Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    comp.sys.mac.advocacy    |    Steve Jobs fetishistic worship forum    |    120,746 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 118,783 of 120,746    |
|    Alan to Joel W. Crump    |
|    Re: Cheaper Apple Macs Coming?    |
|    25 Nov 25 09:42:32    |
      XPost: comp.os.linux.advocacy       From: nuh-uh@nope.com              On 2025-11-25 03:02, Joel W. Crump wrote:       > On 11/25/25 2:09 AM, Alan wrote:       >       >>>>>>>>>>> [Apple] already sell[s] low- end computers for a high price.       >>>>>>>>>>> The cost of a real device from Apple is extortion. Something       >>>>>>>>>>> even lower end will not get many buyers.       >>>>>>>>>>       >>>>>>>>>> Put up some performance numbers to back up that claim...       >>>>>>>>>       >>>>>>>>> Ah, but Alan, that isn't the problem. The Mac mini with 16 GB       >>>>>>>>> RAM and 256 GB SSD will still blow away my China-produced mini       >>>>>>>>> PC on "performance numbers", having the Apple Silicon CPU, but       >>>>>>>>> my inexpensive mini PC has twice as big an SSD - that's       >>>>>>>>> ridiculous. Why is 512 not the first option? Why is it $200       >>>>>>>>> extra? Apple sucks dick, face it.       >>>>>>>>       >>>>>>>> The "problem" is that you keep making claims you can't back up,       >>>>>>>> so you pivot to some other claim.       >>>>>>>       >>>>>>> I did back it up, though, I *have* 512 GB storage, on my $190       >>>>>>> mini PC, that came with Win11 Pro, *WHY* the hell is 256 the       >>>>>>> default on a Mac?!       >>>>>>       >>>>>> Your attention span is terrible.       >>>>>>       >>>>>> Your claim was:       >>>>>>       >>>>>> 'The reason it won't be successful is because they already sell       >>>>>> low- end computers for a high price'       >>>>>>       >>>>>> So put up some numbers to show that Macs are "low-end".       >>>>>       >>>>> 256 GB.       >>>>       >>>> That's it?       >>>>       >>>> That's all you've got?       >>>       >>> If Apple were serious about selling hardware competitively, 512 GB       >>> would be the minimum option, not a $200 extra splurge.       >>       >> Oh, no!       >>       >> One hardware specification doesn't mean your drunken (and high)       >> standard of "acceptable"!       >       >       > Nah, you're defeated on this one Alan, 256 is paltry. Apple is cheap       > while being expensive.       >              LOL!              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca