RadioBanter - View Single Post

Tankfixer[_2_]

In article , - Alan
Baker spouted !

In article ,
Tankfixer wrote:

In article , - D Peter Maus
spouted !

On 10/11/11 07:04 , BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

In ,
John wrote:

On 10/10/2011 4:49 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

In ,
Alan wrote:

In articlejoednXxxSuLvPQzTnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d@earthlink .com,
wrote:

On Sun, 09 Oct 2011 11:03:20 +0900, Brenda Ann wrote:

That's not the business Apple is in; they sell a lifestyle of form
[over] substance

--------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
---
--
--

--------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
---
--
--

Besides, Apple was extant in the market before PC's (the original
Apple
computer was something like $3000, a clone was about $2300, IIRC).
Apple
maintained a following and indeed an increasing market base even
after
PC's got so cheap that most anyone could afford one.

If someone likes a product enough to pay what seems to be an
exhorbitant
price for it, even in the face of a much cheaper alternative, then
that
is what they call "market forces" in operation. The consumer, in
this
case, has actually set the price by buying the product. If nobody
were
buying it, it would either become cheaper or taken off the market.

They subsidised and strongarmed their way into schools; a whole
generation equated Apple with computing. It's definitely a fashion
thing.
I was the IT guy at a TV network west coast headquarters. All the
"creative" types insisted on iMacs; they refused to work on windows
machines (this is for typing-not editing). Hollywood creative types
are
insufferable boors.

Of course... ...someone insisting on a product must be a "fashion
thing".

How exactly did Apple "strongarm" their way into schools.

Perhaps this genius can also explain why more and more college
students
in science and engineering are switching to Macs? Of their own free
will, that is. And not to use Windoze on them, either.

What is Apple at now - 11%, third largest, up from less than 5% four
years ago?

Intel won.

Linux is surely the equal, or better, of windows -- however, it is a
tad
bit more difficult to use (unbutu perhaps breaks that rule) and is just
as prone to viruses and such, if used by people without proper
education
and/or a virus/malware scanner ...

If Linux is "surely the equal, or better, of Windows", then Mac OS X is
surely the superior of Windows, because it is surely the better of
Linux.

It offers all that Linux offers and is easier to use.

Keep trying. The world runs on Windows.

That was not his point. Consensus is not necessarily truth, nor fact.

And popularity is certainly not dispositive proof of quality. If it
were, the Model T would have been the highest quality vehicle of all time.

The post was about which is the better tool. Not about where the
largest sale figures post.

Mac's and the Apple operating system were so technologically superior
that Apple adopted the i86 processor and borrowed Linux as the core for
OS10

Incorrect on both counts.

Greater marketshare meant greater economies of scale for i86 processors.
There was nothing inferior about PowerPC.

An inability to convice white box makers to use it ?

And Linux is not used in Mac OS X at all. FreeBSD is a part of its
heritage.

To this layman the difference there is like variations of Vista or
Win7..