5 Nov
2001
5 Nov
'01
10:09 a.m.
Well, I'd have to say that, since the performance
and reliability haven't
improved since back in the '80's, the Apple was not designed for serious use,
but rather for use by those who didn't value and trust computers enough to
make
the investment in one that warranted the value and trust. Oddly enough,
it was
less costly to use a much more reliable system with a larger installed
software
based, targeted at small business, yet, thanks to the Apple myths, people paid
15%-25% more with the idea that it would be easier to use, which, sadly, it
wasn't.
More below.
Dick
I agree with your first sentence, indeed the performance and reliability
haven't improved, but kindly explain how that is possible when you are
number ONE to start with. PC clones barely last a few years in the school
systems, five is OLD, ten years and its been lost in a warehouse. Working
15 year old Apple computers are routine in surplus, non working is actually
rare at any age without physical damage.
My personal experience with many many years of consulting supporting Apple
products has shown them with few exceptions to be the most reliable and
easiest to use machines. If somebody was foolish enough to buy the company
computer at Sears, and bought some Performa and tried to run their business
with the bundled lite versions of software, they have my sympathy.
Yes indeed the Apple GUI sadly has failed. It is merely conincidental that
all the PC users have paid a couple hundred bucks every two years to
attempt to copy it.
Nothing new on this topic, just wintel propaganda.