On 10/10/2011 6:58 PM, RHF wrote:
On Oct 10, 4:50 pm, Alan wrote:
In ,
John wrote:









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

In ,
Alan wrote:

In articlejoednXxxSuLvPQzTnZ2dnUVZ_sudn...@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.



Plus, when you give people a product with is dirt free, they just can
never really trust it, they have to suffer payment or they just have
"that uncomfortable feeling." ROFLOL

Regards,
JS

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg

Ah... My "OS" can Beat-Up Your "OS" !

and dats dat ~ RHF
.

Computers are like fords and chevys ... you will always prefer one over
the other, truth is, one will take you where you are going just as well
as the other ...

But, some of us prefer four-wheel-drives and Peterbilts!

Regards,
JS

On 10/10/2011 2:30 PM, D Peter Maus wrote:
On 10/10/11 16:27 , Alan Baker wrote:
In ,
John wrote:

Your post is an excellent example of what I have found about "Apple
People", they have a religious devotion to the platform ...

Your post is an excellent example of someone who believes that anyone
who sees value where you do not must do it out of religious
devotion...


Personally, the only reason I use a PC, and refuse MAC's, is that I
write much of the software I use ... plus, I private contract to
develop
software on multiple platforms (even though I am retired, for the
most
part) ... while most of that could be done on a MAC, it simply
would not
make economic sense, for me ... I mean, I am in the business to make
money -- NOT pay money to apple ... apple has worked hard in
being one
of the most proprietary corps I have ever seen, I think they can
do that
without me ...

In what way is the Mac more "proprietary" than Windows from your
perspective? The fact that they've always sold computers with
their own
OS? You can write software for that platform just as you can for
Windows
or for Linux.


Windows doesn't hold patents on the hardware, to run their software,
just for starters ... and, they don't have an iphone, or even an
idildo,
for that matter! ROFLOL

So?

Apple's suddenly an evil empire because they make hardware and
Microsoft
doesn't?


Actually, you have missed the point, gotten off track, the conversation
I seen was focused on fools and overpaying for the same bang less buck
will do ...

It isn't that apple is evil for taking fools money, the fools always end
up giving it to some one ... nor are the fools evil ... evil just
doesn't really apply.

If fools willingly give you money, I am not aware of any crimes which
have been broken, nor evil criminals at fault ... I mean, like, DUH!

Regards,
JS

As I said:

How arrogant to assume that anyone who sees value in what you do not
must be a fool...


It's a cultural standard, today.




Hey, I am not the one into social standards!

I freely admit that a MAC can do anything a PC can do ... the PC can
just do it faster, cheaper and usually better ...

Regards,
JS

On 10/10/2011 3:02 PM, Scout wrote:


"Alan Baker" wrote in message
...
In article ,
John Smith wrote:

then sold them the software for
exorbitant prices ... signed them into exploitative contracts, etc.

Really? And they signed these contracts with the children?
Because I was
under the impression that schools had people who were qualified
to agree
to such contracts...

Contracts which stipulated only apple people maintained the college
hardware ... etc., etc. Games within games, really.

Then they were free not to sign them, weren't they? Ergo: not
strongarmed at all.


Back in the late 80's and early 90's I taught at a jr. college,
I seen
first hand how apples predatory sales techniques worked.

Clearly.


Finally, at the college, a few of us wrote letters of complaint
to the
"higher ups" and rectified the problem ... there was also some
business
of "incentives" being passed about about by apple to those who
controlled purchasing ... lunches, wining and dining, etc. However,
digital equipment corporation also participated in such
practices ...
(DEC)

However, one thing I did notice, the "apple room" was always
full of
liberal arts students while the PC sections of the computer labs
always
contained the math, physics, science, etc. students ... just as
a casual
observation ...

Riiiiiiiight.


Regards,
JS


Your post is an excellent example of what I have found about "Apple
People", they have a religious devotion to the platform ...

Your post is an excellent example of someone who believes that anyone
who sees value where you do not must do it out of religious
devotion...


Personally, the only reason I use a PC, and refuse MAC's, is that I
write much of the software I use ... plus, I private contract to
develop
software on multiple platforms (even though I am retired, for the
most
part) ... while most of that could be done on a MAC, it simply
would not
make economic sense, for me ... I mean, I am in the business to make
money -- NOT pay money to apple ... apple has worked hard in being
one
of the most proprietary corps I have ever seen, I think they can
do that
without me ...

In what way is the Mac more "proprietary" than Windows from your
perspective? The fact that they've always sold computers with their
own
OS? You can write software for that platform just as you can for
Windows
or for Linux.


Windows doesn't hold patents on the hardware, to run their software,
just for starters ... and, they don't have an iphone, or even an idildo,
for that matter! ROFLOL

So?

Apple's suddenly an evil empire because they make hardware and Microsoft
doesn't?

Actually Microsoft does make hardware. Mice, keyboards, headsets,
webcams, and even fingerprint readers.

True they don't build systems, but they do produce certain types of
hardware. They even patent certain aspects of that hardware. Such as the
tilt wheel mouse.

Hell, back in 2008, they received a patent for the page up and page down
keys. (Patent #7,415,666)




Actually, the problem might be semantics, here.

But, I would like to have my ignorance and false beliefs removed. So,
enlighten me, where are the microsoft manufacturing plants which are
making these these things -- mice, keyboards, headsets, webcams, even
fingerprint readers?

All I am aware of is microsoft lending their name to products which
other companies manufacture ... except software, they do produce that,
themselves ... they even hire employees to make it, the software.

Regards,
JS

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
On 10/10/2011 3:02 PM, Scout wrote:


"Alan Baker" wrote in message
...
In article ,
John Smith wrote:

then sold them the software for
exorbitant prices ... signed them into exploitative contracts,
etc.

Really? And they signed these contracts with the children?
Because I was
under the impression that schools had people who were qualified
to agree
to such contracts...

Contracts which stipulated only apple people maintained the
college
hardware ... etc., etc. Games within games, really.

Then they were free not to sign them, weren't they? Ergo: not
strongarmed at all.


Back in the late 80's and early 90's I taught at a jr. college,
I seen
first hand how apples predatory sales techniques worked.

Clearly.


Finally, at the college, a few of us wrote letters of complaint
to the
"higher ups" and rectified the problem ... there was also some
business
of "incentives" being passed about about by apple to those who
controlled purchasing ... lunches, wining and dining, etc.
However,
digital equipment corporation also participated in such
practices ...
(DEC)

However, one thing I did notice, the "apple room" was always
full of
liberal arts students while the PC sections of the computer labs
always
contained the math, physics, science, etc. students ... just as
a casual
observation ...

Riiiiiiiight.


Regards,
JS


Your post is an excellent example of what I have found about "Apple
People", they have a religious devotion to the platform ...

Your post is an excellent example of someone who believes that anyone
who sees value where you do not must do it out of religious
devotion...


Personally, the only reason I use a PC, and refuse MAC's, is that I
write much of the software I use ... plus, I private contract to
develop
software on multiple platforms (even though I am retired, for the
most
part) ... while most of that could be done on a MAC, it simply
would not
make economic sense, for me ... I mean, I am in the business to make
money -- NOT pay money to apple ... apple has worked hard in being
one
of the most proprietary corps I have ever seen, I think they can
do that
without me ...

In what way is the Mac more "proprietary" than Windows from your
perspective? The fact that they've always sold computers with their
own
OS? You can write software for that platform just as you can for
Windows
or for Linux.


Windows doesn't hold patents on the hardware, to run their software,
just for starters ... and, they don't have an iphone, or even an
idildo,
for that matter! ROFLOL

So?

Apple's suddenly an evil empire because they make hardware and Microsoft
doesn't?

Actually Microsoft does make hardware. Mice, keyboards, headsets,
webcams, and even fingerprint readers.

True they don't build systems, but they do produce certain types of
hardware. They even patent certain aspects of that hardware. Such as the
tilt wheel mouse.

Hell, back in 2008, they received a patent for the page up and page down
keys. (Patent #7,415,666)




Actually, the problem might be semantics, here.

But, I would like to have my ignorance and false beliefs removed. So,
enlighten me, where are the microsoft manufacturing plants which are
making these these things -- mice, keyboards, headsets, webcams, even
fingerprint readers?

All I am aware of is microsoft lending their name to products which other
companies manufacture ... except software, they do produce that,
themselves ... they even hire employees to make it, the software.

http://www.marke****ch.com/story/cor...make-new-zunes

You figure out where the rest are. If it is done with their name, then they
are the manufacturer.

On 10/10/2011 11:44 PM, Scout wrote:


"John Smith" wrote in message
...
On 10/10/2011 3:02 PM, Scout wrote:


"Alan Baker" wrote in message
...
In article ,
John Smith wrote:

then sold them the software for
exorbitant prices ... signed them into exploitative contracts,
etc.

Really? And they signed these contracts with the children?
Because I was
under the impression that schools had people who were qualified
to agree
to such contracts...

Contracts which stipulated only apple people maintained the
college
hardware ... etc., etc. Games within games, really.

Then they were free not to sign them, weren't they? Ergo: not
strongarmed at all.


Back in the late 80's and early 90's I taught at a jr. college,
I seen
first hand how apples predatory sales techniques worked.

Clearly.


Finally, at the college, a few of us wrote letters of complaint
to the
"higher ups" and rectified the problem ... there was also some
business
of "incentives" being passed about about by apple to those who
controlled purchasing ... lunches, wining and dining, etc.
However,
digital equipment corporation also participated in such
practices ...
(DEC)

However, one thing I did notice, the "apple room" was always
full of
liberal arts students while the PC sections of the computer labs
always
contained the math, physics, science, etc. students ... just as
a casual
observation ...

Riiiiiiiight.


Regards,
JS


Your post is an excellent example of what I have found about "Apple
People", they have a religious devotion to the platform ...

Your post is an excellent example of someone who believes that
anyone
who sees value where you do not must do it out of religious
devotion...


Personally, the only reason I use a PC, and refuse MAC's, is that I
write much of the software I use ... plus, I private contract to
develop
software on multiple platforms (even though I am retired, for the
most
part) ... while most of that could be done on a MAC, it simply
would not
make economic sense, for me ... I mean, I am in the business to
make
money -- NOT pay money to apple ... apple has worked hard in being
one
of the most proprietary corps I have ever seen, I think they can
do that
without me ...

In what way is the Mac more "proprietary" than Windows from your
perspective? The fact that they've always sold computers with their
own
OS? You can write software for that platform just as you can for
Windows
or for Linux.


Windows doesn't hold patents on the hardware, to run their software,
just for starters ... and, they don't have an iphone, or even an
idildo,
for that matter! ROFLOL

So?

Apple's suddenly an evil empire because they make hardware and
Microsoft
doesn't?

Actually Microsoft does make hardware. Mice, keyboards, headsets,
webcams, and even fingerprint readers.

True they don't build systems, but they do produce certain types of
hardware. They even patent certain aspects of that hardware. Such as the
tilt wheel mouse.

Hell, back in 2008, they received a patent for the page up and page down
keys. (Patent #7,415,666)




Actually, the problem might be semantics, here.

But, I would like to have my ignorance and false beliefs removed. So,
enlighten me, where are the microsoft manufacturing plants which are
making these these things -- mice, keyboards, headsets, webcams, even
fingerprint readers?

All I am aware of is microsoft lending their name to products which
other companies manufacture ... except software, they do produce that,
themselves ... they even hire employees to make it, the software.

http://www.marke****ch.com/story/cor...make-new-zunes


You figure out where the rest are. If it is done with their name, then
they are the manufacturer.




Yeah, thought so, this from that page:

"The original Zune, released in November, was produced using a framework
and components provided by Toshiba Corp. Reindorp said the company hopes
that by taking a more direct role in manufacturing a second version, it
will help the device gain popularity."

Reading between the lines, it looks like microsoft is just beginning to
attempt to enter actual hardware manufacturing ... probably a good idea,
for microsoft, since all the jobs and investment money have been moved
offshore ... but, probably means a lot more poverty for USA.

And, no, just slapping their name on a product is not manufacturing it,
like I say, saying some "is" does not make it true ...

Frankly, I'd like to see microsoft told, "If you make it there, sell it
there!" ... and have that applied to their software too. If they want
to sell to Americans, they should damn well employ Americans.

Regards,
JS

In article , says...

On 10/10/2011 4:20 PM, BAR wrote:
In , says...

On 10/10/2011 3:19 PM, BAR wrote:
In , says...

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 ...

Plus, when you give people a product with is dirt free, they just can
never really trust it, they have to suffer payment or they just have
"that uncomfortable feeling." ROFLOL

Regards,
JS

You get what you pay for. When it is free that is exactly what you get,
free software.

We tend to go with Red Hat ES and SUSE Linux. These have proved to be
the most stable and most apps are supported on them.

I have just gone through migrating a class of applications from Solaris
(SPARC) to Windows. The rational is that there was no need to have your
"highly educated" workforce supporting the applications on UNIX/Linux
when they can be supported by just about anyone on a Windows system.
And, since they are on Windows they easily run in a VM. The cost went
from about $25,000 a year to about $300 for the systems. The run support
is expected to be about $2,500 for the partial off-shore Windows head.



Well, red hat and suse have what some don't, proprietary hype and cutsy
GUI tools and implement their own "methods of doing things" ... the most
"honest linux", which stays true to form, the most, to the old UNIX, is
slackware ... simply pick the GUI interface you want to use with it, or
are most comfortable with ... coming from times before the "GREAT GUI
GOD", and related/associated "biblical scriptures in 'GUI syntax'", I
use a command line as much as possible ... but then, up until vista, I
knew how to turn off the windows gui and go mainly commandline (almost
like a 32-bit "super dos!") ... the gui just got too tough to fight ...
I now use the Great GUI Gods tools ...

I could care less about keeping to "honest Linux" I have applications
that a world wide engineering organizations rely upon 24/7/365. I want
up time.

I used to be a command-line die-hard like you but, I have people who
write code and do all of the nitty-gritty technical stuff and I really
don't care if you use ed or vi to edit your files.


Then, why bother, windows is perfect for you ...

You identify the problem and provide the best solution to solve the
problem within the constraints you have to solve the problem.

Linux is not the solution to all problems and neither is Windows the
solution to all problems.

A couple of years ago we did deploy a system on Linux because Linux was
the best platform to solve the problem.

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 15:07:36 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

On 10/10/2011 2:31 PM, Howard Brazee wrote:

...
So is renting an example of a generation being dumber?


It is an example of not owning/having a home ... I don't know that needs
any more explaining ...

There's a lot you don't know. Hardly anybody *owns* a home. And
when the bank owns more than the house is worth, or when a job comes
up and they can't sell their home to move, they wish they had rented.
I am holding off downsizing until housing values go up.

Legally I own the home, the mortgage company has a lien on the title.
Just like when you buy a car, you own the car but the finance company
has a lien on the title.

I am also subsidizing other homeowners because they have tax breaks
renters don't get. (and they are subsidizing me for the same thing).

Why is your life on hold waiting for something that may never happen?

I have heard that the housing market will not recover until 2020.

I will be moving in 3 years, selling my house, and moving to a more tax
friendly state. I will not wait for housing values to recover I will
sell to whomever comes to me with a pile of money and I will move on
with my life.

They choose to rent instead of buy because they are dumb?


There are owners, and there are those who are slaves and work/pay for
their right to squat on land ... I really don't know what you are
looking for here ... the obvious differences and benefits are simply
that, obvious, to those with the grey matter to know that/those
differences ...

Or is it they are dumb enough to create the economy where it made more
sense to rent than to buy?



The indians sold manhattan for some beads and trinkets ... the russians
sold alaska for less than one days worth of oil which comes out of there ...

Again, those capable already know the importance of these facts ... and
conduct their life accordingly ... the implications, importance and
consequences surrounding what you ask make me think something is wrong
if you must ask the question which you are ...

Regards,
JS


It is always good to examine closely held beliefs. You don't seem
to be willing to do so.

In article ,
says...

In article ,
John Smith 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.

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.

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