> From: "Jez Cunningham" <jez.cunningham@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> I'm not violently anti-Mac (used to have an SE waaay back) but I
> just can't
> see myself stepping up to Apple price levels.
This may be true if you're talking garage-built computers, but it's a
myth if you're comparing similarly configured, substantial machines
from prominent vendors.
Sure, Apple can't compete in the bottom end at the $600 level. But for
any REASONABLE computer, it may surprise you.
"Only a few years ago, it seemed like a no-brainer that Windows
hardware was much cheaper. But if you're talking name-brand hardware,
that's just no longer the case." Computerworld (not exactly a "Mac
Fanboy" magazine) <http://tinyurl.com/3alutp> There are many more such
things if you google "PC Mac price comparison".
One oft-disregarded part of the price equation is lasting value or
resale value. Macs simply get used longer, according to IDC, which
says the average working lifetime of a Mac is 39 months, vs 27 months
for a PC. I just put Leopard on an eight-year-old Mac, and it actually
runs faster than with Tiger! So factor 1.44x (39/27) into the price
equation and REALLY be surprised.
Anyway, I'm not trying to change your mind. I just wanted to point out
that the argument you present is more a belief based on the past than
a fact based in the present. And just get whatever computer you prefer
-- they're just tools, like cameras... :-)
:::: In medieval days, a peasant could be executed for stealing a
crust of bread, while the lord of the manor could abuse every peasant
in sight without fear of legal retribution. Does it strike you that we
seem to be reverting more and more to a similar society, one in which
the punishments no longer fit the crimes? -- Ed Foster ::::
:::: Jan Steinman <http://www.EcoReality.org> ::::
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|