Google| Subject | Re: mac sales down |
| From | Mayor Of R'lyeh |
| Date | 05/15/2008 05:54 (05/14/2008 23:54) |
| Message-ID | <2jcn24t8jbku7pnal9dg503ccbf1u5tovu@4ax.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | comp.sys.mac.advocacy |
| Follows | ZnU |
| Followups | ZnU (1d, 1h & 14m) > Mayor Of R'lyeh |
On Mon, 12 May 2008 02:38:52 -0400, ZnU <znu@fake.invalid>wrote:
ZnUActually we don't need to do that. Sales figures do that for us. And there's no need to use hypotheticals. We all know that most people just don't do anything very intense with their computers. There's no need to require certain models of graphics cards.
In article <sckf24l7di9alnaoqgob99f28kiec8l9kb@4ax.com>, Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@gmail.com>wrote:Mayor Of R'lyehZnU
On Sun, 11 May 2008 23:59:36 -0500, Chance Furlong <t-bone@megakatcity.com>wrote:Chance FurlongMayor Of R'lyeh
In article <rfhf24teh4oktrgobjans1hdr73g1unq7g@4ax.com>, Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@gmail.com>wrote:Mayor Of R'lyeh
On Sun, 11 May 2008 22:12:47 -0600, Warchild <bob@bob.com>wrote:Chance FurlongWarchildMayor Of R'lyeh
That old horseshoe has been disproved time and time again.
Only when artificially skewed in the Mac's favor.
How is it artificially skewed in the Mac's favor? I ask for in formation only.
The most glaring example of that is the insistence of using the Mac as the baseline instead of the user's wants and/or needs.
Doing a cost comparison based on some hypothetical user's needs is useless in an advocacy group, though, because one can trivially define the user's needs to make the Mac look bad. For instance, insist that the user needs a particular graphics card only available in a high-end tower on the Mac side, but that can be tossed into a free slot on an $800 Windows tower, and then screech about how the Mac costs 5x as much, ignoring the fact that it's a vastly more powerful machine in every other way.
Using the Mac as the baseline isn't completely fair either, but the difference is that Apple has an incentive to build systems for widespread real-world use cases, rather than heavily contrived use cases. They're trying to actually sell those systems to real users, after all.You're the one that is insisting anything but an Apple baseline is 'contrived'. I'm willing to acept any moderately configured PC as a baseline.
Which doesn't remove it from the advantage column. Also you have always grossly underestimated the numbe of people who do this or have friends do it for them.Mayor Of R'lyehZnU
The other way is to try and inflate the costs of PCs by insisting on adding some phantom assembly fee that you're supposed to charge yourself for building your own PC. That's like insisting that you charge yourself what a restaurant would every time you cook your meal.
The proper answer to the you-can't-build-your-own argument against the Mac is that the vast majority of computer users have neither the desire nor the knowledge to build their own computers
and thus, while this argument might be compelling for certain individual users, it's largely irrelevant to the subject of which platform is better overall, the main focus of advocacy discussions.Whether or not most people avail themselves of an advantage it still remains an advantage.
05/08/2008
