Why do people continue to buy Apple computers if they find other much better computers for the same price?

Because people are anchored to marketing, they are severely compromised, they do not actually evaluate what the market offers, often ignoring alternatives without any objective evaluation and often become aware of a specific technology only when it is offered by Apple believing that it is getting something new. For the most part they are users with low computational needs. They generally refuse to understand that: 1) Aesthetically there is better (de gustibus non disputandum est) but to make them pass as “beautiful” computers objectively is too much.2) Now the equivalents PCs at the same price have the same build quality, if not superior, since they contemplate a modularity that does not exist on Macs. With the additional that if it is of the same price, it certainly has more powerful hardware. Taking out the crap on the quality of the keyboard also shows that they are recently “computerized” users because they probably have not tried the old IBM PS / 2 keyboards that already at the time were a reference.3) An Intel i7 from 200 € you can also put on a Mac from 1500, always a € 200 i7 remains. No, the efficiency of an OS does not make you an i5 in anyway i7.4) “Retina” is just a brand, a name. The Retina screens do not really represent any standard neither of quality nor of specification, they stop at the nominal 5k when I write, on the market there are professional OLED 8k monitors that on the retina (a simple good overweighted display) gives it 3 points and one broom. The professional standard focuses on other brands in any case. They continue to compare the Retinas with not better classified alternatives of which, however, they always look good from citing brand and model.5) That Apple is nothing but an OEM, assembles hardware that does not produce and where it marks it in its name is simply a license from other manufacturers.6) That Windows XP in the installation phase, a mesozoic operating system, did change filesystems without realizing it and without losing data, but in 2019 a simple conversion from one version to another rebranded still consider magic. But then they seem to ignore that in 2019 it does not support Unicode normalization.7) They quote you big and emotional words like “respect for users” and ignore that it is practically the only producer left in the world that still welds RAMs to mainboards and received millionaire fines for planned obsolescence and unfair practices, as well as perhaps the market with more padlocks on the entire planet Earth.8) That people change their minds as the wind blows because there is no real real idea. And objectively, the average level of technological literacy cannot have seen it. They broke the cock for years in the PowerPC vs x86 battle but then find themselves with Intel’s low-end sold at weight of gold and with the questions on the small screen of the iPhone with “a design choice for the use of the phone with the thumb” then having to give in to the dominant market. Now I’m thumb no longer needed.9) That they are still at 10.x since 2001, but some new effects on the UI are enough, because the OS only use that.10) They sell SSDs “for Mac”, not even SATA interfaces were proprietary, from 512GB to 700 € without description nor brand of the actual NAND manufacturer but with performance comparable to equivalent from 130 € .11) That Windows is so disgusted that it has a server version that according to IDC has a market share of 47.9% even beating Linux with 40.5% where MacOS is the only operating system among the small desktop segment that remains to have no native container technologies and not to have a 100% native Vulkan API implementation compatible with the TCK (of the which probably the average Apple user has never heard of it). You still mention BSD Unix as a starting point, a system from 1977 of which FreeBSD is now ashamed to inherit (with the difference that FreeBSD also implemented the containers, before the others) .12) That boasts that the PC has been working since 2001 when with that delayed price he now had a PC with 10 times the performance of what they continue to use. It will also continue to work but always a small pile remains. Not even the world was undergoing the plague of “PCs that always break.” 13) They tell you that the system is “optimized for hardware” then they changed microarchitecture 4 times according to how the manufacturers supply the hardware. And they have no …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *