XPost: comp.sys.mac.advocacy, alt.computer.workshop   
   From: nuh-uh@nope.com   
      
   On 2026-02-04 15:34, Joel W. Crump wrote:   
   > On 2/2/26 4:45 PM, Alan wrote:   
   >   
   >>> Objectively, Apple isn't interested in competition, that's purely a   
   >>> facade.  They need Microsoft to be what it is, so they can be the   
   >>> quirky alternative for quirky alternative people.  As such, their   
   >>> hardware and software both languish under mediocre development.   
   >>   
   >> You clearly don't know what "objectively" means.   
   >   
   >   
   > Oh sure Apple boy, you tell me what objectivity is, I'll be all ears for   
   > that, heh.   
      
   Show objective support for ANYTHING you've ever said about Apple.   
      
   >   
   >   
   >> Apple produces products and those products compete with other personal   
   >> digital devices in the market place.   
   >>   
   >> Apple's hardware is clearly leading the way in certain areas...   
   >>   
   >> ...and you've never been able to articulate a single issue with their   
   >> software.   
   >   
   >   
   > To the extent they haven't gone out of business yet, you have a point.   
      
   Non sequitur.   
      
   >   
   >   
   >>>>>>>>> We should want to punish Apple any way possible.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Why? What have they done to deserve (and I can absolutely   
   >>>>>>>> believe you'd use this word): "punishment"?   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Well, let's think about it from a perspective we'd at least   
   >>>>>>> agree is worth considering - Apple through their Mac product   
   >>>>>>> line does serve a real need in computing.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> That's an unsupported assertion.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Apple's Mac product line serves the real needs of its users so   
   >>>>>> well, they almost never EVER want to use anything else ever   
   >>>>>> again.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Yeah so ask yourself why, you yourself have talked up   
   >>>>> repeatedly buying Macs, you probably have the slightest   
   >>>>> insight.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Again: not really English.   
   >>>   
   >>> Again:  you are admitting not really being able to read English.   
   >>   
   >> No. I'm stating that you wrote a sentence that makes no sense.   
   >>   
   >> Let's remove the somewhat parenthetical clause from the middle of the   
   >> sentence, and look at what you wrote:   
   >>   
   >> "Yeah so ask yourself why you probably have the slightest insight.   
   >>   
   >> In what world does that sentence make sense?   
   >   
   >   
   > Uh dude, that is simple mental retardation.  I didn't write that. You're   
   > literally gluing two completely separate phrases into one.  Were you   
   > serious about that?  If so, you need to see if you can pass a cognitive   
   > test like Trump.   
   >   
      
   I removed a separate clause, that was separated by commas from the rest,   
   which shouldn't have affected the grammar and sense of what remained.   
      
   Watch:   
      
   'I removed a separate clause which shouldn't have affected the grammar   
   and sense of what remained.'   
      
   See?   
      
      
   >   
   >>>>> "Real need in computing" here means that there is more than a   
   >>>>> niche market for macOS and software designed for it.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Circular argument.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> macOS and software designed for it encompass the vast majority of   
   >>>> things that people want to do with personal computers.   
   >>>   
   >>> OK but why are they choosing the Mac?   
   >>   
   >> That's a very good question.   
   >>   
   >> How about: because they've found it works well for them.   
      
   No answer.   
      
   Got it.   
      
   >>   
   >>> Is it just what was placed   
   >>> in front of them?  Usually, it's a very intentional choice, in fact,   
   >>> and I'm recognizing that but since I'm expecting Apple to up its   
   >>> game in response,   
   >>   
   >> Why would Apple "up its game" in response to people being ferociously   
   >> loyal to their products.   
   >>   
   >> I'm serious:   
   >>   
   >> I've used, sold, supported both Macs and PCs for more than 30 years.   
   >>   
   >> And in all that time, I've encountered less half a dozen people who   
   >> tried a Mac and wanted to go back to a PC.   
   >>   
   >> My current work is computer and network support, and while I   
   >> TECHNICALLY have clients with Macs for whom I provide support, the   
   >> truth is that they almost never need assistance.   
   >   
   >   
   > It's good to know that their needs are met.   
      
   Indeed. And my last 20 years of experience shows that people who use   
   Macs for equivalent tasks compared to those who use Windows have their   
   needs met much more completely and effectively.   
      
   >   
   >   
   >>>>>>> There are people who simply get better results using   
   >>>>>>> Apple's equipment for a PC, their software to run it.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Not even an understandable sentence...   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> You're not trying very hard, then.  But that's OK, I know your   
   >>>>> only goal here is to compete with me.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> You think far too highly of yourself.   
   >>>   
   >>> It's funny you'd say that though given how you seem to perceive   
   >>> yourself, but OK.   
   >>   
   >> Learn proper English punctuation.   
   >   
   >   
   > Get a brain.   
      
   Irony.   
      
   >   
   >   
   >>>>>>> As such, the price gouging on hardware sales does trouble   
   >>>>>>> me, as a regulator.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> You're NOT a "regulator".   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> I could make Apple repay its customers for overcharging them   
   >>>>> over a long period of time.  But I know better than to overuse   
   >>>>> authority.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Your megalomania is showing again.   
   >>>   
   >>> Your ignorance might be, if you really think I'm a megalomaniac.   
   >>   
   >> LOL!   
   >   
   >   
   > Laugh all you want, but you will see it in certain terms soon.   
      
   Thanks, I will!   
      
   LOL!   
      
   >   
   >   
   >>>>>>> If they're continuing to make the base unit have 256 GB   
   >>>>>>> storage, but the next step up is $200 extra, at what point   
   >>>>>>> is that not just transparent gouging?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Because offering people products they freely purchase isn't   
   >>>>>> gouging of any kind.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> It is gouging because if they want a non-joke of a computer they   
   >>>>> have to pay so much extra that they're doing more than their   
   >>>>> fair share to support the product line.  It's ridiculous.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Circular.   
   >>>   
   >>> It'll never be circular when half of a 512 GB SSD is $200.  You have   
   >>> not addressed that basic fact.   
   >>   
   >> It doesn't need address.   
   >>   
   >> Apple offers products for sale.   
   >>   
   >> People freely buy them.   
   >   
   >   
   > Then answer me why my $190 mini PC has a 512 GB SSD *along with the rest   
   > of its parts*, how are they so much better able than Apple to get parts?   
      
   Because people don't buy PARTS. They buy a SYSTEM.   
      
   >   What a load of bullshit, dude, you just work for Apple, so you're   
   > getting your slice of the pie.  It's obvious.   
      
   Nope. Sorry. The closest I ever came to "work[ing] for Apple" was when I   
   was selling Macs at an Apple dealer...   
      
   nearly 30 YEARS ago.   
      
   >   
   >   
   >>>>>>> Why is 256 still an option?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Because it still works fine for many users.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> And it's reasonable to cost $200 to double it?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> If people are willing to pay it? Yes, absolutely.   
   >>>   
   >>> Spoken like an Apple employee.   
   >>   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)