mr. me

nolamacguy said:

mr. me said:

This is just it. People who assert that "rich people don't care" don't know rich people. Drug dealers, 20-year-old professional athletes, and lottery winners may not care, but people who have money and know how to use it care very much. The owner of a loaded Mac Pro system would not generally consider replacing it after only one year. Apple sells Watch Editions at twice the price of a loaded Mac Pro.

you're still thinking about it wrong. buying a loaded Pro (a tool used to generate income) isn't the same as buying a gold watch (jewelry used to show off income). you can't apply the same, normal, practical way of thinking about it. there are tons of wealthy people (say the rising new money in China) who desire gold status symbols. they don't buy their status symbols as investments or practical tools. they will upgrade. 

I agree with almost all of your posts, but we have to part ways on this one. The Mac Pro is a fabulous computer. However, it is not an investment--at least not in the sense of other investments. You invest money in securities with the expectation that those securities will rise in value. You invest in real estate with the expectation that the real estate will generate income through rents and capital gains. You also expect that paper losses in real estate will shelter income from other sources. You invest in commodities with the expectation that those commodities will soon be worth more than you paid for them. Be it the things that I have already mentioned, race horses, or numerous other investments, you expect that your investment will rise in value or act as a hedge against the falling value of other investment. The Mac Pro, on the other hand, is a work tool. Purchasing a Mac Pro is an investment in the person who uses it. It allows that person to do the very best that he or she is capable of doing. However, the computer itself will never be worth more than it is when the buyer takes receipt of it. This, despite the fact that Apple computers depreciate much slower than those sold by the competition.

You appear to have fallen for a misconception of the wealthy that is popular on this forum and elsewhere. Rich people as a rule are not in the business of showing off their possessions. When you see a rich woman wearing an expensive necklace, she is usually not showing off her expensive necklace. She is likely showing off a reproduction. Her expensive necklace is in a security vault somewhere.

As for the Watch--whether its case is aluminum, stainless steel, or gold--is much more than a luxury item. It is intended to replace not only your old digital and mechanical watches, but it is also intended to replace everything in your pockets from your house keys to your high-end credit cards. The fact that it comes in versions engineered and built using some of the World's finest materials is just the spoonful of sugar to help the medicine go down. Although the Watch Edition is more than a luxury item, it is still a luxury item. As such, it must maintain a substantial fraction of its purchase price for an extended period of time. I have no idea how Apple plans to pull this off, but I expect Apple to do anything to depreciate any very of the Watch.

spice-boy said:

I wonder if these new cars will have the capability of "road rage"?  This may also mean no more DUIs so less court and law enforcement cost. People with no drivers license (as myself) can now buy or rent a car? Since all responsibility for operation of the vehicle will no longer be of the "driver" accidents and deaths will be solely upon the heads of the manufacturer such as Apple? 

If your self-driving car has an accident because you failed to maintain it or were otherwise negligent, then you may rest assured that you will be held liable.

Hyundella said:

Everyone needs to take a chill pill. Samsung's 2016 Tizen UI is the evolution of last year's UI. Their TVs are awesome and you've obviously never used one. Not everything revolves around Apple, ladies and gents. https://macnn.mnmcdn.com/article_images/1420198182-md-samsungtizensmarttv1.jpg

I own two Samsung TVs--one a 4K SmartTV; the other, a 2005 era 720p HDTV. I also own an TV 4. I love them all. My Samsung SmartTV has the same UI as shown in the posted JPEG. It is disingenuous to claim that Samsung's current UI is an evolution of last year's UI. Samsung didn't get into the business of smart tvs last year. It has sold them for several years now. Samsung's original SmartTV UI was pretty much a straight crib from the iPhone UI. It did not evolve from last year's UI; it evolved from the iPhone UI.

dhagan4755 wrote: »

...

And perhaps Apple should get rid of the OS X moniker and just call it MacOS (like iOS, tvOS, and watchOS). I'm being a little OCD here but OS X as a name is getting lame, and when Apple switched the Mac over to Intel, they changed the name of the PowerBook to the MacBook Pro because they wanted Mac in the name of their Mac products. How about finally doing that with the software too?!

There are several issues with this suggestion. MacOS is the name of the classic Macintosh operating system. It was sold under that name from MacOS 7.6 to MacOS 9.2.2. This operating system commonly referred to as OS 9. Over the last 15 years, Apple has built a lot of brand equity in the "X." Every Mac user has seen it. Those of us who are old enough to remember when Apple charged for its operating systems have several $100 invested in the "X." As the average Mac user which version of OS X is he/she using. Compare this to tvOS, watchOS, or iOS. [Note the inconsistent name of iOS.] How many ?TV, ?Watch, iPod, iPad, or iPhone users know that their devices have an operating system, let alone which version of the OS installed?

Apple would have to be dumb on a lot of levels to chuck the brand equity of OS X in favor of the brand equity of watchOS.