3 ms·
Mostly windows machines of comparable spec could be had for 10% less, but most importantly there were many OEMs willing to sell objectively bad underspecced mac
by steveBK123 2y ago
Mostly windows machines of comparable spec could be had for 10% less, but most importantly there were many OEMs willing to sell objectively bad underspecced machines that were 50-75% cheaper than the cheapest Mac. Remember the era when people had overheating laptops etc.
- detourdog 2y agoPrice comparing Macs and PCs has rarely been accurate. The experts I remember would hammer the price difference and say Apple was dying so the investment isn’t worth it.
- devmor 2y agoThis is happening again now, with a new addition (well, resurgent) of insidious price cutting strategy: adware. Ed Zitron goes into it in a recent article rant here[1] (skip to the "direct example" section if you're not interested in the rest of the read) where he reviews the best selling laptop on Amazon, which is ridiculously cheap... at a devil's bargain. 1. https://www.wheresyoured.at/never-forgive-them/ https://www.wheresyoured.at/never-forgive-them/
- steveBK123 2y agoAt this point it’s like the old story about boots - too poor to afford cheap ones. Most people would be better served with a $600 Mac mini that will literally still be working & better in 5 years than in buying a $300 Amazon deal with 4GB ram which will run awful and die right outside warranty period. Maybe in a couple years apple will have prior year minis a little cheaper / refurbs available at $450-500ish too.
- Dylan16807 2y ago$240 for that, huh. I just bought a $280 Acer laptop, still limited storage but better class, twice the ram, and with a CPU that actually has performance cores so it runs 2.5x-5x faster. It came with chromeOS, which is a limiting factor, but in this particular comparison it sounds like it's more of an upside than a downside.