🚀 go-pugleaf

From article <1991Mar16.221739.21956@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>, by mroussel@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Marc Roussel):
> In article <27dc15b6-a2e.5comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc-1@vpnet.chi.il.us>
> akcs.gregc@vpnet.chi.il.us (*Greg*) writes:
>>[Flame ON!]
>>You'd have to buy a $6000.00 - $15,000
>>dollar machine to do the same performance as PC hardware.  I can get a fast
>>33MHz 386 that will intergrate software and hardware for $4000.00.  And this
>>will blow the doors off comparable Macs.  With the newest Macs, 
>>it's different.  They
>>are fast enough.  But again, at what price.  And how much storage can you
>>fit in em?  The choice is clear.
> 
>      When quoting hardware prices, you should try to be fair.  Sure, a Mac is
> more expensive (usually) than a similarly equipped neighbourhood computer
> store PC.  But how does a Mac compare to an equivalently equipped Compaq?
> Last I looked, the answer was "very favorably".  (By the way, I'm not even
> sure that your idea of Mac pricing is accurate, but then I'm not in the market
> right now, so I couldn't say for sure.  Apple's pricing has improved
> considerably in the last year, largely as a result of market pressure.)  The
> point is that large companies have overhead that smaller companies don't.
> Mac pricing is very competitive for a machine in that class made by a
> company of Apple's size, especially when you consider that the windowing
> interface and things like Hypercard come with the machine rather than having
> to be bought separately.

Who buys Compaq, (any more)...