Total cost of ownership does not mean you can ignore some of the costs.
Total cost of Ownership means exactly that the "total" of ALL the costs.
Enron type accounting can't get you out of the corner you painted yourself into.
A day ago you were telling me that TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP was what you paid for it. . . and now you are trying to tell me what it is. All obviously and deliberately refusing to understand what TOC was.
At no point in any post did I say I was going to do TOTAL COST OF OWNER SHIP analysis. I said that the iPhone had a LOWER TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP (and there is an article from an authoritative SOURCE on this thread that makes the same point) and I showed you why without going in to all kind of charts, comparisons, and the kinds of studies I COULD have gone into. That meant I could OMIT those things that were equal for all other phones, and therefore IRRELEVANT, to the topic under discussion. I could list some of the other costs associated with phone ownership. . . but they are also irrelevant. Do I need to DEFINE EVERY TERM I use???? Should I include a dictionary of Economic Terms? How about a text book of basic Economics? Perhaps we should go back even farther and include basic Statistics?
Had I been writing a list of all costs of owning a cellular smartphone, I would have listed it. . . but I was not. I was talking about the SAVINGS and the LOWER COSTS associated with DIFFERENT PHONES, not the costs that are equal in the phone purchasing environment, no matter what phone you buy. I was not writing a dissertation.
I have not painted my self into any corner. YOU just do not understand what you are talking about and want to argue from ignorance. Only in your ignorant mind do these things matter, so GO AWAY, you economic ignoramous.
You are deliberately refusing to acknowledge obvious equal and irrelevant costs. . . obviously just to be irritating and obstinate. The stupid in you is also obvious.
A day ago you were telling me that TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP was what you paid for it. . . and now you are trying to tell me what it is. All obviously and deliberately refusing to understand what TOC was.
At no point in any post did I say I was going to do a TOTAL COST OF OWNER SHIP analysis. I said that the iPhone had a LOWER TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP (and there is an article from an authoritative SOURCE on this thread that makes the same point) and I showed you why without going in to all kind of charts, comparisons, and the kinds of studies I COULD have gone into. That meant I could OMIT those things that were equal for all other phones, and therefore IRRELEVANT, to the topic under discussion. I could list some of the other costs associated with phone ownership. . . but they are also irrelevant. Do I need to DEFINE EVERY TERM I use???? Should I include a dictionary of Economic Terms? How about a text book of basic Economics? Perhaps we should go back even farther and include basic Statistics?
Had I been writing a list of all costs of owning a cellular smartphone, I would have listed it. . . but I was not. I was talking about the SAVINGS and the LOWER COSTS associated with DIFFERENT PHONES, not the costs that are equal in the phone purchasing environment, no matter what phone you buy. I was not writing a dissertation.
I have not painted my self into any corner. YOU just do not understand what you are talking about and want to argue from ignorance. Only in your ignorant mind do these things matter, so GO AWAY, you economic ignoramous.
You are deliberately refusing to acknowledge obvious equal and irrelevant costs. . . obviously just to be irritating and obstinate. The stupid in you is also obvious.