Re: Yep, some more actual Mac advocacy (This is comp.sys.mac.advocacy, after all)


"-hh" <recscuba_google@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:812ba7f6-d06b-4c10-81dc-ad1585a5a696@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Hasta La Vista" <noem...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"-hh" <recscuba_goo...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Hasta La Vista" <noem...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> "George Graves" <gmgrav...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hasta La Vista wrote:
> >> "George Graves" <gmgrav...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> >>> Hasta La Vista wrote:
> > > >>>>>> In my case I found Apple's prices to be double for what I > > > >>>>>> paid
> > > >>>>>> for my PC, for less hardware than I got.

> > > > IOW, more of less.

> > > Please explain how 2 GB of RAM instead of 1 GB of RAM is "more of > > > less."
> > > Continue on from there for a faster 500 GB HD instead of Apple's > > > slower
> > > 120GB HD.

> I see you have no answer for the above.

My apologies for overlooking it, but the answer really is quite
simple:

You're confused.

your HP a1250n didn't come with 2GB of RAM or a 500GB HD. As
per your "Merry Xmas to me!" thread of 5 Dec 05, it had 1GB and a
250GB...half as much of each.

My HP a6300f most certainly did come with 2 GB of RAM and a 500 GB HD, and I mentioned it first in a thread called "I'm sure glad I didn't buy a Mac Mini!" posted on the ninth of March.

However, as per later threads, you've claimed that you paid $850 for
your PC ($250 more than the current mac mini price). As such, I'm a
tad confused: have you actually bought TWO PCs within the past 24-30
months?

You're more than a tad confused.

"I looked at the Mac Mini and at first glance I thought they were pretty
good. Then I saw what I could get for $400 from Office Depot ! I paid
$550, with a $150 mail-in rebate."


In any case, while we can always say "more is better", hardware specs
are merely an intermediate to functional performance and primarily are
relevant when all other things are equal, but since the OSs are
different, this is not the case. Thus, the functional question is:
how fast does OS X run in 1GB of RAM versus Vista with 2GB?

http://www.macworld.co.uk/blogs/index.cfm?entryid=355&blogid=7

"As I write this, the first Airs have been released into the wild, and the thing's been benchmarked to within an inch of its life. And friends, the news ain't great. This is the lowest-performing Mac in the whole line. Slower than even the Mac mini, which under many operating conditions makes you wonder if there isn't some sort of hidden button on this little box that causes the lid to pop open and reveal an assortment of chocolate novelties inside."


And specific to the HD, I agree that the mini takes a performance hit
because of it, but the 2.5" drive is a "necessary evil" to achieving
its small form factor. Personally, I'd like to see the trade studies
that Apple went through in making this decision, as it wouldn't be a
killer to me if the mini's box were 1" wider and 1" deeper ... but I
suspect that due to power & cooling issues, it wouldn't likely have
been this minor. If the mini grew to a chunky box (eg the old 'pizza
box' design) its form factor would no longer neatly fit on a book
shelf, etc. In any case, the bigger picture here is that that HD is
the standard that's in all brands' laptops (size and capacity), which
the general public's consumers are buying more and more of (IIRC,
roughly half the market now) which is a clear indication of their
willingness to trade off this aspect of computational performance for
the non-computationally based performance benefits of transportability
and compact size. In other words, the general consumer simply doesn't
care, and there's millions more of them than just the two of us.

After all those words, you failed to give any reason why I should accept less in the Mac Mini just to get a very small computer. I've noticed that most of you Mac fanbois try to cover the fact you've said nothing by saying lots of words.

> I knew what the analogy meant. In reality I got ~20 oz. of Ruth Chris
> steak from HP for half the price Apple wanted for 5 oz.

Its the OS that determines the grade of meat.

No, the hardware determines the grade of meat.

Since your HP is
running Windows, your plate only can contain chopped meat.

Nope. My HP is still twice the steak for half the price Apple wanted.

> > > After you cover those two we can discuss the other computer parts > > > that
> > > the Mac has half of for twice the price.

> > Such as total package size, which is the mini's strength. What does
> > the price of the HP go to when that performance parameter is
> > *matched*?

> You don't get to go on to discussing that after ignoring what I brought > up.

Well, its now provided, per the above. Your turn to put up.

It wasn't provided. If anything, you knocked down the Mac Mini's size as an advantage.

> > Its not a question of it is important to *you*, but merely
> > matching the products' salient characteristics that *someone*
> > may care about.

> I'm unimportant, but this imaginary "someone" is important, because > they'll
> probably want a Mac Mini? That's a strange argument, to say the least.

It is because a single person does not ever determine the success/
failure of a mass produced product. Myself included too. This is why
we all need to leave our personally myopic "me, me, me" preferences
set aside when trying to gain perspective for the broader and
holistically more objective comparisons.

I don't give a flying fig about the success of the Mac Mini in the market. I want to know what about OSX would have justified buying a Mac Mini for myself, or even a $1200 iMac, instead of my $400 HP PC ($600 with monitor).

> > > >>>> I got two good steaks from Ruth's Chris for $25 instead of half
> > > >>>> a steak for $50 from Apple.
> > > >>> Nope Rith's Chris doesn't sell two steaks for $25.
> > > >> You retreated from your own analogy into literalism.
> > You've obviously not eaten at Ruth Chris <g>

> How is that obvious?

Because if you had, you would have cracked a joke about their $8
potato. Ruth Chris isn' t worth their high price for their food
quality alone ... I've joked that they serve a nice $25 steak for the
bargain price of $50. This is often the price that you pay for
getting a "safe" meal at a restaurant chain in an unknown city, and
Ruth Chris is no exception here...its just positioned to be a bit more
high end than TGIFridays or Ruby Tuesday's.

IOW, you didn't understand George's analogy.

> > > > The hardware doesn't matter any more
> > > Yes it does.
> > Even when a major differentiating factor has become the OS?

> Explain how the OS makes 1 GB of RAM just as good as 2 GB of RAM, or a > 120
> GB HD just as good as a faster 500 GB HD.

How many times have we heard complaints about how Windows is a
"Resources Pig"?

I don't think you've ever heard that complaint from me.


To use an automotive term, if your OS only gets 10mpg, then you need
more RAM/HD just to be the functional equal to another OS that gets
20mpg. The ultimate determinator is the productivity of the
computer's operator, and one doesn't measure that by hardware specs
alone. The problem is that we don't have easy measuring sticks for
this, so we tend to ignore it and look at only that which we can
easily measure - - eg, the hardware specs - - even though this is
known to be incomplete.

You failed to talk me into half the hardware for twice the price.

> > When Apple has successfully "demanded" and gotten more for their
> > products - - with market penetration of laptops of particular note -
> > - when in many cases they're running on the same (or older!) Intel
> > architecture, if its not the hardware or trendy cachet, the only thing
> > left to differentiate is the OS.

> IOW, Apple offers such a poor deal in hardware you'll just close your > eyes
> to it.

I can buy a $599 mini for $563 (because I can get a $36 employer
discount); others can get an EDU discount. As such, this means that
that Psystar clone would only save me a whopping $18.

YMMV, but I'm more than willing to pay the extra $18 just to not lose
the OS's automatic Software Update feature, even without having to
consider the issue of violating the EULA or considering the rest of
the hardware trade-offs (gain 3.5" HDs, lose size, lose firewire,
etc).

I'd rather pay $400 for this:

HP Pavilion Desktop a6300f PC

Operating system Genuine Windows Vista Home Premium(1)

Processor Intel Pentium Dual-Core Desktop Processor E2180(2)

Memory 2048MB

Memory speed PC2-5300 DDR2 SDRAM

Total memory slots 2 DIMM

Maximum memory expansion Expandable to 4GB

Graphics NVIDIA GeForce 7100 with 128MB dedicated graphics memory.

TV and entertainment experience N/A

PCI expansion 1 PCI (occupied) 2 PCI Express x1 (2 available) 1 PCI
Express x16 (1 available)

Hard disk drive(s) 500GB 7200RPM SATA [gigabyte is defined as
1,000,000,000 bytes, accessible capacity may vary]

Primary CD/DVD drive SuperMulti DVD Burner with LightScribe Technology

Secondary CD/DVD drive N/A

Communications Integrated 10/100BaseT network interface

Sound card High Definition Audio,

Speakers 8 speaker configurable

System N/A

Front-side bus (processor dependent) 800MHz Front Side Bus

Power supply N/A

I/O ports Front panel 15-in-1 memory card reader 6 USB 2.0 ports (2
Front, 4 Back) 2 FireWire (IEEE 1394) port(s) (1 Front, 1 Back) Headphone;
Microphone; Line-in (Front) 2 PS/2; Digital Audio In

Software - full versions Photosmart Essential to manage your digital
photos(25b) Roxio Creator featuring LightScribe Technology: Edit, burn and
archive data to to DVDs and CDs(9) muvee autoProducer Basic: Automatically
create professional looking home videos videos and burn to DVD Roxio MyDVD
Basic: Make movies and slideshows and burn to DVD or CD(9) Microsoft Works
8: Includes a word processor, spread***, database and calendar calendar
Adobe Reader 8.0: Read and print PDF files HP Total Care Advisor:
Customizable desktop tool provides support, system health health and
shopping information

Software - introduction versions Microsoft Office Home and Student 2007
Trial: 60-day trial version(14) Norton Internet Security 2007: Protect your
PC out of the box (60 days of complimentary complimentary live updates)

Trial Internet service Easy sign-up to major dial-up and broadband
Internet Service Providers:(16) - AOL Basic Dial-Up (offer included) - AOL
Dial-Up Advantage (offer included) - AOL High Speed (offer included) - MSN
dial-up (offer included) - NetZero Dial-Up (offer included) - NetZero
Accelerated Dial-Up (offer included) - EarthLink dial-up (offer included) -
EarthLink High Speed (offer included) - High Speed Internet Services
Comparison Shopping

Dimensions 16.28 x 6.89 x 15.24 in

Basic warranty One year of hardware parts and labor coverage, 90 day
software toll-free phone assistance



> > I'm willing to pay more to run OS X in lieu of Windows, because my
> > firsthand experience is that there's a significant-enough-for-me
> > difference in system maintenance and headaches to be worth it.

> I don't know what you're talking about. Windows has never been a > headache
> for me.

All OSs have design elements that represent compromises. If you
haven't found any yet, its because your attention to detail in product
design is not particularly high.

You're completely wrong.

> > FYI, I'm also not willing to pay anything more for a 'LightScribe' > > CD/DVD
> > burner,

> I paid less to have it included, not more.

> > as the feature reportedly has shelf life issues.

> Who says so?

I've cited it before; go use Google.

No, I'll just disregard your claim.

> > > How many times am I going to have to repeat that I got
> > > the same damn hardware, except more of it, for half
> > > what Apple charges?

> > Besides the fact that you actually didn't get the same?

> That's a lie, not a fact.

Except for all of the differences we just spent 200 lines discussing.

None of those lines showd I didn't get the same hardware or better.

> > What you got was a pile of hardware that roughly approximates one of
> > the Apple products,

> What I got is more hardware that is as good or better than I could have > got
> in a Mac, for half the price of a Mac.

Even if your claim is true, hardware without software is worthless.

I got a great software bundle with my HP.



> Nobody here has shown how it's important for anybody.

It is Apple that's making the money from their products, which they're
doing through thousands and millions of retail sales. Its not just
all because of two guys on CSMA.

You failed to show how it's important to anybody.

> > >>> I never called a Macintosh "just a PC."

> > >> "They only sell PCs like you can buy from any other PC maker"
> > >> Looks like "just a PC" to me.

> > > You interrupted the context below.

> > And above, you ignored the OS as a product differentiator.

> I have yet to be given a reason why I should pay twice as much for a > Mac,
> to get less hardware, just to run OSX.

I'm not trying to convince you:

You sure typed a lot of words for somebody who isn't trying to convince me.

just pointing out your perspective
biases.

You failed to do any such thing.

Personally, I don't expect that anything could be said here
that would ever be sufficient to convince you,

The lack is in you, not in me.

and that observation
has nothing to do with the product or facts:

None of what you claim does.

you've dug in your heels
and are obstinately proud to have done so.

That's not true.

> > > All the hardware in the Mac is the same as in any other PC.

> > Yet buying Mac hardware is the price of admission for using OS X..

> Why should I pay that price? If what I saw of Safari is what Apple's
> software is like, I have no reason.

And most car buyers only test-drive one car: the car that they buy.
Wouldn't it be more logical to drive each of the 3 or 4 cars on your
short list before picking the winner? Go research what
'confirmational bias' is.

Who's going to give me a computer to test drive before I buy it?

> > Now if you want to claim that Apple is ripping off consumers by only
> > making OS X legally available to Mac hardware, you have a long uphill
> > battle that you will lose, as this is a continuation of a centuries-
> > old precedence in IP and product differentiation.

> No, I'll stick with my argument that nobody has given me a reason to pay
> Apple twice the price for half the hardware I got from HP.

Be my guest, but do refrain from trying to generalize that specific
instance, since we do know that there are product points where Apple
is significantly cheaper than the competition.

Often claimed, never proven.

> > If you have no interest in running OS X, then you have no reason to
> > pay anything extra to get it (or have the option).

> I never said I had no interest in running it.

It is a tangential topic this week in particular because of the
Psystar clone.

Your remark has no relation to what it's in reply to.

> > However, that is
> > still just your **** personal **** choice, and just because
> > something's not important to you doesn't somehow automatically make it
> > unimportant for all others.

> Just as your ***personal*** choice to pay so much more for your hardware
> doesn't make the choice of getting more hardware for less money > unimportant.

See, there you go making the mistake of generalizing already.

You've been generalizing also.

FYI, I already have my next Mac picked out...and as of this week, it
would cost me $1200 more to buy the Dell equivalent (you know how Dell
prices fluctuate; its usually been closer to 'only' $1000 more).
However, I'm not foolish enough to try to generalize this instance
into claiming that all (or even most) Macs are less expensive than
their Windows PC equivalents.

IOW, you skewed the comparison to make the Dell seem to cost more.

.