Hey, I took my first programming class in college in 1969. . . So I have a few more years in this business than you. . . and far more experience with Apple products. I just did a like-for-like comparison of two Notebook computers . . . and showed you which was the better value despite being only slightly more expensive but YOU see only the price. The Apple was by far the better deal. You seem to know the price of everything but the value of nothing!
The Apple MacBook Pro, five years later, will probably retain 50-60% of its value for resale. That's the historical experience. The Windows notebook, if it's still running, only 15-20%. That's also the historical record. Taking the lower figure, in five years, the MacBook is likely to be salable for ~$750 and the Acer will be offered for ~$280. Once you account for selling your used notebook when you're done with it, your cost factor changes. The Apple cost over five years is only $750, but the Acer is $1120. Oops, total cost of ownership is FAR LESS for the Apple product.
It's the same across the gamut of Apple products. At my office, we just sold an eight year old first model MacPro for $900, because it could no longer be upgraded. We had bought brand new it for $2499. That's 36% of its original price. . . eight years later. Find a similar retention of value in a Windows computer. You can't. An eight year old Windows computer may, on a good day, bring under $100 IF you included the monitor. We upgraded to a four year old MacPro that could install OSX.9 Mavericks (actually a 7 year old model, one up from our old one would have been sufficient). We paid $1600 for it. . . 64% of its sold new price of $2499. Apple's maintain their value. . . but the upshot for us is the net cost, because we had written off the old one through depreciation, is this one cost us only $700 to upgrade. $1600 minus $900 = $700.
Again, the total cost of ownership is far less. If you knew how to really analyze actual cost, you'd know that Apple is always the better buy. . . and in numerous independent studies, has been shown to be so.
And Android is still kicks arse in the handheld market.
And you think you know all about this market, too? Tell me, if Android is "kicking arse" as you so crudely put it, how come last year Apple (and holding true the first quarter of this year), a manufacturer of only six handheld products—competing against literally hundreds of other manufacturers making thousands of handheld market products—took home 87.5% of ALL mobile handheld profits? Samsung, takes home 31.2% of the mobile handheld profits. Yes, I know that totals 119.7%, but that's because ALL of the other makers are losing money! Just whose "arse" is getting "kicked?" Market share is a false metric that just records the mobs race to the bottom, DHS. Apple refuses to play there. While everyone else is racing to the poorhouse, Apple is strolling to the bank.
Additionally, net-traffic, a measure of the usage of mobile platforms, shows that iOS, Apple's mobile platform is used for over 90% of tablet connection to the Internet! and over 70% of phone connections. . . Worldwide, and higher in the US. Where are all those "arse kicking" Android devices connecting to the Internet? No one seems to know.
2.So you are saying that developers don’t pay a “tribute” to Apple for the privilege of selling into their systems? I disagree. And guess who pays for the tribute that the developers pay to Apple? Lemme help you here — THE CUSTOMER. And that is why in part that Apple products are so much more expensive.
Are you that dense??? You first claim that the Developers Don't earn anything for their efforts in developing their Apps on the Apple App Store. I provide you with the WELL KNOWN FACT that Apple has PAID out $18 BILLION to developers. . . and you dismiss it with an "I don't believe it!" Incredible! Yet you claim you know everything about Apple. BS!
Apple's App Store downloads top $10bn: Battle for developers' hearts and minds heats upSummary: iOS device owners downloaded nearly three billion apps in December, while developers earned $8bn across the year.
By Steve Ranger | January 7, 2014 -- 14:14 GMT (06:14 PST)
Apple customers spent over $10bn in its App Store in 2013 — including over $1bn in December, the company has revealed.
The company said App Store users downloaded almost three billion apps in December making it the most successful month for the app repository. As a result, it said, Apple developers have now earned $15bn from apps in the Apple App Store; this time last year that figure stood at somewhere around $7bn. ZDNet excerpted source
Add $3 billion for the last quarter and one month. . . $18 billion.
Look, everything paid by any business comes from the customer in the long run. I'm educated as an economist. It's what my degree is in. Look around on FreeRepublic and you'll find I've explained that concept at length to people who think businesses pay taxes. But the developers DEVELOP first for Apple iOS because they make money there. . . then they MAY port to Android. There are lots of articles written on this preference. . . and the reasons. Developers have LEFT Android because of losing money there.
In 2012-2013, a developer made on 25¢ on the Android Play Store for every $1 they could make on the iOS App Store.
That is total BS that Apple is price competitive and you know it. What people pay for when using an Apple platform is ease of use. That has always been their strategy and some people, the less computer literate, are willing to pay for that premium.
You simply refuse to see what is in front of your eyes. Which notebook in the comparison I showed you was the better value? Answer the question. Are they competitive? Answer that question. If you refuse. You are willfully blind and cannot see quality has value.
My definition of quality is all inclusive and INCLUDES both the hardware AND the software. Because, if either doesn’t function that I end up with a useless brick.
Which shows me you've never used Apple products. Every Apple user I know has never ever wound up with a useless brick. Apple length of useful life is far longer than typical Window computers. . . and they tend to get handed down to new users through resale. Few Apple's wind up in landfills after just one owner. They get gifted or sold on. Same with the handhelds. I sold my iPhone 4s for $260 when I bought my iPhone 5 for $199. Pocketed $61. My original iPhone from 2007 was being used by my ex-wife until we retired it three months ago. . . It's now being used as an iPod touch by my 2 1/2 year old granddaughter, still with the original battery. So what problem with iPod batteries are you recalling? The bad batch from Sony?
Consumers are angry? Is that why Apple has the highest customer satisfaction rating of ALL the tech companies for about ten years running? They are several percentage points higher than the nearest competitor.
My final point is that paying for a new computer every 3 to 4 years at $1500 a pop is expensive. I want that investment to last as long as possible. And it is very clear that Apples business strategy is planned obsolescence at the expense of their customers.
Why would you think you have to do that? Read the comments of the Apple users on here. All of them state that every OSX update makes their Mac run faster and better than it had before. That's true. . . and that works for years. Apple computers don't slow down with usage or age. Contrary to myth, the desktops are upgradeable for RAM, hard drives, even in some cases graphics. If you DO want a new computer, buy it and sell your old one for an excellent resale price to offset the price of the new one.
You claim Macs are "closed systems" but they are not. You think they are because you don't know how to use one. But OSX is UNIX, and the full open power of UNIX is just a couple of keystrokes away. As for power and usability, my IMac is running four Virtual Operating Systems simultaneously, all under OSX, in sandboxes. That makes five, counting OSX. . . and they can intercommunicate.
Planned obsolescence? We don't see it. . . and we, unlike you, are very experienced with the hardware. Planned obsolescence is what Android users get when they buy their phone and can't upgrade to the next latest version when it comes out except by buying another phone.
1969 Programming? That was back in the days of punch cards. Geez. Even before punch cards. Mag tape? What system? IBM something? What languages? Wow.
This is a very important point, and I need to repeat it here: there is absolutely no difference for me between a system that has a hardware failure and has to be replaced and a system that has lost all software and OS support and needs to be replaced. Simply put, a brick is a brick. A door stop is a door stop.
I cut my teeth on an IBM PC. And have owned one in one form or another since 1984. And, at various points, I actually considered Apple and I could never justify the higher price for both the hardware or software. A wintel system was a third the cost of a basic Apple Mac or whatever. BTW, I used Apple PCs/Macs throughout the years (all owned by my parents). First, a IIE and then Macs and then Power Macs.
Apple bad experience #1: the ipod and the battery solution for all Apple products. Why the heck not design in a removable battery. The battery is the first to die and I have a closet drawer full of ipods. Lots of $300/$400 bills. Apparently, this is the standard for all of their devices. And it is race to see if the battery will die before the support. Usually the battery dies before.
Apple bad experience #2: My (wife's) ipad. Although it still works I am having trouble getting apps for it. Another $600. BTW, it was a b-day present for my wife and my wife is not happy. Guess where I put it? In the drawer in with the pile of dead ipods.
Apple bad experience #3: My dads Power Mac G5 and Canvas. The darn thing was released in 2003 and retired in 2006! AFTER ONLY 3 YEARS!!! Anyway, my dad created a bunch of family tree documents in Canvas and we are no longer able to read them and convert them to a more modern format where we can use them. Guess what, software and hardware support is gone. Believe me, I tried! My dad even bought a couple of the old green monster Imacs thinking that we might recover the files that way. Anyway, that is a rat hole. Anyway, I'll sell it you you for $1000 if you want it.
In comparison: I am typing this response on my Dell Ipsiron E1505 (now 8 years old) and my son still uses our Dell Dimension 8300 (11 years old) and office 2010. Have I had problems with PCs? Absolutely! But, I could repair them myself because the system wasn't locked down. I could buy a power supply, maybe a new video card, etc.