6 Oct
2011
6 Oct
'11
3:26 p.m.
On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 18:11:44 -0400, "TeoZ" <teoz at neo.rr.com> wrote:
logo
> Most people who eat at McDonald's frequently
would call a $75 dinner
at
a high-end
steak house to be "overpriced".
-Dave
Yea, few people can sell a McDonalds double cheeseburger with
an Apple on it in a pretty box for $75 and call it a steak.
Annd as is often the case, the truth is probably somewhere in between. My
experience with the reliability of recent (last ten years) Apple hardware
has been that it's been pretty much on par with reasonable-quality PC
hardware. We had one iMac (an early Intel one) that bounced back and forth
between us and Apple at least three times (I forget the details now), each
time failing again in the same way in under 24 hours. Having said that,
Apple's design and build quality is generally better (but not such that the
price is justified, IMO).
I do agree strongly with the point made earlier that Apple's major
contribution to the world has been in the field of extreme vendor lock-in
and apparently anti-competitive practice. Perhaps I'm still bitter about
the whole Apple II/Woz thing! Anyway, that's what I thought of when I read
the original $75 dinner vs. burger comment. I don't think it's a relevant
point at all; each time I go out to dinner, I can easily choose one or the
other depending on what works for me at the time. If I choose McDonald's,
or the $75 lunch, I'm not stuck with that choice for months/years, and end
up only being able to eat the breakfast and lunch that the Applestaurant
tells me I can. I really do resent companies that try to over-reach
thmeselves; this annoyed me about Microsoft for a long time, to the point
that I find myself astonished to be in this position regarding Apple.
Now, we just have to wait for Google to take over enough of the world for
me to resent them as well. Then I can sit back and watch the fisticuffs
between the three of them. Not that Microsoft seems likely to put up much
of a fight these days.
Mike