Hi, Scott.
You write
Your message does mix a number of things here, but the end result is
the Mac is beyond what your willing to spend and that is pretty much
where it should
end. Any argument beyond that is pointless.
I'm glad, Scott, that you know my motives better than I do. I must be
a bit irrational, though, given that the desktop I'm typing this on
cost more, originally, than most Macs. However, faced with
omniscience, I have nothing to say. We might as well say that I must
have been a bit off my rocker when I had it built.
You write
The most unrealistic part is breaking this down to components. The
average user is not at all interested in choosing an Asus board over
an Intel board. ALl they want is to turn it on and get their tasks
accomplished.
That is precisely my point. Apple is targeting a certain type of user
and ignoring all others. This user is not interested in what
components go into the machine. He also lives in the developed world,
has an income which puts him into at least the lower middle-class,
regularly uses one, or at most two, machines, outside of work, and
possibly owns several other Apple products. If you don't fit that
mould, then the Apple products will not adapt to your circumstances.
You can deviate from that mould slightly, but deviate too much and
Apple OSX just don't work for you. Both Windows and Linux, on the
other hand, do not have such a mould. They will work on the machine
you put them on. They may work more slowly or rapidly, but they will
work. This is my understanding of adaptability, that the OS should
adapt to the user's circumstances and desires. The OS should be usable
by, and satisfactory to, the vast majority of users, not just the
"average user", with the word "average" being defined by Apple. OSX is
not adaptable in that sense, partially because of its artificial
hardware limitations. This is the entirety of my point about this
issue, and has been my point in this thread.
Aman
On 4/30/11, Scott Howell <scottn3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Aman,
>
> Your message does mix a number of things here, but the end result is the Mac
> is beyond what your willing to spend and that is pretty much where it should
> end. Any argument beyond that is pointless. The most unrealistic part is
> breaking this down to components. The average user is not at all interested
> in choosing an Asus board over an Intel board. ALl they want is to turn it
> on and get their tasks accomplished. I used to build my own machines and
> spent a great deal of time and money trying to get the best box I could. If
> the Mac is more than you want to spend then fine, you get what works for
> you. ALl the rest of this is unnecessary pointless piffle.
>
> --
> 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.
