XPost: comp.os.linux.advocacy
From: nuh-uh@nope.com
On 2025-12-16 06:47, CrudeSausage wrote:
> On 2025-12-15 9:44 p.m., Alan wrote:
>> On 2025-12-15 17:15, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>> On 2025-12-15 5:54 p.m., -hh wrote:
>>>
>>>>> What do current benchmarks show you between two comparable machines
>>>>> at the same price?
>>>>
>>>> Don't know, as I'm not currently in the market for new hardware.
>>>> What's your current PC do and when was it put into service?
>>>
>>> Zephyrus G14 2021 with AMD R9 5900HS CPU and RTX3060 GPU. It's a 2021
>>> model. The new 2TB NVMe is a Samsung 990 EVO. The Pro was only $10
>>> more but it used more power and I wouldn't have been able to use its
>>> full speed anyway since my laptop's interface is a PCIe 3.0 x4.
>>>
>>>>> I doubt providing less bang for the buck is part of what the Apple
>>>>> stockholders want the company to offer. Higher profit margins, for
>>>>> sure, but not an inevitable backlash from customers who eventually
>>>>> realize that they're being ripped off.
>>>>
>>>> Apple has been 'pricey' since the Apple ][ shipped 45+ years ago,
>>>> which suggests a different value paradigm than what you're assuming.
>>>
>>> Jobs wanted to give people the impression that their machines were
>>> premium by charging more. In the end, their machines weren't actually
>>> capable of anything more than the competition, though I believe that
>>> the Apple ][ felt more robust than machines from Atari and Commodore.
>>> Of course, I wasn't old enough to even own one at the time, so I'm
>>> basing myself on what other people have said.
>>
>> What?
>>
>> Complete bullshit you just made up.
>
> Another quote, from Bing: "Steve Jobs had a strong belief in the value
> of innovation and quality, which influenced his approach to pricing. He
> often chose prices that were significantly higher than the cost of
> production, reflecting his vision for creating products that combined
> elegance and functionality. For example, the original Apple-1 computer
> was priced at $666.66, which was a deliberate choice to emphasize the
> product's uniqueness and the power of ideas behind it. Jobs's philosophy
> was that by investing in quality and innovation, Apple could command a
> premium price, positioning the company as a luxury brand in the tech
> industry. "
>
> Here's another link to prove it:
>
> strategy/>
>
> "1. Premium Pricing Strategy
> One of the most significant ways Steve Jobs influenced Apple’s pricing
> strategy was through the adoption of a premium pricing model. Jobs
> firmly believed in creating products that combined elegance,
> functionality, and innovation. This vision allowed Apple to position
> itself as a luxury brand in the tech industry, similar to how high-end
> fashion brands are priced higher due to their perceived value.
>
> Rather than competing on price, Apple focused on providing exceptional
> design, user experience, and quality. This strategy enabled Apple to
> charge a premium for its products while maintaining customer loyalty and
> satisfaction. For example, the iPhone, which was launched in 2007, was
> priced significantly higher than most other smartphones on the market at
> the time. Jobs understood that customers were willing to pay more for a
> product that not only functioned well but also looked and felt superior.
> This pricing strategy reinforced Apple’s identity as a premium brand,
> willing to sacrifice mass-market appeal for exclusivity and quality."
>
> This is where you'll claim that my original sentence was structured in
> such and such a way and that I'm still wrong. I've seen it before and
> it's part of why I don't take you seriously.
>
What you've not shown are Jobs actual words, but rather others'
interpretations.
And offering higher quality for higher prices is not "giving people the
impression of higher quality".
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
