Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 16th Jul 2009 12:51 UTC
Permalink for comment 373711
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-07-26
Hit em where it hurts. Apple has a better OS but the hardware is still way overpriced. And since you can buy and run that OS on any laptop for only $100 it still doesn't justify the price. Maybe OSX is subsidized, if it is... they should fix that.
If Apple wanted to react, they could run a cost of ownership campaign. Great... you got a $1,000 laptop. Now you gotta buy Virus protection. Oh, you wanted to edit movies right? What are you going to use? Now you gotta buy that software. What about office documents once that 3 month trial runs out? All of a sudden you spent more than you would have on a Mac which has all that stuff, no virus, iMovie, iLife etc.
They would have a problem with this however since it could also be solved by loading OSX onto that $1,000 laptop for only $100. Also you could just keep running Windows and use free / opensource antivirus, movie editing, office etc.