APPLEVISION Monitor

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Thu May 2 03:42:27 2002

It's true that "name-brand" computers tend to cost more. What I was getting
at, with respect to Apple Computer Co, was that they, Apple, do what they do
strictly to line their pockets by operating in a market that has no
competition. Over time and if the market is big enough, somebody pops up
anyway, and they then have to compete, but often small competitors are just
ignored, or Apple fiddles with their system so the competitor has to
reengineer their product.

What's always annoyed me with "brand-name" PC's is that the packaging ALWAYS
deviates from the "norm" established by the DIY market. Consquently, your
DELL, Gateway, or Compaq was never upgradable, because the CPU or hard disk
wasn't supported by the BIOS, or some peripheral wouldn't fit in the system
because of address conflicts. Simple things like the on-board video caused
problems when they failed because one couldn't disable them, or, if one did,
the now-broken native video interfered with the replacement. Even printer
ports posed such problems. Many times the packaging itself was the problem.
Have you ever tried to replace or upgrade the CDROM drive in an HP PC?


----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris" <mythtech_at_mac.com>
To: "Classic Computer" <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 2:03 PM
Subject: Re: APPLEVISION Monitor


> >It's just that the 250% price premium
> >paid for it because it's mainly a single-vendor system is pretty steep.
Now,
> >I haven't looked at any pricing in over 15 years,
>
> But when you compare a similar package Gateway, Dell, or other "name
> brand" PCs, you will find that there is actually very little difference
> in price. Certainly not enough to justify the significantly higher TCO of
> the PC.
>
> Where the price difference really shines is in the generic branded PCs,
> or in the "build your own" PCs.
>
> >What I don't understand is, if the
> >supply is lower and the devices are as reliable as those on the PC market,
> >where's the demand that drives the prices up coming from?
>
> Because people WANT a Mac. How does BMW get away with charging a price
> premium when they only have a 5% market share. People will pay the price
> because they want the item.
>
I wouldn't go there ... BMW's are infamous "hangar queens." Having worked in
more than one group with several BMW owners, I've often driven people to the
shop in my Maxima. One time I noted that every BMW needed a day in the shop
every week. While I'm sure that was the exception rather than the rule, I'm
sure I'll never covet one of the things.
>
> I have long felt that Apple could make much larger sweeps into the market
> if they would stop being "cool" and just make a $400 bare bones iMac.
>
My observation, when the MAC was new, and was the only GUI system on the
personal market, was that people wanted it because, like a car, you could turn
it on and start doing what you wanted right away. Like a car, you might have
to read the user manual to figure out how to turn on the high-beam headlights,
but that was O.K. Unfortunately, as with a car, within just a few days, you'd
exhausted everything you could do on the MAC of '85 or so. Because the market
was so much bigger, whatever was done, was done on the PC first. Then, if it
was easy enough, it happened for the MAC, but at a penalty. Though the market
situation hasn't changed much, the situation is somewhat different. However,
I still can't find some classes of software for the MAC. Now that the MAC is
compatible with PCI hardware, it's likely there'll be more overlap in the
market. It's still Apple Computer Co's private market, though.
Received on Thu May 02 2002 - 03:42:27 BST