Xref: utzoo comp.unix.aux:2069 comp.sys.mac:55038 comp.sys.mac.programmer:15097
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!nems!ark1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!ucselx!bionet!ames!eos!shelby!portia.stanford.edu!name@portia.stanford.edu
From: name@portiaStanford.EDU (tony cooper)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.aux,comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: FLAME Concerning Apple's pricing of A/UX 2.0.
Message-ID: <1990Jun2.003545.12613@portia.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 2 Jun 90 00:35:45 GMT
References: <1990Jun1.185845.24189@ox.com>
Sender: news@portia.Stanford.EDU (USENET News System)
Reply-To: name@portiaStanford.EDU (tony cooper)
Organization: Stanford University - AIR
Lines: 24


In article <1990Jun1.185845.24189@ox.com>, time@ox.com (Tim Endres) writes:
> 
> Apple, ...
>                     ... Their recent pricing of A/UX 2.0 is an
> obvious gouge, attempting to recoup development efforts.
> 
Apple has made mistakes before, concerning overpricing. Slumps in sales have
been attributed to overpricing a few times in the past. And industry "experts"
have said that the lack of a low cost Mac has been costly for Apple.

Reducing the price of A/UX will increase sales of it. And probably sales of
peripherals, particulary hard drives and CDROMs will increase. There are
far more Macs out there than UNIX machines. So Apple has a chance of making
A/UX the most popular UNIX around. I think it is a fair price, perhaps, for
a UNIX person who wants a UNIX system. But why not sell it for far less to
entice MacOS users to have a look at it. I realize that Apple has to pay
royalties on it. But since they do not make a direct profit from selling
MacOS, why is there a need to make a direct profit from A/UX?

Eventually MacOS and A/UX will converge to a single system. Can't have two
different prices for the one system right?

Tony Cooper