouse and keyboard, and speakers totaling almost $1900. A year after that, my PC became obsolete. I switched to Mac in 2006 and I have to admit that I never regret spending $1800 on my iMac. Almost 2 years without going obsolete. Thats the beauty of Mac.
Don't get me wrong, I love Apple products, and my next computer will be a Mac, but I had the exact opposite experience.
Almost 2.5 years ago I built my own computer and spent about $900 - $1,000 bucks and it's STILL faster than probably 50% of new computers on the market. I can't wait for mine to become "obsolete" so I can finally get a Mac!
Computers are hardly necessities but if I'm going to compute at home I want something a bit better than the ubiquitious Wintel fare I have to work on.
My Honda gets me from A to B but I can't help but salivate at the style and panache than an Audi A6 would deliver.
I'm in no no hurry for Audi to deliver Honda quality.
It's not 1980. Computers ARE a necessity, I might even suggest as much of a necessity as a car. Al Gore was into something when he invented the internet because, surprize, e-mail is the new telephone, and Alexander Graham Bell is very unhappy about it. I know I'm a youngster, but I don't know a single person without e-mail. Hell, even my 89-year-old grandfather checks his e-mail regularly.
This is all besides the point.
This is about your Honda. Yes, we'd all love to replace our "Hondas" with "Audis" (my "Honda" is a hail-damaged 1999 Mercury Mystique and my "Audi" is an Opel GT (or it's US counterpart, the Saturn Sky Redline)) and of course we'd love to buy our "Audis" at the price of a Honda..........
Meh. Things are only gone until they aren't, anymore.
.
I bought a G4 (DA 466, single processor) 7 years ago last month for $1699. If you an increase of about 5 per cent per year to that price then I can buy the a single quad Mac Pro for about the same price as I paid for the G4. So I get a lot more for the same price. I do realize that computer prices are somewhat down during that same period of time, but then I would have to buy a Windows machine and that I'm not going to do.
Some people want the Mac Pro to be a gaming machine, but has anyone priced a true high end Windows gaming PC. Several thousand more than a Mac Pro.
Comments
Although I love working on MacOSX and with Apple hardware, I have problems justifying to my boss me getting a new one.
A little more than three years ago I got the biggest MAC-laptop (after hefty negotiations). One of my arguments where that it would last one to two years longer than a PC. It has been repaired once (the LCD screen). Now, after expired warranty, there is a new error with the screen (I'm not the only one with this error, but Apple has chosen to ignore our frustrations).
With Macs at 30 to 50 percent higher prices than PCs I could feel comfortable, but here in Norway they are sold at prices between 100 and 200 percent more!
Perhaps a vacation to New Jersey (no tax) is in order. Better yet, have your boss come instead. Kill three birds with one stone.
With Macs at 30 to 50 percent higher prices than PCs I could feel comfortable, but here in Norway they are sold at prices between 100 and 200 percent more!
Why does Apple sell at prices between 100 and 200 percent more in Norway?
Are there added costs that Apple has to pay for selling in Norway, required by Norway, that Apple passes along to the consumer? Is that before any taxes are applied? If not and Apple is just being super greedy, are there not laws in Norway regarding price gouging?
Regardless of whether you like the pay the price or not companies that thrive on premium products have to deliver adequate performance and enough style and class to warrant the premium.
Let's face it ..if Vista wasn't a boring as hell over candified OS with a plethora of annoyances Apple wouldn't exist.
If PC manufacturers differentiated themselves by deliver more than ubuquitious rectangular boxes with cheap components Apple wouldn't exist.
Don't believe the hype if someone tells you Apple doesn't pay more for their hardware.
When Macbooks have powered 6 and 9 pin Firewire and the rest of the PC industry cheaps out with nonpowered 4 pin you see the difference.
When Apple standardizes on DVI ports while the kitsch PC industry standardizes on silly card readers you see the difference.
When Apple's keyboards are backlight or they deliver buttons that don't buckle or pop off as easy. You see the difference.
When you look at a Mac Pro's internals and can't see nary a cable and drives sleds that work, you see the difference.
When you see more expensive slot loaders (but arguably safer) optical drives in laptops you see the difference.
I've been supporting Apple for over a decade. No one is going to sit here and tell me Apple doesn't spend more on their componentry without generating a look of incredulity or at least a laugh.
I've built PCs and they don't look like Macs do for the most part.
If you don't like it, then stay with your Windows OS.
Pro desktops: $2500-3500 on average.
No no no. In the G3 & G4 days, the PowerMac was in the $1700 - $2500 range, and it only got that high with outrageous BTOs.
The price for Apple's pro desktop has been steadily rising, and is most certainly not a set price-point or even range.
As for the 60% margins, that is based on today's margins, not margins at the time of release. This can be verified yourself by building a computer using identical components as those in the high-end MacMini at RETAIL PRICES (not bulk, like Apple orders) for around $500 while Apple sells it for $800.
This is almost comical in light of current events. Yahoo is a company with no shortage of customers - #1 portal, #1 in email, essentially tied for #1 in IM, #2 in search and advertising and also a huge player in social networks (Flickr and del.icio.us) and yet its very existence as a separate company is threatened because its shareholders are unhappy.
There are alawys exceptions, and of course it's difficult to go back to operating without shareholders once you've taken them on, but there are companies who do so. And there are plenty of successfull companies who operate without shareholders... Cargil, Toys 'R' Us, C&S, Menards... Apple could start buying back their shares and wouldn't have to be anyone's bitch.
-Clive
And this is good for shareholders, not so good for customers. I passionately dislike when a company strives to hard to please shareholders at the expense of their customers.
You realize that an increase in average selling price can be done in one of TWO ways:
1. Raising prices. (Apple has not done this--pricing info is no secret. In fact they have lowered some prices relative to specs--look at the current iMac compared to the previous gen. One of their best selling lines.)
2. Customers opting more often for higher-end systems compared to low-end systems.
If people are CHOOSING more high-end machines, it's not at their "expense." Maybe more people are going for the 24" iMac than last year. Maybe more people are getting Mac Pros. Maybe people are skipping the Mac Mini and getting Apple TVs. Who knows? What we don't know is that Apple is raising prices and screwing people.
A higher average selling price doesn't necesarily say ANYTHING about the price of a Mac vs. the price of a PC with similar specs. Instead, it could be telling us that people buy bottom-end PCs more than they buy bottom-end Macs. Which makes sense, since really Apple offers no stripped-down bottom-end models at all. They start at the low mid-range in features--and are priced fairly accordingly. Look at ALL the specs and compare a Mac to a PC (note I mentioned ALL, so you may have to add a few things to both models unless you can find a close match). The Mac is often cheaper than a Dell or HP or Sony. Sometimes by a lot. But basically in the same ballpark as name-brand (not Acers with cheap parts) PCs.
There's no doubt I omitted R&D and software. I'm not denying that. Neither am I denying that the quality of Macs exceed that of Windows PCs. I'm just saying that the premium, even for a "luxury item" is a bit excessive.
Would you sell a computer with an 80GB HDD, Combo Drive, and 1.8GHz CPU for $600? My 6-year old iMac has a Superdrive and 60GB HDD! Even to the sanest of minds, buy a computer with those specs at that price doesn't even make sense, even if it does have the best software and stability available.-Clive
Perhaps and here are some old pics (http://mini-itx.com/viewer.asp?i=01&j=0421 that might help you identify some of the missing parts, but heck, why not go for it. Don't forget the case, power cord, labor, packaging, transportation (doubt that you would ever need it though), advertising, liability insurance, product support, software (better include some, otherwise you may never get an order especially if you compare it to a Mac).
Oh. forget R&D. I think that it would be a waste of money on your part.
Hmmm. Looks so easy. Wonder why somebody hasn't done it before?
Look at how successful the cracking community has been getting and keeping the iPhone unlocked. Estimates say 20-25% of all iPhones are unlocked.
If the same level of effort was made to make it easy for Joe Consumer to run Leopard on his $500 PC, Apple would have a huge problem on its hands. Imagine if 25% of Mac customers replaced their machines with Acer hardware running Leopard.
Like the iTunes store works to reduce file sharing by making it easy to find and buy music online, Apple needs to make Macs affordable enough that most customers don't go looking for cheaper alternatives.
Prescription:
1) continue to innovate with cooling systems to allow the MacBook Pro to carry top of the line components in an even lighter package.
2) having confirmed the MacBook Pro as a true high-end notebook at a premium price, introduce a 15" MacBook to grab a chunk of the market that currently sees nothing for them in the Mac lineup. There's no need to make this unit ultra light because the competition is often a full pound (or more) heavier than a Mac.
3) accept that the desktop market still exists and that very successful hackintosh units already exist in this space. accept that most consumer (as opposed to corporate) desktop buyers play games. Respond with a small tower packing commodity desktop components and PCI express video.
4) use the aforementioned small tower, a more aggressively priced entry-level iMac and the AppleTV to completely replace the Mac Mini.
Net result: Apple continues to sell 3 desktop models and expands selection in the growing notebook and home electronics markets.
No no no. In the G3 & G4 days, the PowerMac was in the $1700 - $2500 range, and it only got that high with outrageous BTOs.
The price for Apple's pro desktop has been steadily rising, and is most certainly not a set price-point or even range.
Yup. In fact, didn't Apple used to sell G4 towers for $1,499? And now the Mac Pro is $2,799(!)... wow.
.
Don't believe the hype if someone tells you Apple doesn't pay more for their hardware.
There are certain places where Apple uses better hardware, but as for the guts of the machine, it's all the same.
I too have been a Apple support for well-over 10 years, but that certainly doesn't mean they don't have flaws in my eyes. And I've also home-built PCs. Sure, they're nothing like Macs but in my experience that's because you don't get the benefits of OS X, not because I had to put my CD in a tray instead of slot-loading it, because the insides had wires, or because I couldn't see the keys in a dark room.
Sure the extra touches are nice, but surely not necessities (save for the DVI port). When I slot-load a CD into my iMac, I don't say, "ahh, I'm using a Mac. How much of a pain in the ass would it be if I had to put this in a tray?"
-Clive
...all I ever do here is argue with people....
-Clive
Maybe you should consider moving on, why waste your life arguing?
Yup. In fact, didn't Apple used to sell G4 towers for $1,499? And now the Mac Pro is $2,799(!)... wow.
.
Yep a lot of us have been missing that $1500 entry level pro tower.
Perhaps and here are some old pics (http://mini-itx.com/viewer.asp?i=01&j=0421) that might help you identify some of the missing parts, but heck, why not go for it. Don't forget the case, power cord, labor[................................]
I didn't forget the motherboard. It can't really be considered a Mini-ITX as it has a much more limited set of hardware features than the Mini-ITX standard and AGAIN, only has to work with a small subset of hardware. And as for the case and power cord and all the other things you mentioned, those must be considered in the products I mentioned as well, so the only thing I'm missing is assembly.
Oh, yeah, and I already mentioned R&D a few posts up.
Yup. In fact, didn't Apple used to sell G4 towers for $1,499? And now the Mac Pro is $2,799(!)... wow.
They did but it was a former top-spec G4 which then became an entry-level model when new hardware came out.
Maybe you should consider moving on, why waste your life arguing?
Maybe you should read and quote my entire sentence.
-Clive
They did but it was a former top-spec G4 which then became an entry-level model when new hardware came out.
Maybe, but it didn't seem like a transitional or temporary thing... I seem to remember Apple selling towers at the $1,499 price point for quite a long time, i.e. a few years.
In fact, I believe they even had a $1,299 tower out for awhile, but that was a transitional/temporary thing.
.
There are certain places where Apple uses better hardware, but as for the guts of the machine, it's all the same.
Sure the extra touches are nice, but surely not necessities (save for the DVI port). When I slot-load a CD into my iMac, I don't say, "ahh, I'm using a Mac. How much of a pain in the ass would it be if I had to put this in a tray?"
-Clive
Computers are hardly necessities but if I'm going to compute at home I want something a bit better than the ubiquitious Wintel fare I have to work on.
My Honda gets me from A to B but I can't help but salivate at the style and panache than an Audi A6 would deliver.
I'm in no no hurry for Audi to deliver Honda quality.
Maybe, but it didn't seem like a transitional or temporary thing... I seem to remember Apple selling towers at the $1,499 price point for quite a long time, i.e. a few years.
In fact, I believe they even had a $1,299 tower out for awhile, but that was a transitional/temporary thing.
.
I think the end of the $1499 Mac tower was the Mac G4 in Jan. of 2003 for $1499. Then in the Summer of 2003 came the G5 which jumped the low end up to $1999. Then came the Mac Pro in mid 2006 for $2499. The cheapest now is the Mac Pro single quad for $2299.
The $1499 days are gone. The choice is, if you want a truly upgradeable (not talking about processor) tower and a separate monitor, then you have have a choice of a Mac Pro with OS X or a PC made by a good number of other computer makers and run the system you want, but not OS X.
I think the end of the $1499 Mac tower was the Mac G4 in Jan. of 2003 for $1499. Then in the Summer of 2003 came the G5 which jumped the low end up to $1999. Then came the Mac Pro in mid 2006 for $2499. The cheapest now is the Mac Pro single quad for $2299.
The $1499 days are gone.
Meh. Things are only gone until they aren't, anymore.
.
I built my last Windows PC back in 2002 hoping that I can get high quality parts and high-end performance for less money. Well, I ended up paying more that what I paid for my current iMac. The CPU alone was more than $1200 plus 15" LCD monitor, Wireless mouse and keyboard, and speakers totaling almost $1900. A year after that, my PC became obsolete. I switched to Mac in 2006 and I have to admit that I never regret spending $1800 on my iMac. Almost 2 years without going obsolete. Thats the beauty of Mac.
Don't get me wrong, I love Apple products, and my next computer will be a Mac, but I had the exact opposite experience.
Almost 2.5 years ago I built my own computer and spent about $900 - $1,000 bucks and it's STILL faster than probably 50% of new computers on the market. I can't wait for mine to become "obsolete" so I can finally get a Mac!
Computers are hardly necessities but if I'm going to compute at home I want something a bit better than the ubiquitious Wintel fare I have to work on.
My Honda gets me from A to B but I can't help but salivate at the style and panache than an Audi A6 would deliver.
I'm in no no hurry for Audi to deliver Honda quality.
It's not 1980. Computers ARE a necessity, I might even suggest as much of a necessity as a car. Al Gore was into something when he invented the internet because, surprize, e-mail is the new telephone, and Alexander Graham Bell is very unhappy about it. I know I'm a youngster, but I don't know a single person without e-mail. Hell, even my 89-year-old grandfather checks his e-mail regularly.
This is all besides the point.
This is about your Honda. Yes, we'd all love to replace our "Hondas" with "Audis" (my "Honda" is a hail-damaged 1999 Mercury Mystique and my "Audi" is an Opel GT (or it's US counterpart, the Saturn Sky Redline)) and of course we'd love to buy our "Audis" at the price of a Honda..........
.... but who said ANYTHING about quality
Meh. Things are only gone until they aren't, anymore.
.
I bought a G4 (DA 466, single processor) 7 years ago last month for $1699. If you an increase of about 5 per cent per year to that price then I can buy the a single quad Mac Pro for about the same price as I paid for the G4. So I get a lot more for the same price. I do realize that computer prices are somewhat down during that same period of time, but then I would have to buy a Windows machine and that I'm not going to do.
Some people want the Mac Pro to be a gaming machine, but has anyone priced a true high end Windows gaming PC. Several thousand more than a Mac Pro.