They meant that it costs less for apple, not the customer
Before I landed a good job, I was buying used Macs for years. Mac of All Trades is your friend.
That pin can be found for $30 or $35 on on ebay here and here, where it is described as being from the 80s and as an “employee pin”.
I was thinking that this might have been something aimed specifically at technology buyers in US schools in the 80s or 90s, to whom Apple offered substantial institutional discounts in a (relatively successful) effort to dominate that sector. However searching the phrase “does more costs less” i found this TV spot advertising the Quadra 605 which at $1000 was the cheapest computer Apple sold when it was introduced in October 1993 (and allegedly cheaper than something else they refer to as “PC Leading Brand” 😂). That system was sold under the LC and Performa brands up to 1996, but it was only sold as a Quadra until October 1994, so, to answer OP’s question: that slogan was in use at least sometime in that year.
seeing the mac logo im thinking this was when steve jobs was between. Nobody wanted an apple in 1999 and even early 2000’s I remember a guy who used to stick apple stickets on his ibm to deter thieves.
Apple purchased NeXT in 1997. Steve became the i(nterim)CEO shortly after. iMac was first introduced in 1998. Steve was running the show already. That’s around when the logo stopped being multi-colored.
Thanks for the context. One thing I liked about ios was the way it used many next things (that and I was so jacked that it was built on freebsd). They were my favorite machines back in 1994ish. I was aware jobs went from there back to apple but I thought it was more a falling out previous to that. I was a fanboy by 2005 (well as much as Im gonna be about anything) but it only lasted half a decade as the service at the mac store faltered combined with the whole iminmalist thing when I like them due to maximalist.
Think different
Just Capitalism Problems
That aged like milk lol
Do the words “IBM PC-Compatible” mean anything to you?
I had an Apple ][+ in 1982 and an Apple ][c in 1984.
Cost less is a relative term depending on application.
They were cheaper than full business model IBM computers (who hadn’t much entered into the home computer market) but significantly more expensive than other home offerings such as commodore or (shudder) radio shack.
My username is from playing Thexder on my grandparents’ Apple ][gs. I had a lot of fun learning Basic on that computer.
Does more, lol. Think Apple might need a dictionary considering iPhone is just barely getting home screen customization and the Mac mouse actively works against doing anything.
Does less
Cost more
Fuck you
Want wheels sucker?
Pro versions: Does a little more
Costs even more
Fuck you as well
Pro versions: Does a little more
Costs even more
Best regards
idk why you got downvoted i think this was a good iteration
Gaming aside (though that particular gap is beginning to close) I honestly can’t think of anything I’ve wanted to do with my various Macs over the years that I couldn’t because of macOS.
The closest I can get to is running radio station playout software, but that was less something I needed to do, and more an itch I fancied scratching at that moment. Other than that, my Macs have always had a way to do exactly what I wanted with them.
Wasn’t that always the case? I mean compared to my IBM PC clone, mine did way more and cost way less. And it was upgradeable. And mine could play games.
But does it have a cool rainbow apple?
Who cares when it could run Doom in full screen?
deleted by creator
Well, that button probably dates from the late 80s or early 90s, when Apple was comparing Macs to branded IBM PS/2s and such that were sold to schools and enterprises.
And they weren’t wrong, at the time. Those PS/2s were fuckin’ expensive.
There’s a reason why no-one bought IBM PS/2s. They were horrible value for money.
The real competition at the time was the thousands of other brands selling PCs. By that time IBM was plummeting in sales and other companies were selling most of the PCs. That’s where 95% of the market was.
Certainly, but Apple was comparing itself to other computer companies with international reach, not to the white box PCs coming out of the Floppy Wizard store in the strip center.
A lot of larger companies like Compaq etc. were making “respectable” PCs by then and selling them in big quantities in direct competition to IBM.
My Apple IIC was the stuff back in the 80s.
It was also the last Apple product I owned.
The interaction between Jobs (Michael Fassbender) and Woz (Seth Rogen) pretty much sums up the Apple ][ era.
apple was never cheaper than their competition, and when IBM got into PCs they were also not even comparable in quality anymore. Reality is that even in the early days apples was also more expensive and they relied on a dedicated fan base to sell their trash, to be fair they sorta earned their reputation in the super early PC space with actually good products but when IBM came in, it had better PCs at lower prices and apple was basically riding on pure brand power. Then they had a few good hits with the ipad and later the iphone (tho the ipad was not as significant at the time as people seem to think it was looking back) and now they have been entirely eclipsed when it comes to phones and are once again reliant on hype and brand recognition.
It is not a unique history by any means but i feel it is especially egregious considering just how shit apple products are and how expensive they are.
So, I lived through that time, and I supported computers professionally during that time. I started working at a university help desk in 1989.
It’s easy to go back and look at Apple products and white-box PCs of the era (or quasi-legit clones like Compaq, HP, Gateway, etc) and say, “oh, on specs, the Apples were MASSIVELY overpriced – you can get a much better deal with the PC”.
The problem was that PCs were nowhere near on par, functionally, with Macintosh.
-
Networking. We were running building-wide Appletalk networks – with TCP/IP gateways – over existing phone wires YEARS before anybody figured out how to get coax or 10base-T installed. We were playing NETWORK GAMES (Bolo, anyone) on Mac in the late 80s.
-
And when they did… what do you do with networking in DOS? Unless you ran a completely canned network OS (remember Banyan, Novell, etc. ad infinitum?) and canned apps specifically designed to work with it, you were SOL. Windows 3.0 and 3.1 were a joke compared to System 7.
I configured PCs and Macs for the freshman class in 1995. For the Mac? You plug the ethernet port in and the OS does the rest. For the PC… find a DOS-compatible packet driver that works with your network card, get it running, then run Trumpet Winsock in Windows 3.1, then… then… it was a goddamned nightmare. We had to have special clinics just to get people’s PCs up and running with a web browser, and even then, there were about 10% of machines we just had to say “nope”. Can’t find a working driver, can’t get anything working right. Your IRQs are busted? Who fuckin’ knows. I ran the “Ethernet Clinic” until the late 90s, when Windows 98 finally properly integrated the TCP/IP layer in the OS.
- Useful software on the Mac had a pretty consistent look & feel. On the PC? Even in Windows 3.1, it was all over the map. You might have a Windows native program, you might have a DOS program that launches in a console window, you might have a completely different graphical interface embedded in the software (Delphi apps, anyone?). Games were using DOS into the mid 90s because getting anything working right in Windows 3.1 was a total fuckin crap shoot.
Windows 95 started to fix things, finally. And Windows XP would finally bring an OS with stability comparable to Mac (arguably WIndows 2000 as well, but it was never really offered on non-corporate PCs).
The short version is: that $3000 Mac could do a lot more than that $1800 PC, even if the specs said that the CPU was faster on the PC.
-
You for got to mention the free and heavily discounted prices to get Mac computers into schools to get kids hooked on them. Which is something they still do to this I think.
At the same time Windows is going down the drain, so if you compare removed to that it definitely has an edge. And that 8GB Air is not that expensive either… And fanboy can tell you it can swap to SSD so fast blah blah…
But if you have the knowledge to use Linux, there are less and less reasons to go even near removed computers…
“The more you buy the more you save” - NVIDIA
Seems like they both went to the same school
The M2 Mac Mini is $599, or $499 if you can get the education discount. There is not a (new) Windows PC in that price range that has the same performance (especially performance-per-watt) and Thunderbolt 4. The M1 MacBook Air is getting a bit old, but it’s on sale for $600-700 pretty often and will knock the socks off most PCs in that price range, especially in build quality.
Apple’s pricing gets ridiculous when you try spec’ing up with certain memory or storage upgrades, sure, and most internal upgrades are a no-go. The base models of most of their computers are incredibly competitive, though.
At 600 you can get a computer with an actual graphics card. The only outstanding feature of the M1/2 macs is the very low power consumption, the rest is quite subpar.
A $600 PC with a dedicated graphics card is probably going to have a worse CPU than an M2 or M3 Mini, and probably no Thunderbolt. You would only be cross-shopping a PC like that with a Mac Mini if you were thinking of graphically-demanding productivity work, like video editing or Blender. If it’s for gaming then the Mac wouldn’t be in the running at all.
Except for their low draw and thus unmatched battery life on portable devices, the M chips are honestly not impressive performance wise. Not really the appeal, even tho Apple is trying tooth and nails to pretend that that’s a selling point with their unlabeled graphs.
I mean if you really don’t want a GPU (which IMO is a must, given proper hardware acceleration which makes up for any CPU short comings, but I digress), that leaves you with a much bigger budget for the CPU, and now it’s no longer close enough to the M chips, but an absolute slaughter.
It’s really up to personal preference but I’m a big fan of the metal unibody of Mac laptops. While my friends’ PC laptops plastic bodies were starting to separate and show wear, my laptop was still looking mint. That alone also helped determine how long I kept a Mac laptop going (I was on a 2017 MBP 13” up to just recently and the body is still near mint).
So while it could be perceived as a simple cosmetic preference, it was also about the longevity of the laptop’s use.
That said, I have an ASUS ROG Zephyrus that has a pretty solid body, despite being plastic. Some of them have gotten better, but a lot are still flimsy crap.
It’s the same reason I prefer the body of my iPhone, vs the multitude of plastic Android flagship phones I churned through back in the day. The G1 still holds a place in my heart though and had a metal body (and I still have it in its original box!)
I don’t want to downplay or invalidate any of your preferences, but you HEAVILY miss represent the competition. Have you seen a non apple device in the past 5 years?
Other companies make metal body PCs now. From the dinky cheap ass laptop I bought just for fun, to my sister’s proper gaming laptop, there’s plenty of metal+glass laptops out there. And when it comes to android I only really follow Samsung, Sony and Google, but at least those 3 have had metal+glass flagship phones since I care to remember. (looked it up, Sony: 2013, Samsung: 2015, Google: 2018)
Well now I just need apple to provide a real os.
I use Nixos btw.
If I’m buying a Mac personally I always buy a refurbished one. The machine has the same warranty but you save a couple hundred bucks.
Luxury brand is what happened.
(First it was colored plastic.)
I love the look of colored plastics.
Join us at /3dprinting
