Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac.misc:1132 comp.sys.mac.hypercard:3937
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!walt.cc.utexas.edu!awessels
From: awessels@walt.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc,comp.sys.mac.hypercard
Subject: Re: "Innovative software like Hypercard" [sic]
Message-ID: <33543@ut-emx.UUCP>
Date: 8 Jul 90 19:22:39 GMT
References: <1990Jul7.225429.22821@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: news@ut-emx.UUCP
Reply-To: awessels@walt.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels)
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas
Lines: 41

In article <1990Jul7.225429.22821@midway.uchicago.edu> gft_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu writes:

>"Apple doesn't price its computers for the educational market"?  Maybe, if you
>buy retail.  But at many universities and community colleges you can get Macs
>for less than 50% of retail.  A Plus for <$700, for instance.

A Mac Plus is not a Macintosh system.  You need at least another 800k drive to
make it functional.  Also, my point was made with the perspective of hisory in
mind.  The price drop in the Plus is typical of Apple when it plans on 
discontinuing a model.  Apple should have made this move a year ago.  

>Nonsense.  BTW, who do you see out there marketing "innovative" products. 
>Clone makers?

Innovative not wrt new products, but innovative wrt giving more price/
performance.  Apple can market both a high-end line to recoup the R&D budget,
and a low end to build a mass market.  Maybe if Apple could deliver the numbers
that give clone buyers leverage in buying other products for their machines,
people wouldn't gripe so much about paying for the box.

>The original point of this thread -- which I think has been lost -- is that
>Apple cannot compete on price with clone makers, since Apple has a large R&D
>budget to support.  This is true, whether you like it or not.  Who do you think
>is paying for System 7, the NEA?  No, we are.  (Of course, I still think Macs
>could be priced somewhat lower, but that's a flame for a different time. :->). 
>It is doubtful that HyperCard itself adds much to that R&D cost, since the
>original HyperCard was developed by a team of fewer than 10 people (mainly Bill
>Atkinson).  As for whether HyperCard has value: look at the real world.  Of
>course it does.

I don't think anyone has said that Apple could sell a machine for less than a 
clone.  But Apple's current moves have been way too slow and been in response
only to massive complaints around the industry.  Of course, the clones have 
been making large inroads to the market they are beginning to address and so
these changes have more to compete against.

I'm sure HyperCard has value, but I'm not so sure the value is to the end-user.
Most people I know who have Macs don't use HyperCard for much of anything.
The advantage of HyperCard is in development, and I have yet to see how that
advantage has passed on to end users.  Possibly in the number of products 
available - except that many of those are HyperCard devlopment aids.