Linked by Adam S on Thu 21st Aug 2008 13:13 UTC
Windows Steven Sinofsky, who oversees Windows 7 development, has really committed to keeping us in the loop on the new Engineering Windows 7 blog. In today's post, "Measuring the Scale of a Release," he discusses whether or not Windows 7 will be a "major" or "minor" release. It's a pretty good piece that really makes some good points. Read on for our perspective.
Permalink for comment 327625
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by Hakime
by Hakime on Fri 22nd Aug 2008 07:52 UTC
Member since:

"I'm sorry, it's still too much. For $1099 I can get the "I'm sorry I can't afford the COOL Mac, please don't look down on me" basic Mac laptop. For $500-$600 I can get a similarly spec'd PC. As PsyStar has shown us, it is a very closed game Apple is running, where people pay twice the money for the "coolness" factor. "

You are talking crap and the worrying thing is that maybe you are not knowing it.

I can't believe that you come up with PsyStar. PsyStar only showed one thing to us: they sell crappy hardware. PsyStar sells you unreliable hardware, it sells you noisy hardware, it sells you poorly designed hardware (inside and outside), it sells you poor support an it sells you poorly valued hardware. No way that you can compare PsyStar's computers with Apple's macs. No way... A little bit of honesty would be welcome here....

And even PsyStar dudes knows that they are selling crappy computers and when they realized that Vista won't help to sell a lot of them they decided to steal Mac OS X. Crazy business practice i would say...

So now let me get it strait. Apple sells you first class designed hardware, inside and outside, Apple sells you quality, Apple sells you style, Apple sells you custom motherboards design to fit into those nice designed computers, Apple sells you a kick ass OS, Apple sells you a kick ass software suite, remember iLife, and Apple sells you good support.

How a hell you can expect that Apple's computers would be prized as PsyStar ones even if the so called specs are close? And by the way those trolls like to speak about specs but they forget that a computer is not only numbers describing the processor speed and the size of the disk, and that's why they can't get it. Look at the facts, there is no way that you can compare the prize of a computer like the iMac with its design, style, performance and operating silence with PsyStar's crappy boxes. There is also no way that you can compare the prize of a Mac Pro with his hundreds of sensors for reliability and performance with PsyStar's crappy boxes.

And recall that there is the software, Apple does an operating system, and it seems to be the best one out there. Apple does most of its return on investment for developing OS X by selling macs, Apple sells a platform, so is it so surprising that Apple's computers cost more than a computer which only gets assembled together before it gets to the user?

I don't think so, i mean, is it a new concept? You pay more for better quality, it is simple and it has existed since humans started to sell objects. It applies to cars, to bikes, to bicycles, to houses, to TVs, to sounds systems, to video cameras, to cameras, to food, to planes, to trains, to shirts, to trousers, to socks, to under wears... you name it. Why it should not be applied to computers?

And yes it applied for pcs too.. Look at Lenovo, they are trying to add value to their computers, and result they cost more. Same thing for japanese companies like Sony or Hitachi, here in Japan, their laptops cost most of the time more than macs.... and even with weaker specs and without the Apple's design.

But if you prefer to buy cheap, poorly designed computers with bad quality, it's fine, no problem with that, you are free to do that. Or maybe you can't just afford higher quality products, this is totally understandable. But the point is that get your fact right!!

Edited 2008-08-22 07:55 UTC

Reply Score: 0