On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 9:50 AM, Wojtek Sokolowski <swsokolowski at yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>
>
> --- On Fri, 5/1/09, Michael McIntyre <morbidsymptoms at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > Preferring PC to Mac on the basis of
> > price, especially when software is
> > free, is certainly reasonable. But everything else
> > here is wrong. The Mac
> > GUI was not exactly "ripped off" from Xerox (not Zenith).
> > Microsoft, in
> > contrast, based DOS on a hacked version of CP/M. The
> > competing business
> > models of (1) Microsoft and (2) Apple were (1) to allow
> > anyone to
> > manufacture computers that could run DOS, but to require a
> > licensing fee
> > from all, and (2) to refuse to license the software to
> > third-party
> > manufacturers. Microsoft's business model succeeded
> > while Mac's business
> > model failed, or nearly so. The "cult of Apple" arose
> > initially among
> > pre-Mac Apple users and was later adapted as a marketing
> > strategy, not a
> > business model, after Jobs was brought back. Apple's
> > new business model is
> > a hybrid of the old Microsoft and Apple
> > strategies. Apple still
> > manufactures all of its own hardware, but with iPod and
> > iPhone its aim is to
> > overwhelm the competition with content (either the size of
> > the iTunes store
> > or the vast range of iPhone apps) and ease of use.
> > Wojtek's rejection of
> > the fanboy culture is really just a very effective means of
> > building
> > cultural capital in a would-be proley group like ours.
>
>
> [WS:] OK, I got the Xerox part wrong (my memory did not serve me well this
> time :)) - but how is what you argue different from what I argue? I argued
> that the Mac model is based on monopolistic practices, you say that Apple
> refused to license to third parties. I said that the Mac model is based on
> commodity fetishism, you said this model was created by pre-Mac Apple users.
> I say tomato you say tomahto....
>
> I understand that finally Mac yielded to market pressure and allowed third
> party software on their Ipod and Iphone - which are still overpriced and
> still wrapped in the shroud of a commodity fetishism cult. I agree they are
> cute but with the price tag of $400+ I prefer Asus at half that price. Ok,
> it may not be cute (albeit is is "hearttouching" :)) and it does not shake,
> but it offers a far greater choice of really good and inexpensive
> aftermarket software. After all, it is a machine, not a status symbol.
>
> As to they proley image - I dunno, but I thought that lbo-talk is mainly a
> Mac shop, no?
>
> PS. By "monopoly with a hefty price tag" I understand that Mac does not
> allow aftermarket software or hardware - you have to buy it form Mac at a
> price that is far greater than the aftermarket products. My issue with that
> is that it would work for me if I were buying a computer for life (quality
> pays!) but unfortunately the average life of a computer is 5 or so years,
> after which even the best quality machine is made obsolete - so quality does
> not really matter that much, but price does.
>
> Wojtek
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>