(OT) Steve Jobs.
 

"Scout" wrote in
:



"Lloyd E Parsons" wrote in message
...
On 10/14/11 4:24 PM, John Smith wrote:
Your text, once again, demonstrates the "status symbol" of the MAC:

" You must go to some really poor spots!! :)

Most places I've been all have brand name boxes there."

Indeed, that is the only part of your whole post which has any
relevancy!

I just went with a relative to social security, while assisting him
(is partially blind), I noticed every computer at every desk was a
PC ... and mostly custom built ... apparently their IT dept. puts
them together ... unless the workers have to bring their own!
ROFLOL

Regards,
JS

I can tell you that the local SS offices sure don't have no brand
computers in their offices.

But whatever the market share of what is, the profits are not with
wintel or Linux desktop boxes. No matter who or how they are built,
tiny profits seem to be the norm. Except at Apple...

Now we can argue that all you want. But keep in mind, IBM got out of
the wintel desktop/laptop market years ago, and it looks like HP is
going to follow. No profits will do that.

No, IBM got out of the RETAIL computer market. They still provide
computers for the BUSINESS market, and make quite a bit of money doing
so.

The problem is the PC market is very competitive and being a name
brand just isn't enough that people will pay lots more money to own
inferior hardware.


What were the IBM laptops are now manufactured and marketed by and under
the name Lenovo.

--
Sleep well tonight.........RD (The Sandman)

Witnessing Republicans and Democrats bickering over
the National Debt is like watching two drunks argue
over a bar bill on the Titanic.....

(OT) Steve Jobs.
 

Lloyd E Parsons wrote in
:

On 10/14/11 6:35 PM, Scout wrote:


"Lloyd E Parsons" wrote in message
...
On 10/14/11 4:24 PM, John Smith wrote:
Your text, once again, demonstrates the "status symbol" of the MAC:

" You must go to some really poor spots!! :)

Most places I've been all have brand name boxes there."

Indeed, that is the only part of your whole post which has any
relevancy!

I just went with a relative to social security, while assisting him
(is partially blind), I noticed every computer at every desk was a
PC ... and mostly custom built ... apparently their IT dept. puts
them together ... unless the workers have to bring their own!
ROFLOL

Regards,
JS

I can tell you that the local SS offices sure don't have no brand
computers in their offices.

But whatever the market share of what is, the profits are not with
wintel or Linux desktop boxes. No matter who or how they are built,
tiny profits seem to be the norm. Except at Apple...

Now we can argue that all you want. But keep in mind, IBM got out of
the wintel desktop/laptop market years ago, and it looks like HP is
going to follow. No profits will do that.

No, IBM got out of the RETAIL computer market. They still provide
computers for the BUSINESS market, and make quite a bit of money
doing so.

No, in fact, IBM does not make any personal computers. They do
provide Lenovo branded computers.

http://www.ibm.com/ibm/us/en/pcannouncement/

Which came about when IBM added to its laptop development venture in the
early 90s with Legend out of China who made some of its components. In
the mid-90s development moved from Boca Raton, FL to Raleigh, NC. In the
early 2000s, the Lenovo name was introduced although it had been in
internal use for some time. In 2004 IBM announced that Lenovo would take
over IBM's PC Division.

Yes, IBM still produces computers, but not laptops or PCs. They
concentrate on the "BIG" market.

The problem is the PC market is very competitive and being a name
brand just isn't enough that people will pay lots more money to own
inferior hardware.

You don't need to tell me how competitive it is, I was in the biz for
over 20 years.

Your statement would ring truer if Apple wasn't able to sell upscale
computers at premium prices. Hell, they sell everything at premium
prices and make a hell of a big profit margin on all of it.

Yes, they do........of which part of that goes to why they are a much
smaller (although wildly devoted) segment of the industry.


--
Sleep well tonight.........RD (The Sandman)

Witnessing Republicans and Democrats bickering over
the National Debt is like watching two drunks argue
over a bar bill on the Titanic.....

(OT) Steve Jobs.
 

"Scout" wrote in
:



"Lloyd E Parsons" wrote in message
...
On 10/14/11 6:35 PM, Scout wrote:


"Lloyd E Parsons" wrote in message
...
On 10/14/11 4:24 PM, John Smith wrote:
Your text, once again, demonstrates the "status symbol" of the
MAC:

" You must go to some really poor spots!! :)

Most places I've been all have brand name boxes there."

Indeed, that is the only part of your whole post which has any
relevancy!

I just went with a relative to social security, while assisting
him (is partially blind), I noticed every computer at every desk
was a PC ... and mostly custom built ... apparently their IT dept.
puts them together
... unless the workers have to bring their own! ROFLOL

Regards,
JS

I can tell you that the local SS offices sure don't have no brand
computers in their offices.

But whatever the market share of what is, the profits are not with
wintel or Linux desktop boxes. No matter who or how they are built,
tiny profits seem to be the norm. Except at Apple...

Now we can argue that all you want. But keep in mind, IBM got out
of the wintel desktop/laptop market years ago, and it looks like HP
is going to follow. No profits will do that.

No, IBM got out of the RETAIL computer market. They still provide
computers for the BUSINESS market, and make quite a bit of money
doing so.

No, in fact, IBM does not make any personal computers. They do
provide Lenovo branded computers.

http://www.ibm.com/ibm/us/en/pcannouncement/

Hate tell you this....but nothing you said contradicts me in the
least.

The problem is the PC market is very competitive and being a name
brand just isn't enough that people will pay lots more money to own
inferior hardware.

You don't need to tell me how competitive it is, I was in the biz for
over 20 years.

Your statement would ring truer if Apple wasn't able to sell upscale
computers at premium prices. Hell, they sell everything at premium
prices and make a hell of a big profit margin on all of it.

Yep, it's a small nitch market among a following of people sold on the
brand.

That doesn't happen in the PC market because the O/S isn't brand
specific.

At one point it was....although it was a joint development effort with
MS.

--
Sleep well tonight.........RD (The Sandman)

Witnessing Republicans and Democrats bickering over
the National Debt is like watching two drunks argue
over a bar bill on the Titanic.....

(OT) Steve Jobs.
 

On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 08:37:10 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

For over 20 years I have been observing, "next year" was going to be the
"year of the mac", nothing has changed in that arena, in a LONG, LONG time!

Interesting. Where did you observe this? (That is something I
haven't observed myself, but nobody can observe everything).

But I have observed changes in Macs in the last 20 years.

--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."

- James Madison

(OT) Steve Jobs.
 

"Howard Brazee" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 20:12:02 -0400, "Scout"
wrote:

No, their desktop market is growing, just not as fast as their laptop
market.

Sorry, they are selling more desktops because of an expanding market, but
their share in that expanding market is decreasing.

Other arguments in this thread have been claiming a shrinking desktop
market. Which arguments are correct?

Both.

Desktop computers last longer nowadays before becoming obsolete for
most functions. And there are more and better alternatives to
desktop computers than there used to be.

Yep, but the alternatives are most expensive, less durable, limited in
upgrade options, and generally poorer performance than a comparable desktop.

(OT) Steve Jobs.
 

"Lloyd E Parsons" wrote in message
...
On 10/15/11 10:46 AM, John Smith wrote:
On 10/15/2011 8:41 AM, Lloyd E Parsons wrote:

...
I don't think you or I will live long enough to see the 'year of the
mac' if that is defined as Apple being the dominant tech provider. Not
going to happen.

But the 'year of the Mac' has already happened in the upscale tech
market with consumers with a few bucks.



Yes, I am sure many are heroes in their own mind, have saved the world,
dominate the markets ... and it would be evil to destroy their fantasies
... roflol

Still, one must keep a foot in reality ...

Regards,
JS

In business, the reality is growing your sales and profits. In that, it
has been the year of the Mac for quite awhile now. You are free to talk
about what volumes of sales are out there in wintel/linux world, but that
is being done at pathetic profit levels.

Overall, desktop sales on all platforms is down as more go to laptops.
Primarily because laptops now have enough performance for almost all
applications and the prices are down quite a bit. Heck for all the
bitching about Apple's prices, laptops with similar specifications and
build quality are all pretty much the same in cost.

Apple just doesn't do cheap laptops.

Which is why Apple sells only a small fraction of the number of laptops
sold. PC dominates over Mac even in the laptop market

(OT) Steve Jobs.
 

On 10/15/11 2:53 PM, Scout wrote:


"Lloyd E Parsons" wrote in message
...
On 10/15/11 10:46 AM, John Smith wrote:
On 10/15/2011 8:41 AM, Lloyd E Parsons wrote:

...
I don't think you or I will live long enough to see the 'year of the
mac' if that is defined as Apple being the dominant tech provider. Not
going to happen.

But the 'year of the Mac' has already happened in the upscale tech
market with consumers with a few bucks.



Yes, I am sure many are heroes in their own mind, have saved the world,
dominate the markets ... and it would be evil to destroy their fantasies
... roflol

Still, one must keep a foot in reality ...

Regards,
JS

In business, the reality is growing your sales and profits. In that,
it has been the year of the Mac for quite awhile now. You are free to
talk about what volumes of sales are out there in wintel/linux world,
but that is being done at pathetic profit levels.

Overall, desktop sales on all platforms is down as more go to laptops.
Primarily because laptops now have enough performance for almost all
applications and the prices are down quite a bit. Heck for all the
bitching about Apple's prices, laptops with similar specifications and
build quality are all pretty much the same in cost.

Apple just doesn't do cheap laptops.

Which is why Apple sells only a small fraction of the number of laptops
sold. PC dominates over Mac even in the laptop market

At such a low profit margin that HP, one of the biggest in the biz is
seriously looking at dumping wintel desktop/laptop production and sales.

Apple has been making all the right moves these days. Good products
that are very popular at a price point that makes them great profits. A
success by any measure except for the 'market share at any cost' types.

They literaly own the tablet market at the moment. But will they own
the desktop/laptop market? Nope, there will always be a market for a
low priced product.



--
Lloyd

(OT) Steve Jobs.
 

On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 23:04:46 -0700, John Smith
wrote:



The rest of what you had to say, bad decisions, paying too much for a
home, etc. ... well ya', that is covered in "Life 101." If you missed
that class, problems will keep arising until you do take that class! ...
don't make those bad decisions, don't pay too much for over valued
property, don't buy what you can't afford, etc.

You ignore the people who were *told* they could afford the houses
they bought. People with a duty to be diligent--brokers, financiers,
investment houses, all assured them that they deserved a good house
and by heck they could afford one because they were given them a real
bargain.

Basically, it comes down to common sense, if you can't afford the house,
don't buy it... yet ...

But if you're assured that you can afford it, who is the real culprit
here?
--
Don Kirkman

(OT) Steve Jobs.
 

There are a lot of new houses that were poorly built.

You gonna get a free house!,,,, you gonna get free gas!,,,,, gonna pay
off your mortgage!,,,,, you gonna get free health care!,,,,,,,
cuhulin

(OT) Steve Jobs.
 

On 10/15/11 17:47 , Don Kirkman wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 23:04:46 -0700, John
wrote:



The rest of what you had to say, bad decisions, paying too much for a
home, etc. ... well ya', that is covered in "Life 101." If you missed
that class, problems will keep arising until you do take that class! ...
don't make those bad decisions, don't pay too much for over valued
property, don't buy what you can't afford, etc.

You ignore the people who were *told* they could afford the houses
they bought. People with a duty to be diligent--brokers, financiers,
investment houses, all assured them that they deserved a good house
and by heck they could afford one because they were given them a real
bargain.

Basically, it comes down to common sense, if you can't afford the house,
don't buy it... yet ...

But if you're assured that you can afford it, who is the real culprit
here?


When I bought my last house, I carefully constructed the budget. When
I got to the financing stage, every carrier I spoke with pushed like mad
to get me to take a non-traditional mortgage for far more than I'd
considered, with variable interest, balloon payments, and 'creative'
structures, all based on the assumption that 1) I'd be selling the
property at a substantial profit within 5 years and 2) incomes always rise.

I resisted, and stayed with a 30 year fixed at the interest that I'd
shopped around for. And was told that rate was no longer available, so
the non-traditional was my only option.

They sold it hard. "You should buy the maximum amount of house you
can possibly afford, and you can afford this." "You're upwardly mobile,
you'll be selling to upgrade before the interest rates increase and make
a bundle in the process." "You won't be in the house by the time the
balloon comes due." Even going so far as to tell me that at my age, a
traditional 30 year fixed would simply not be available. But that a 15
year ARM was a virtual certainty to be approved, at nearly 50% more than
I'd planned to borrow.

I eventually found the mortgage I wanted, at the rate I wanted, and
when things collapsed in the housing market, and the economy slowed, I
had both equity and a payment I could manage. But it was a fight to the
death to get a lender to agree to the traditional mortgage.

Few go into this kind of transaction with a fierce determination to
do things his own way. Most I've encountered would be quickly swayed by
both the temptation of more house than they thought they could afford,
or the enticing finance opportunity when so reassured by the lending
agency that the risk is small, and the benefits so great.

Now, I'm not, by a long shot, opposed to creative financing. I've
been quite creative in financing my businesses. And a couple of really
nice cars. But only in the short term, and only for small, manageable
amounts of money. Specifically, so I'd be prepared as economic fortunes
change.

So, though I'm hardly one of those 'invade Wall Street' protest
types, who blames all ills in the universe of Man on the banking system,
I can say that I've seen first hand some of the more underhanded, and
manipulative behaviours that have led a lot of folk down a very
turbulent river.

So, yes: Who is the culprit, indeed.

p