Google| Subject | Re: Adobe's Low hanging .... ? |
| From | nospam |
| Date | 07/13/2014 17:40 (07/13/2014 11:40) |
| Message-ID | <130720141140328540%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Mayayana |
In article <lpu5fl$8oe$1@dont-email.me>, Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam>wrote:
Mayayanaad hominem, which means you have nothing to refute.
| >to choose. I asked the cheapest prices for each. $2,200 for | >the Mac. $500 for the eMachines. | | is price all that matters to you?
Only an AppleSeed could ask such a silly question.
The Mac was more than 4 times more expensive.if you think a $500 emachines was in any way equivalent to a $2000 mac, you're dumber than a bag of rocks.
the mac had very different specs than the emachines computer, which is why it cost more. very simple.
there are also pcs that cost even more than $2000 but i don't see you bitching about that.
Actually, the first computer I used was a Mac. My neighbor at the time let me onto his AOL account. At that time everyone was talking about the Internet and getting email. I wanted to see what it was all about. I used the Mac for several months just to go online.that just means you personally didn't need the additional features.
At the time -- 1998 -- Macs still had better displays. But I wasn't working as a graphic artist. I didn't even have any idea what the difference was between the two. So spending an extra $1,700 for the Mac would have needed to give me more than just better display; like maybe a free car or a washer/dryer/frig combo.
not everyone does.
what you don't understand is that there's a reason why one computer cost $2000 and the other $500 and it's *not* because of who makes it, it's because of the specs.
also, in 1998, the least expensive mac was $1299 *and* came with a display, which the emachines almost certainly did not.
but when have facts mattered.
In the end I was glad of my choice. I'm a tinkerer and Windows is great for tinkering. I can write my own software fairly easily on Windows. I can build my own computers. Apple has always held a tight rein on both hardware and software development.when will you get it through your thick head that is flat out wrong.
apple has *no* say in what third party hardware or software development. none whatsoever.
the specs are published and anyone can (and did) make hardware expansion cards and peripherals, as well as all sorts of software.
| | >Somewhere around that time, I don't remember when, MS | >actually bailed out Apple, just to keep the appearance of | >competition. | | microsoft has never bailed out apple. that is a *myth*. | | what *actually* happened was that microsoft stole apple's code for | quicktime. | | apple and microsoft both knew it, so instead of going to court and | losing, microsoft settled out of court and part of the settlement was a | $150 million stock purchase and cross-licensing patents and other | intellectual property.the facts absolutely support my claim.
The facts online don't support your claim. As usual, you don't provide any corroboration for your claims. Anyone who cares to look into it can search for: microsoft bailed out apple
microsoft did *not* bail out apple. period.
$150 million was also a drop in the bucket for apple at that time.
from apple's 1998 10k filing:
<http://investor.apple.com/secfiling.cfm?filingid=1047469-98-44981&cik=3 20193> As of September 25, 1998, the Company had $2.3 billion in cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments, an increase of $841 million or 58% over the same balances at the end of fiscal 1997
in other words, in 1997 they had a little more than $1.4 billion cash & equivalents and the $150 mil was about 10% of their assets at the time.
The first few links I got were CNN, Wired, etc.it was reported as being a bailout but that's completely false.
you do realize that reporters often get stuff wrong, don't you?
They offered a number of explanations for the deal, but I didn't see anything about QuickTime.then you didn't look very hard.
<http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/Apple_v._San_Francisco_Canyon> In August 1997, Apple and Microsoft announced a settlement deal. Apple would drop all current lawsuits, including all lingering issues from the Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp. lawsuit and the "QuickTime source code" lawsuit, and agree to make Internet Explorer the default browser on the Macintosh unless the user explicitly chose the bundled Netscape browser. In return, Microsoft agreed to continue developing Office, Internet Explorer, and various developer tools and software for the Mac for the next five years, and purchase $150 million of non-voting Apple stock.
Apple did agree, as part of the deal, to drop a suit over GUI but it was commonly known that Apple was desperate for money at the time.nonsense.
07/10/2014-
