The Toy Computer Conundrum: Yep. LOL. I'll tell my story and you may understand--and may disagree. Back in the 1980s, I left a consulting gig and began learning about computers...

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

tdekany wrote:

He usually calls Apple computers “toy” computers. He must not have had his Ex-Lax yet.

Yep. LOL.

I'll tell my story and you may understand--and may disagree. Back in the 1980s, I left a consulting gig and began learning about computers, eventually became one of the first Novell people. The Apple II+ was big. My friends, who were computer nerds (I was actually a psychologist by professional training.) and electronic engineers. They designed, built and began marketing an interface to put a hard drive on the A+. Apple came along and offered them a few thousand dollars for it. When they asked for more money, Apple simply reverse engineered it and started selling it. Even had the chutzpah to write my friends that if they didn't stop selling theirs, Apple would sue them.

Probably, with enough money and lawyers, my friends might have prevailed, but they didn't have money and lawyers--Apple did. This became standard operating procedure for Apple. Law suits were their way of keeping their prices high and stealing any ideas they could. (This includes the mouse and the graphic interface.) There were hundreds of stories like this, not all, but many of them true.

Eventually the S100 bus died and the PC bus was invented by IBM. IBM was too big for Apple to treat this way, but IBM was also too hidebound to see the need for graphics. The PC bus, unlike the Apple Mac, allowed for great variation and invention. Also IBM did not impose a high tariff on innovation. Microsoft did move into graphics and Windows began. Unlike the Mac, the ambition was that with proper care, anyone could design and build products and programs for Windows and PCs. That made things a little dicey at times, and it took many years to tame the beast, but Microsoft succeeded, IBM dropped out and into other fields, many other companies like Dell, Azus, Acer, etc. took the hardware field. Competition kept the price low. (Note my machine is not top of the line, but beyond almost any Mac.) But good companies did prosper.

I went back to psychology after getting my Microsoft and several other certifications and selling my computer business.

Any PC you buy has an upgrade path that is reasonably unlimited. Any Mac will cost 3x the price for similar computing capability and will be limited as to upgrade. It will also use as much proprietary component as possible. Apple continues to make a large sum of its profits by maintaining a very large legal department and suing or threatening everyone around. This has actually worked well for Apple's shareholders, for the public, not so much.

So, if I spend $1000 (And I really could do "OK" for half that.) and you spend $1000 on a Mac. I will have a game level machine. You will have a toy computer.

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

The Apple IIc was the first real computer after Commodore.

G Brown Loc: Sunny Bognor Regis West Sussex UK

AND if you don't play games and happy to wait 30 seconds.....your computer doesn't need to be that expensive either...Read the minimum spec requirements of the programmes you use!

BebuLamar

If the Admin doesn't move this thread then they treated me unfairly because they moved my posts about Windows 10 and dual monitor problem.

BebuLamar

Reinaldokool wrote:

Yep. LOL.

I'll tell my story and you may understand--and may disagree. Back in the 1980s, I left a consulting gig and began learning about computers, eventually became one of the first Novell people. The Apple II+ was big. My friends, who were computer nerds (I was actually a psychologist by professional training.) and electronic engineers. They designed, built and began marketing an interface to put a hard drive on the A+. Apple came along and offered them a few thousand dollars for it. When they asked for more money, Apple simply reverse engineered it and started selling it. Even had the chutzpah to write my friends that if they didn't stop selling theirs, Apple would sue them.

Probably, with enough money and lawyers, my friends might have prevailed, but they didn't have money and lawyers--Apple did. This became standard operating procedure for Apple. Law suits were their way of keeping their prices high and stealing any ideas they could. (This includes the mouse and the graphic interface.) There were hundreds of stories like this, not all, but many of them true.

Eventually the S100 bus died and the PC bus was invented by IBM. IBM was too big for Apple to treat this way, but IBM was also too hidebound to see the need for graphics. The PC bus, unlike the Apple Mac, allowed for great variation and invention. Also IBM did not impose a high tariff on innovation. Microsoft did move into graphics and Windows began. Unlike the Mac, the ambition was that with proper care, anyone could design and build products and programs for Windows and PCs. That made things a little dicey at times, and it took many years to tame the beast, but Microsoft succeeded, IBM dropped out and into other fields, many other companies like Dell, Azus, Acer, etc. took the hardware field. Competition kept the price low. (Note my machine is not top of the line, but beyond almost any Mac.) But good companies did prosper.

I went back to psychology after getting my Microsoft and several other certifications and selling my computer business.

Any PC you buy has an upgrade path that is reasonably unlimited. Any Mac will cost 3x the price for similar computing capability and will be limited as to upgrade. It will also use as much proprietary component as possible. Apple continues to make a large sum of its profits by maintaining a very large legal department and suing or threatening everyone around. This has actually worked well for Apple's shareholders, for the public, not so much.

So, if I spend $1000 (And I really could do "OK" for half that.) and you spend $1000 on a Mac. I will have a game level machine. You will have a toy computer.

Yep. LOL. br br I'll tell my story and you may... (show quote)

Isn't a game machine a toy?

via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

Reinaldokool wrote:

Yep. LOL.

I'll tell my story and you may understand--and may disagree. Back in the 1980s, I left a consulting gig and began learning about computers, eventually became one of the first Novell people. The Apple II+ was big. My friends, who were computer nerds (I was actually a psychologist by professional training.) and electronic engineers. They designed, built and began marketing an interface to put a hard drive on the A+. Apple came along and offered them a few thousand dollars for it. When they asked for more money, Apple simply reverse engineered it and started selling it. Even had the chutzpah to write my friends that if they didn't stop selling theirs, Apple would sue them.

Probably, with enough money and lawyers, my friends might have prevailed, but they didn't have money and lawyers--Apple did. This became standard operating procedure for Apple. Law suits were their way of keeping their prices high and stealing any ideas they could. (This includes the mouse and the graphic interface.) There were hundreds of stories like this, not all, but many of them true.

Eventually the S100 bus died and the PC bus was invented by IBM. IBM was too big for Apple to treat this way, but IBM was also too hidebound to see the need for graphics. The PC bus, unlike the Apple Mac, allowed for great variation and invention. Also IBM did not impose a high tariff on innovation. Microsoft did move into graphics and Windows began. Unlike the Mac, the ambition was that with proper care, anyone could design and build products and programs for Windows and PCs. That made things a little dicey at times, and it took many years to tame the beast, but Microsoft succeeded, IBM dropped out and into other fields, many other companies like Dell, Azus, Acer, etc. took the hardware field. Competition kept the price low. (Note my machine is not top of the line, but beyond almost any Mac.) But good companies did prosper.

I went back to psychology after getting my Microsoft and several other certifications and selling my computer business.

Any PC you buy has an upgrade path that is reasonably unlimited. Any Mac will cost 3x the price for similar computing capability and will be limited as to upgrade. It will also use as much proprietary component as possible. Apple continues to make a large sum of its profits by maintaining a very large legal department and suing or threatening everyone around. This has actually worked well for Apple's shareholders, for the public, not so much.

So, if I spend $1000 (And I really could do "OK" for half that.) and you spend $1000 on a Mac. I will have a game level machine. You will have a toy computer.

Yep. LOL. br br I'll tell my story and you may... (show quote)

I'm not sure what the actual point of this is, but I've had Macs for 25 years and never had any issues. I don't play games so don't need a "game level machine." Aren't these two sentences somewhat in conflict anyway...."I will have a game level machine. You will have a toy computer"? The whole Apple thing works very well for me. Thanks for the history lesson.

JerryOfAZ

'Game' level machines are actually very competent computers. They have serious graphics and computing capabilities. They are not toys as the description implies but sophisticated hardware. To each their own. Apple people will always be apple people and PC users will remain PC users. I could factually dispute some of the posts above but it would be of little avail.

oldart Loc: Dallas, Texas

Apple vs PC. Canon vs Nikon. Blah, blah, blah!

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

Reinaldokool wrote:

Yep. LOL.

I'll tell my story and you may understand--and may disagree. Back in the 1980s, I left a consulting gig and began learning about computers, eventually became one of the first Novell people. The Apple II+ was big. My friends, who were computer nerds (I was actually a psychologist by professional training.) and electronic engineers. They designed, built and began marketing an interface to put a hard drive on the A+. Apple came along and offered them a few thousand dollars for it. When they asked for more money, Apple simply reverse engineered it and started selling it. Even had the chutzpah to write my friends that if they didn't stop selling theirs, Apple would sue them.

Probably, with enough money and lawyers, my friends might have prevailed, but they didn't have money and lawyers--Apple did. This became standard operating procedure for Apple. Law suits were their way of keeping their prices high and stealing any ideas they could. (This includes the mouse and the graphic interface.) There were hundreds of stories like this, not all, but many of them true.

Eventually the S100 bus died and the PC bus was invented by IBM. IBM was too big for Apple to treat this way, but IBM was also too hidebound to see the need for graphics. The PC bus, unlike the Apple Mac, allowed for great variation and invention. Also IBM did not impose a high tariff on innovation. Microsoft did move into graphics and Windows began. Unlike the Mac, the ambition was that with proper care, anyone could design and build products and programs for Windows and PCs. That made things a little dicey at times, and it took many years to tame the beast, but Microsoft succeeded, IBM dropped out and into other fields, many other companies like Dell, Azus, Acer, etc. took the hardware field. Competition kept the price low. (Note my machine is not top of the line, but beyond almost any Mac.) But good companies did prosper.

I went back to psychology after getting my Microsoft and several other certifications and selling my computer business.

Any PC you buy has an upgrade path that is reasonably unlimited. Any Mac will cost 3x the price for similar computing capability and will be limited as to upgrade. It will also use as much proprietary component as possible. Apple continues to make a large sum of its profits by maintaining a very large legal department and suing or threatening everyone around. This has actually worked well for Apple's shareholders, for the public, not so much.

So, if I spend $1000 (And I really could do "OK" for half that.) and you spend $1000 on a Mac. I will have a game level machine. You will have a toy computer.

Yep. LOL. br br I'll tell my story and you may... (show quote)

Its odd that the Windows platform is the vicim of the vast majority of cyber hijacking. Guess us Mac users get something (but not absolute safety) for the extra dollars.

bobmcculloch Loc: NYC, NY

BobHartung wrote:

Its odd that the Windows platform is the vicim of the vast majority of cyber hijacking. Guess us Mac users get something (but not absolute safety) for the extra dollars.

I don't think it's odd, more targets, more opportunity!

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

You could have summed this all up in one sentence: “I don’t like Macs.” But I do. Variety and competition are what make the world go around.

markngolf Loc: Bridgewater, NJ

Yup!!!

Probably 10 to 1 ratio.

Mark

bobmcculloch wrote:

I don't think it's odd, more targets, more opportunity!

EdJ0307 Loc: out west someplace

BebuLamar wrote:

If the Admin doesn't move this thread then they treated me unfairly because they moved my posts about Windows 10 and dual monitor problem.

I went back to your profile to find your thread about Windows 10 and dual monitors. I found it listed in General Chit-Chat. I even made a comment in it. Now I'm wondering where it originally started life if it wasn't Chit-Chat.

EdJ0307 Loc: out west someplace

BobHartung wrote:

Its odd that the Windows platform is the vicim of the vast majority of cyber hijacking. Guess us Mac users get something (but not absolute safety) for the extra dollars.

It's not odd at all that Windows machines are targeted more than Macs when you realize there are ten PCs for each Mac. The scammers aren't stupid, they're going to go after the most potential victims. It's not that Macs are safer, it's more like they are more expensive and not many people can afford them.

BTW, you spelled "victim" wrong. I'm surprised your Mac didn't point that out to you. My PC would have let me know if I had spelled "vicim" wrong. See, it underlined the word indicating it was spelled wrong.

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

BobHartung wrote:

Its odd that the Windows platform is the vicim of the vast majority of cyber hijacking. Guess us Mac users get something (but not absolute safety) for the extra dollars.

It's not odd, but perfectly rational. Until the last 10 or so years, 97-8% of the market was PC. If you are writing hacks and malware, where would you put your energy? The bad guys have the same decision that other software people do. That led to the misunderstanding that Mac are impervious to viruses. Not so. In the last 10 years, Macs have increased to about 8-9%. Predictably, there are now about 20-30 serious Mac malwares coming out each week.

Best source of information about malware is Sophos regular newsletter "Naked Security".