Why does Apple charge so much?

[tsali]

Most people on these forums are wise enought o choose function over style.

I always laugh at these kinds of statements.

A life reduced to function only isn't worth living. It isn't even human.

[igknighted]

LOL

C'mon they make better PCs than Windows, seriously overpriced though.

Last time I checked, microsoft didn't make PC's. And there are many PCs (Dell XPS 1330, 1530 laptops, HP's touch screen PC, many Sony and Toshiba laptops... to name a few) that look and work just as well as the apple ones. The hardware you get from apple is the same as you get elsewhere, the only difference is you get OSX. If OSX is worth it, by all means go buy a mac. I don't think a mediocre, closed at every turn OS is worth the huge markup you pay. But that's me. If you think it is worth it, by all means, go for it.

Oh... and the apple service? If you think going to the genius bar at the mall is great service, by all means keep doing it. Personally, I'll take my PC to a the local repair shop if I need any work where I have a great, personal relationship with the techs (if it's something I can't do on my own). Not only do I then have some say as to what happens to my PC, but I support local business. Win-Win.

[Frak]

WHEN it can be bundled with full support of both hardware vendor AND Apple, then I accept its viability as a consumer alternative.

http://store.psystar.com/

There you can buy a computer with OS X, Windows, and/or Linux pre-installed with full support from the vendor.

There are companies in various countries that now use OSx86, though, as a result of Apple's OS monopoly not being a legal binding. (Therefore, anybody has the right to install OS X on any computer they wish with no legal repercussions)

[Swarms]

Last time I checked, microsoft didn't make PC's. And there are many PCs (Dell XPS 1330, 1530 laptops, HP's touch screen PC, many Sony and Toshiba laptops... to name a few) that look and work just as well as the apple ones. The hardware you get from apple is the same as you get elsewhere, the only difference is you get OSX. If OSX is worth it, by all means go buy a mac. I don't think a mediocre, closed at every turn OS is worth the huge markup you pay. But that's me. If you think it is worth it, by all means, go for it.

Ok, show me another aluminium and glass laptop with a backlit keyboard. I am not being very specific...
Afterwards we can make a poll to let people pick out the more beautiful laptop.

Note: I am not trying to prove you wrong, simply curious.

[handy]

The people that bitch the most about Apple, tend to be those that just can't afford one....but want one.

I bitch, & we have 3 that I bought & 1 that our daughter bought for herself in the house, amongst other non-Apple boxes.

But I agree, there is a lot of bitching from people that are reacting to price & the odd macatroid that has rubbed their personality the wrong way.

[handy]

I wouldn't accept a free apple unless I was going to sell it on.

I'm all for freedom of choice.

Most people on these forums are wise enought o choose function over style.

You have absolutely no basis for that statement, you just pulled it out of thin air.

mp3 players there are far better options than the iPod and cheaper too

I disagree, the iPod for my old eyes is the easiest of any mp3 player I have ever seen to operate.
That is the sole purpose I bought it, the added bonus that I can so easily sync my contacts on the Leopard side of my iMac is just icing on the cake. I don't listen to music these days, but love well read audio books, which is what lives on most of the 8Gb of storage on my iPod. (None were bought from Apple's store by the way.)

A new pc with windows is far cheaper than a mac for equal specs even when software costs are incorporated. Plus you can reject the EULA and still use the PC (you might be able to do it with macs but I doubt it). Windows are infinitly more upgradeable too.

I happily use Arch on my iMac, which was bought for the space advantage in my already crowded office, as I have detailed previously in this thread.

As far as non-Apple machines are concerned, I've been building them since 1995, & hacking Amiga hardware before that; 10 years of the building experience was during existence of my IT technical service business.

I agree that all notebooks & Apple's iMacs are extremely limited as far as upgrading is concerned. A few rare notebooks made by non-Apple manufacturers can have their GPU &/or their CPU's upgraded.

People that buy any brand of notebook or Apple's iMac aren't expecting to be able to upgrade any more than the RAM & possibly the HDD size.

There really exists no argument against Apple regarding upgradability on these products, beyond the slim one that Apple could have joined the list of the producers that build the very rare notebooks (they could have done it with the iMac too) with the inherent ability to upgrade their GPU or CPU.

Apple is for people who prefer style over function and like chucking £20 notes on the fire.

You are writing as though you are quite a young person.

You should have been taught that such generalisations without backing, are nought but an appeal to the emotions that leave logic behind.

Such statements always fail to win any points, though they are quite often what flame wars exist on, hot air.

[MikeTheC]

There are companies in various countries that now use OSx86, though, as a result of Apple's OS monopoly not being a legal binding. (Therefore, anybody has the right to install OS X on any computer they wish with no legal repercussions)

Hmm? Where'd you get that from? Apple, to the extent that one can argue they're a monopoly, does not operate in an illegal fashion, nor are they in violation of any laws. They do not engage in anti-competitive behavior, do not use leverage in one arena to shut out others in another one, and so forth and so on.

Installing Mac OS X on anything other than Apple hardware is a violation of the Apple EULA. Period, plain and simple. Now, whether Apple is likely to come after you personally for putting Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware is a separate matter. That being said, if businesses are doing it, then that would become somewhat more problematic. Besides, what business would want to not just risk tort action by Apple, but have no warranty or support for their intended platform (that is, a "Mac")? If I ran a business, I certainly would want support, and that means I would certainly need to make sure everything was on the straight-and-narrow.

[Frak]

Hmm? Where'd you get that from? Apple, to the extent that one can argue they're a monopoly, does not operate in an illegal fashion, nor are they in violation of any laws. They do not engage in anti-competitive behavior, do not use leverage in one arena to shut out others in another one, and so forth and so on.

Installing Mac OS X on anything other than Apple hardware is a violation of the Apple EULA. Period, plain and simple. Now, whether Apple is likely to come after you personally for putting Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware is a separate matter. That being said, if businesses are doing it, then that would become somewhat more problematic. Besides, what business would want to not just risk tort action by Apple, but have no warranty or support for their intended platform (that is, a "Mac")? If I ran a business, I certainly would want support, and that means I would certainly need to make sure everything was on the straight-and-narrow.

OK, you misunderstood what I said.

It is not of legal binding -> It is not legally enforceable. In some countries, the part that says "OS X may not be installed on any non-apple branded/labeled (it's changed a bit) computers" is not legally enforceable since it, in itself, may be a violation of another law entirely.

[tsali]

In some countries, the part that says "OS X may not be installed on any non-apple branded/labeled (it's changed a bit) computers" is not legally enforceable since it, in itself, may be a violation of another law entirely.

If it is being installed not in accordance with the Apple EULA, it's piracy, plain and simple. It doesn't matter what country your in or what their legal structure is like. The EULA is an "AGREEMENT" between Apple and the User...not LAW. However, Apple has the option of pursuing action against those who violate the terms of that EULA, just as Pystar is being hammered by Apple now...

http://www.engadget.com/2008/12/23/p...re_cnet_inline

http://www.engadget.com/2008/07/16/a...star-examined/

[KiwiNZ]

Can you please provide proof of your claim . Please provide examples and the appropriate supporting statute.

Your statement concerns me as it could be seen as promoting illegal actions which is not allowed here.

OK, you misunderstood what I said.

It is not of legal binding -> It is not legally enforceable. In some countries, the part that says "OS X may not be installed on any non-apple branded/labeled (it's changed a bit) computers" is not legally enforceable since it, in itself, may be a violation of another law entirely.