Hi, Carolyn and all.
I do not use a Mac for two reasons. The first, and most important,
has nothing to do with this thread, but a second, and almost equally
important reason is one which Carolyn's message below hints at.
Carolyn writes
The Mac is a totally different system, and built to some stringent
specifications. You don't see any Macs for $300 as you do for PC
machines. And there's
a good reason. They're worth more.
I think they are worth more. That's not to say that they're worth
what is being charged for them, but if you're saying that a Mac is
worth more than most netbooks, I absolutely agree. The problem with
Apple is, though, that they don't realize that technology needs to be
adaptable to be taken up by a large number of people. I want a very
good desktop and an adequate laptop. That's because I want to carry my
laptop around with me everywhere. I want it light and I don't want to
worry about damaging it, losing it, etc. I can use my powerful desktop
remotely and everything works well. A $300 netbook is just the thing
for me. No Mac is. The wonderful thing about both Windows and Linux is
that they are so adaptable. Your $250 netbook runs Windows, and your
$1000 laptop runs Windows, and your $2500 desktop runs Windows. Your
plug PC costing $50 runs Linux and your $500 laptop Runs Linux and
your $2500 desktop runs Linux. Obviously, I could say more, but I'm
speaking strictly as a consumer. Anyhow, this is where Apple fails.
Their products are adaptable over a narrow range. For many
circumstances, what you want is simply something that will do the job
cheaply and reasonably, and that usually isn't a Mac. Sometimes you
want the fastest/best components on the market and here, again, Apple
fails because of its stringency. For example, SSDs were available for
other computers for nearly a year before they were available for the
Mac. I think what Brant is pointing out here isn't that the Mac is too
expensive for what you get, though that may well be true, but is too
rigidly expensive for certain users, and too rigidly cheap for others.
The fact that he finds the prices high is just a symptom, the disease,
if I may be so fanciful, is that a Mac machine doesn't adapt to his
situation. If you want the very high-end or the somewhat/very low-end,
you don't want a new Mac. If you want to spread your money
differently, spending more on certain components and less on others,
you don't want a Mac at all. Of course, that also means that your
skill set on a Mac, and this is particularly as an AT user, isn't as
useful because it isn't used on as many devices and at as many
locations.
Now, you may argue that all of the above is well and good for the
ordinary user but that it doesn't apply to the blind user because of
the cost of screen readers and other at. The cost savings, though, on
AT, have been somewhat exaggerated, in my view. They apply most
obviously to a person who has never bought a screen reader or other AT
before, and who wants something a bit more complicated than NVDA. This
person saves money, and gets capability, with the Mac. Others don't
save money quickly, don't save it at all, or take a cut in capability
when they buy a Mac. An example of where the financial savings take
quite a while to kick in is where people have already purchased a
screen reader, Say Jaws or Window Eyes, and are purchasing a Mac
rather than purchasing an SMA. Depending on the cost of the Mac and
the SMA, their savings may not kick in for anywhere from 2-5 years.
Again, people who want multiple computers, even if it is two machines,
can, because they need only purchase the screen reader once, end up
spending less on the Windows option over all. The more computers you
have, the more the cost of a screen reader purchase is wiped out by
cheaper hardware. Again, people who run Windows for any reason do not
save money except possibly for upgrade costs in their screen reader.
Again, people who want fairly simple computing can buy a netbook, use
NVDA, and save large amounts of money compared to those who buy a Mac.
My point, as if I haven't belaboured it enough, is that the Mac is not
adaptable in the same way the PC is, and that what I hear from those
who say that "the Mac costs more because it's better than Windows
Machines", ignores the further question "Why should I care if I don't
need to pay for a better machine?".
Note that where Apple has been really successful, they have brought
out devices which either push forward a category in its infancy (the
iPad and iPod), or fit into a fairly narrow category (iPhone). They
haven't been general purpose, like PCs are.
I should say that I know about, but completely ignore, the cool/other
emotional factors in buying any computer. I understand that people buy
the Mac because they feel that they're supporting accessibility, or
that buying mainstream technology rather than specialized access
technology is somehow important/beneficial, or that they like Apple's
design philosophy, or that their friends have Macs, and so on. I
acknowledge that these are reasons for some people, they're just not
reasons for me. I am not emotionally invested in any platform or
computer, a computer is a tool, and the only questions that matters to
me is what can it do and how much does it cost? It seems to me that
the Mac is still on the high-cost end of the curve, and that its
capabilities do not justify the premium charged by Apple which, as I
understand Brandt, is what he is saying.
Aman
On 4/29/11, carolyn Haas <chaas0...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Brandt:
> Couldn't disagree with this point of view more. First you're comparing
> Apples and raspberries.:)
> The Mac is a totally different system, and built to some stringent
> specifications. You don't see any Macs for $300 as you do for PC machines.
> And there's a good reason. They're worth more.
> Secondly: you're buying mainstream technology, and not having to fork out
> the price of a second machine just to get it to talk. Voiceover is built
> into the system, not as an adaptation of the system.
> As such, Vo is intended to give the VI Mac user a more accurate picture of
> the screen.
>
>
> Finally, even at $299, if docuscan works as well as we're hoping it does,
> it's still a third of the price of your krzweil or openbook programs.
>
> Sorry, but I believe when you buy a Mac, you get what you pay for.
>
>
> Carolyn
>
> On Apr 29, 2011, at 12:33 AM, brandt wrote:
>
>> Hi there,
>>
>> Yes, $299 is a fair bit of money, but how many actually went and bought
>> open Book or something similar back when ever for 3 ore 4 times more? My
>> biggest complaint is not the cost of software but the ridiculous prices of
>> Mac computers. I can and probably will go the Hakintosh route just because
>> of that.
>>
>> Warm regards,
>>
>> Brandt Steenkamp
>>
>> If you like country, oldies and the occasional modern track, you can tune
>> in to my show, "an Eclectic mess" every Wednesday afternoon at 3 PM UTC by
>> going to www.TheGlobalVoice.info
>>
>> Contact me:
>>
>> Skype: brandt.steenkamp007
>> MSN: brandt...@live.com
>> Google talk/AIM: brandt.steenk...@gmail.com
>> Twitter @brandtsteenkamp
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: E.J. Zufelt
>> To: macvisionaries@googlegroups.com
>> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 5:23 AM
>> Subject: Re: For those who can actually afford this, DocuScan Plus is now
>> on the mac app store.
>>
>> I know nothing at all about this app. But, I suspect that a significant
>> portion of the cost is related to licencing a OCR SDK
>>
>>
>> Everett Zufelt
>> http://zufelt.ca
>>
>> Follow me on Twitter
>> http://twitter.com/ezufelt
>>
>> View my LinkedIn Profile
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/ezufelt
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2011-04-28, at 10:05 PM, Matthew Campbell wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Listers.
>>> DocuScan is now mac compatible and can be found on the mac app store.
>>> Don't get too excited though, unless you have $299.00 to burn on it.
>>> Hope this actually benefits someone.
>>> the Infuriated Matt Campbell.
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>> "MacVisionaries" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "MacVisionaries" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group
>> athttp://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "MacVisionaries" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "MacVisionaries" group.
> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"MacVisionaries" group.
To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.
