Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!bridge2!ngg
From: ngg@bridge2.ESD.3Com.COM (Norman Goodger)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Low cost Mac's ?
Message-ID: <2763@bridge2.ESD.3Com.COM>
Date: 17 Aug 90 18:24:31 GMT
References: <3965@crash.cts.com>
Organization: 3Com Corp., Mt. View, CA
Lines: 26

In article<3965@crash.cts.com>pkovac@pro-truckstop.cts.com (Peter Kovac) writes:
>In-Reply-To: message from boris@world.std.com
>>At these prices, Macs seem a lot more competitive
>Take a Mac Classic at $2000, take off 30% and you have a $1400 machine (if I
>can do math).  For $1300 you can get a 20Mhz 386 with more slots, 1 meg of
>RAM, a drive, monochrome monitor, and keyboard.  That's enough to bury the Mac
>Classic.  If the Mac Classic is similar to the SE or Plus, the $500-$700 price
>range would be best.  After all, an IBM XT clone costs around $400 and an AT
>clone is about $700.
>
	Who wants an xt clone, thats some comparison? Who wants an AT clone
	if they want a Mac? Who wants to run DOS if they want a Mac? 
	Comparing PC and Mac pricing is an effort in futility. If you want
	a Mac, you'll pay for one. You want to suffer thru DOS, you'll get
	a clone and poor to mediocre service with it, and the learning
	experience of a life time to get it running? If you get a decent
	PC from say IBM (remember them) Compaq and perhaps a few other
	names, you are going to spend just as much if not more for your PC
	and the pain to learn how to use it (assuming a novice computer user
	is the buyer) Mac's may cost a little more, but depending on very
	specific needs, in most cases its probably worth it.
-- 
Norm Goodger				SysOp - MacInfo BBS @415-795-8862
3Com Corp.				Co-SysOp FreeSoft RT - GEnie.
Enterprise Systems Division             (I disclaim anything and everything)
UUCP: {3comvax,auspex,sun}!bridge2!ngg  Internet: ngg@bridge2.ESD.3Com.COM