XPost: comp.os.linux.advocacy   
   From: crude@sausa.ge   
      
   On 2025-12-16 2:12 p.m., Alan wrote:   
   > On 2025-12-16 10:36, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   >> On 2025-12-16 1:08 p.m., Alan wrote:   
   >>> 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:   
   >>>>   
   >>>> >>> pricing- 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".   
   >>   
   >> In other words, Alan is saying that even when he's proven wrong, he is   
   >> right.   
   >   
   > Nope.   
   >   
   > Because you haven't even supported your first claim that:   
   >   
   > 'Jobs wanted to give people the IMPRESSION that their machines were   
   > premium by charging more.'   
   >   
   > Actually building premium machines isn't giving people an impression   
   > that they're premium.   
      
   The Apple ][ was built better than the plastic competition, I'll give   
   you that much. Nevertheless, it was capable of much less than even   
   Atari's machines.   
      
   --   
   CrudeSausage   
   John 14:6   
   Windows is fine.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)