[SATLUG] Re: mobile devices with linux

Brad Knowles brad at shub-internet.org
Tue Jul 29 18:33:46 CDT 2008

KC wrote:

> What I refer to in this sort of direction is the way the old hardware was
> better at the graphics type tasks. I don't think the Intel direction
> should have won when it won. It wasn't superior for graphics and
> multimedia, just more prolific and lower priced. One more swing at Apple
> is, if they gave in and decided to use mainstream hardware from Intel,
> why didnt they drop their price to mainstrem.. or at least a little above
> mainstream? Instead they stay at WAY above mainstream.

You obviously haven't done your homework.

There's crap el-cheapo bargain basement bottom of the sewer prices, and the 
hardware you're buying isn't worth the time you spent looking at it.

Then there's the kinds of prices charged by name-brand companies.  Their 
hardware may or may not be any better, but that's what you assume when you 
buy hardware from them.

Now, compare prices of Apple hardware against comparably configured devices 
from name-brand companies like HP, Dell, etc....  You will generally find 
that the Apple hardware is less expensive for the same hardware 
configuration, or at least fairly competitively priced.

But no, Apple doesn't make or sell any crap el-cheapo bargain basement 
bottom of the sewer machines, so you won't find any of their machines priced 
like that.

If you want crap el-cheapo bargain basement bottom of the sewer machines at 
correspondingly low prices, then you need to go elsewhere.

> So I know longer get a clear performance advantage and I still get a
> grossly negative pricing advantage. Where is the advantage to using an
> Apple for computing?

It's called Total Cost of Ownership.  Look it up sometime.

> If I want stable, I go with RHEL for less, or CentOS for free. Or
> numerous other stable Linux distros. I don't need FrankenLinux from Mac,
> which, does run GREAT, but is over priced for no performance advantage.

Free isn't necessarily cheap.  It costs time and effort to support stuff 
that doesn't work together well, and for most people time really is money. 
In those cases, you're better off paying for RHEL and getting real support 
from the vendor than by ripping off CentOS for free.

The mechanism is the same with Apple, only they get much more mainstream 
support from most third-party vendors.  So, not only does the OS work well 
out-of-the-box, and not only is the OS well supported by the vendor, now you 
have a wide variety of third-party vendors you can work with that are also 
well-supported on that platform.

You end up getting an entire ecosystem for the price of a single machine, 
and both are well-supported by everyone involved.

Brad Knowles <brad at shub-internet.org>
LinkedIn Profile: <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu>

More information about the SATLUG mailing list