I really don't fault IBM much, it's not as if they were able to find enough buyers for the various G5 chips when they were good chips to justify continued development.
I agree. Their primary buyer was also pretty inflexible. Not like Amiga was going to pick up the rest of the tab.
yeah.. but warranties is an indication that we would expect the product to break down... which means the quality is not good.
Although i appreciate Apple care, a good product is not supposed to break down (and the funny part is we expect it by purchasing apple care). if we dont expect it, why would we buy it.
Everything breaks. It's always a matter of when. Computers can be made tougher, but for consumers, there's not much point in buying a machine that doesn't break if it costs way too much to make it that tough, especially if the computer's very obsolete in three years. Back then, the price of a computer was quite high. It doesn't make sense to apply the same reliability standards to a $2000 notebook in today's money vs. a $5000 notebook in 1995 money.
I don't think it's that one expects a given machine break, but that you're weighing the cost of the service vs. against the risk that something breaks. If there's a 1 in 10 chance that the main board fries in the first three years, then it's probably worthwhile, vs. having to pay for the repair or just buy a new machine.
Really, anyone that is already an Apple customer with a Mac would get the OS for the same price they're getting it now, as an upgrade. Why would that be a problem?
Only people who didn't have OS X installed on a Mac would have to pay $400, or whatever, for a "complete" new install. That's no different from the way MS does it now, or any other software maker does it.
Since Apple, presumably, wouldn't want to encourage people from installing this on a PC, that would be no problem.
This idea has been around forever. Haven't you heard of Project OSx86? I'm sure you guys have. This Chris555 is just trying to make money off of it. www.osx86project.org
Really, anyone that is already an Apple customer with a Mac would get the OS for the same price they're getting it now, as an upgrade. Why would that be a problem?
Only people who didn't have OS X installed on a Mac would have to pay $400, or whatever, for a "complete" new install. That's no different from the way MS does it now, or any other software maker does it.
Since Apple, presumably, wouldn't want to encourage people from installing this on a PC, that would be no problem.
Although i appreciate Apple care, a good product is not supposed to break down (and the funny part is we expect it by purchasing apple care). if we dont expect it, why would we buy it.
I recall from the movie Tucker that they didn't want to add seatbelts because it would imply the car isn't safe. That is the same logic.
The iPhone only has the typical one year warranty. You can't get an additional warranty. It can be argued that Apple offers a 3 year warranty on Macs because they are well built and therefore it's a revenue builder under normal wear and tear, but not on the iPhone because cell phones are much more abused, thus not likely to last 3 years under normal wear and tear.
He doesn't listen to customers, he's admitted it publicly.
It's great that they have done so well making the products SJ wants to make. But that doesn't mean that they could learn something by listening to feedback from customers (and potential customers).
He never said he didn't listen to customers. He said that Apple didn't use focus groups, which is very different.
I have plenty of experience with them, on both sides. They are a waste of time. If you only knew...
On a related note, does anyone have a Hyundai body with a BMW engine?
Because, you know, that's actually better than a real BMW. Why people pay all that money for a complete BMW is beyond me. A Hyundai outfitted with a BMW engine is WAY better. More bang for your buck.
What does the BMW factory in Germany with all those engineers know about making cars that my friend Lil' Puppet in his chop shop in Florida doesn't already know, and know better?
Neither do I. I've never heard that one. I have heard that electric current going through electronics will break down them faster, but we are talking eons, not the life of a personal computer.
The Mini's problem has never been the CPU. It's been hard drive size and accessibility of the memory,
The HDD can be replaced. It takes two minutes to open the case and get to the drive.
The same thing is true for the RAM.
And how many times do peope upgrade RAM or HDD's?
Not very often. Maybe once or twice during the lifetime of the unit. Once for RAM.
You can always get a HDD unit that fits under the Mini, and connects through Firewire. There are many external HDD solutions available for every computer. Most people upgrade that way, including PC people, most of them never open their "upgradable" machines.
On a related note, does anyone have a Hyundai body with a BMW engine?
Because, you know, that's actually better than a real BMW. Why people pay all that money for a complete BMW is beyond me. A Hyundai outfitted with a BMW engine is WAY better. More bang for your buck.
What does the BMW factory in Germany with all those engineers know about making cars that my friend Lil' Puppet in his chop shop in Florida doesn't already know, and know better?
-1: auto analogy.
But if I had to continue it, both systems use pretty much the same quality of parts as the core "engine" chips. Intel doesn't sell different quality of chips, they're all pretty reliable, they're just rated for different speeds or power consumption, not buying a chip that's going to burn up vs. one that won't.
On a related note, does anyone have a Hyundai body with a BMW engine?
Because, you know, that's actually better than a real BMW. Why people pay all that money for a complete BMW is beyond me. A Hyundai outfitted with a BMW engine is WAY better. More bang for your buck.
What does the BMW factory in Germany with all those engineers know about making cars that my friend Lil' Puppet in his chop shop in Florida doesn't already know, and know better?
It would be more like a BMW hydrogen engine. There is no way everyone is going to buy a BMW, so keeping the technology proprietary isn't in their best interest. Also try to do any pulling or hauling with a 3-series.
Thanks. I recall a big fuss about there not being an extended warranty. I guess I am wrong; but my rational still holds true, even though my example doesn't.
yeah.. but warranties is an indication that we would expect the product to break down... which means the quality is not good.
Although i appreciate Apple care, a good product is not supposed to break down (and the funny part is we expect it by purchasing apple care). if we dont expect it, why would we buy it.
I don't think anyone here understands this.
You're saying that if a company knows it has a good product, it should never break?
And then you're saying, that therefor, they should not offer a warrantee, because they won't need one? And that offering one only proves that they know their product isn't that good, and that it will break?
So we should look for products that come with no warrantee, because they must be so good that they will never break?
It's only EFI now, but guess what? It runs! There are ways around that too.
Apple would need to add some hardware that would be needed for the OS to function properly, or to at least give a proper experience.
Perhaps now that they own PA SEmi, they will be able to do that.
This would give the them opportunity to add some functionality to all of their machines that couldn't be duplicated by "out of the box" PC's.
With this patented, other chip makers couldn't easily duplicate it. They would also have to have some assurance that attempting to do so would reward their high expenses with enough sales. That wouldn't be likely.
No, it wouldn't affect the current consumer. It would not affect anyone except the clone makers who would have to pay "full price" for a new install of the OS. Current customers would have "bought" that full install when they bought the computer. Even users who want to upgrade from 10.4 to 10.5 would not be affected, because they would be able to buy at "upgrade" prices...
Actually, I am not aware of any "upgrade" price for Leopard for my 2006 MacBook Pro. A heavily inflated price would definitely deter me as a consumer.
Consider this as well- look how expensive Windows is- you can find cracked versions all over the internet. There may be a solution to stop these unofficial clones, but raising the price is not it.
Comments
I really don't fault IBM much, it's not as if they were able to find enough buyers for the various G5 chips when they were good chips to justify continued development.
I agree. Their primary buyer was also pretty inflexible. Not like Amiga was going to pick up the rest of the tab.
yeah.. but warranties is an indication that we would expect the product to break down... which means the quality is not good.
Although i appreciate Apple care, a good product is not supposed to break down (and the funny part is we expect it by purchasing apple care). if we dont expect it, why would we buy it.
Everything breaks. It's always a matter of when. Computers can be made tougher, but for consumers, there's not much point in buying a machine that doesn't break if it costs way too much to make it that tough, especially if the computer's very obsolete in three years. Back then, the price of a computer was quite high. It doesn't make sense to apply the same reliability standards to a $2000 notebook in today's money vs. a $5000 notebook in 1995 money.
I don't think it's that one expects a given machine break, but that you're weighing the cost of the service vs. against the risk that something breaks. If there's a 1 in 10 chance that the main board fries in the first three years, then it's probably worthwhile, vs. having to pay for the repair or just buy a new machine.
nope, that will alienate their current consumer..
I don't see why it would.
Really, anyone that is already an Apple customer with a Mac would get the OS for the same price they're getting it now, as an upgrade. Why would that be a problem?
Only people who didn't have OS X installed on a Mac would have to pay $400, or whatever, for a "complete" new install. That's no different from the way MS does it now, or any other software maker does it.
Since Apple, presumably, wouldn't want to encourage people from installing this on a PC, that would be no problem.
There's just one that we know of. There's a video of it on YouTube.
Engadget did one too.
Check it out.
I don't see why it would.
Really, anyone that is already an Apple customer with a Mac would get the OS for the same price they're getting it now, as an upgrade. Why would that be a problem?
Only people who didn't have OS X installed on a Mac would have to pay $400, or whatever, for a "complete" new install. That's no different from the way MS does it now, or any other software maker does it.
Since Apple, presumably, wouldn't want to encourage people from installing this on a PC, that would be no problem.
I would also assume they would keep it EFI only.
Although i appreciate Apple care, a good product is not supposed to break down (and the funny part is we expect it by purchasing apple care). if we dont expect it, why would we buy it.
I recall from the movie Tucker that they didn't want to add seatbelts because it would imply the car isn't safe. That is the same logic.
The iPhone only has the typical one year warranty. You can't get an additional warranty. It can be argued that Apple offers a 3 year warranty on Macs because they are well built and therefore it's a revenue builder under normal wear and tear, but not on the iPhone because cell phones are much more abused, thus not likely to last 3 years under normal wear and tear.
He doesn't listen to customers, he's admitted it publicly.
It's great that they have done so well making the products SJ wants to make. But that doesn't mean that they could learn something by listening to feedback from customers (and potential customers).
He never said he didn't listen to customers. He said that Apple didn't use focus groups, which is very different.
I have plenty of experience with them, on both sides. They are a waste of time. If you only knew...
I have 2 GB of ram. Its working.. its just that it shortens the life of the logic board...
I really don't see how. The Macbook's memory controller is supposed to be able to handle 2GB.
Because, you know, that's actually better than a real BMW. Why people pay all that money for a complete BMW is beyond me. A Hyundai outfitted with a BMW engine is WAY better. More bang for your buck.
What does the BMW factory in Germany with all those engineers know about making cars that my friend Lil' Puppet in his chop shop in Florida doesn't already know, and know better?
I really don't see how.
Neither do I. I've never heard that one. I have heard that electric current going through electronics will break down them faster, but we are talking eons, not the life of a personal computer.
The iPhone only has the typical one year warranty. You can't get an additional warranty.
Why do you say that? This looks to me to be an additional warranty through Apple:
http://www.apple.com/support/product...areiphone.html
The Mini's problem has never been the CPU. It's been hard drive size and accessibility of the memory,
The HDD can be replaced. It takes two minutes to open the case and get to the drive.
The same thing is true for the RAM.
And how many times do peope upgrade RAM or HDD's?
Not very often. Maybe once or twice during the lifetime of the unit. Once for RAM.
You can always get a HDD unit that fits under the Mini, and connects through Firewire. There are many external HDD solutions available for every computer. Most people upgrade that way, including PC people, most of them never open their "upgradable" machines.
On a related note, does anyone have a Hyundai body with a BMW engine?
Because, you know, that's actually better than a real BMW. Why people pay all that money for a complete BMW is beyond me. A Hyundai outfitted with a BMW engine is WAY better. More bang for your buck.
What does the BMW factory in Germany with all those engineers know about making cars that my friend Lil' Puppet in his chop shop in Florida doesn't already know, and know better?
-1: auto analogy.
But if I had to continue it, both systems use pretty much the same quality of parts as the core "engine" chips. Intel doesn't sell different quality of chips, they're all pretty reliable, they're just rated for different speeds or power consumption, not buying a chip that's going to burn up vs. one that won't.
On a related note, does anyone have a Hyundai body with a BMW engine?
Because, you know, that's actually better than a real BMW. Why people pay all that money for a complete BMW is beyond me. A Hyundai outfitted with a BMW engine is WAY better. More bang for your buck.
What does the BMW factory in Germany with all those engineers know about making cars that my friend Lil' Puppet in his chop shop in Florida doesn't already know, and know better?
It would be more like a BMW hydrogen engine. There is no way everyone is going to buy a BMW, so keeping the technology proprietary isn't in their best interest. Also try to do any pulling or hauling with a 3-series.
Why do you say that? This looks to me to be an additional warranty through Apple:
http://www.apple.com/support/product...areiphone.html
Thanks. I recall a big fuss about there not being an extended warranty. I guess I am wrong; but my rational still holds true, even though my example doesn't.
Engadget did one too.
It's the same one.
I
yeah.. but warranties is an indication that we would expect the product to break down... which means the quality is not good.
Although i appreciate Apple care, a good product is not supposed to break down (and the funny part is we expect it by purchasing apple care). if we dont expect it, why would we buy it.
I don't think anyone here understands this.
You're saying that if a company knows it has a good product, it should never break?
And then you're saying, that therefor, they should not offer a warrantee, because they won't need one? And that offering one only proves that they know their product isn't that good, and that it will break?
So we should look for products that come with no warrantee, because they must be so good that they will never break?
Your understanding of logic is seriously flawed.
I would also assume they would keep it EFI only.
It's only EFI now, but guess what? It runs! There are ways around that too.
Apple would need to add some hardware that would be needed for the OS to function properly, or to at least give a proper experience.
Perhaps now that they own PA SEmi, they will be able to do that.
This would give the them opportunity to add some functionality to all of their machines that couldn't be duplicated by "out of the box" PC's.
With this patented, other chip makers couldn't easily duplicate it. They would also have to have some assurance that attempting to do so would reward their high expenses with enough sales. That wouldn't be likely.
No, it wouldn't affect the current consumer. It would not affect anyone except the clone makers who would have to pay "full price" for a new install of the OS. Current customers would have "bought" that full install when they bought the computer. Even users who want to upgrade from 10.4 to 10.5 would not be affected, because they would be able to buy at "upgrade" prices...
Actually, I am not aware of any "upgrade" price for Leopard for my 2006 MacBook Pro. A heavily inflated price would definitely deter me as a consumer.
Consider this as well- look how expensive Windows is- you can find cracked versions all over the internet. There may be a solution to stop these unofficial clones, but raising the price is not it.