XPost: comp.sys.mac.advocacy, alt.computer.workshop   
   From: pothead@snakebite.com   
      
   On 2026-02-04, 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.   
   >   
   >   
   >> 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.   
   >   
   >   
   >>>>>>>>> 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.   
   >   
   >   
   >>>>> "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.   
   >>   
   >>> 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.   
   >   
   >   
   >>>>>>> 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.   
   >   
   >   
   >>>>>>> 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.   
   >   
   >   
   >>>>>>> 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?   
   >   What a load of bullshit, dude, you just work for Apple, so you're   
   > getting your slice of the pie.  It's obvious.   
   >   
   >   
   >>>>>>> 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.   
   >>   
   >> Spoken like someone who understands free market capitalism.   
   >   
   >   
   > Uh huh except for the little fact that this favors those with more   
   > means, they can pay for the privilege of having pretty Apple hardware in   
   > their house to keep up with the Joneses, how nice for them.  If you're   
   > OK with supporting such a racket, it's your money I guess.   
   >   
   >   
   >>>>> If all their revenue for the Mac line is hardware sales, it's   
   >>>>> weird how they don't focus more on having competitive hardware,   
   >>>>> but that's Apple,   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Their hardware sells well.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Mac sales figures continue to trend upward, so you proceed from a   
   >>>> false premise.   
   >>>   
   >>> Shitty OEM PCs sell well, too.   
   >>   
   >> OK? So?   
   >   
   >   
   > How do you not see the point, we know Apple sells a lot, the question is   
   > whether this really makes sense if consumers knew what they were   
   > actually paying for.   
   >   
   >   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)