🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4177@ihlpf.ATT.COM> straka@ihlpf.UUCP (55223-Straka,R.J.) writes:
>In article <1017@aucs.UUCP> peter@aucs.UUCP (Peter Steele) writes:
>|in article <7778@apple.Apple.Com|, kurt@Apple.COM (Kurt Hasel) says:
>|I can think of a real good reason. Their machines are too expensive!
>|they always end up buying a Hong Kong Special--a PC clone. I'll never
>|understand why Apple doesn't introduce an affordable Mac. If the interest
>|here is any indication, they'd sell like hot-cakes. It doesn't seem like
>|in the best interest of every one else! I think this way would be as good
>|a way to increase their market share as suing the world...
>
>What would you take away from a Plus or SE to make a low-end Mac?  In what
>ways would it have to be inferior to the above, yet still usable?

The cost of a Plus could come down quite a bit from what Apple charges, but
probably won't (although the current $1300 street price isn't too shabby).
The reason is what you are paying for is not just the hardware but also
the current and future software development Apple does.  Things like Hypercard,
the ROMs, color quickdraw, HFS and MultiFinder all cost money to develop.
Because Apple is it's own unique world, all of the things have to be
developed by Apple for you to get them free with the hardware (or relativly
cheap upgrades).  In the Hong Kong PC clone world, the clone builders
don't have to support the software overhead and so can charge just the
manufactoring cost plus appropiate markup.  IBM and the major clones do
support the development (or do it themselves) and you notice it in their
prices.

>Rich Straka     ihnp4!ihlpf!straka
>
>Advice for the day: "MSDOS - just say no."

Advice for tomorrow: "OS/2 - just say no."


Jerry Whitnell				Been through Hell?
Communication Solutions, Inc.		What did you bring back for me?
						- A. Brilliant