Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!nosc!crash!pro-truckstop.cts.com!pkovac
From: pkovac@pro-truckstop.cts.com (Peter Kovac)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Low cost Mac's ?
Message-ID: <4012@crash.cts.com>
Date: 19 Aug 90 21:16:03 GMT
Sender: root@crash.cts.com
Lines: 20

In-Reply-To: message from russotto@eng.umd.edu

>You are comparing Apples to clones here, and I think it has been made clear
>that that is not a valid comparison.  If you want to compare, you have to do
>Apple to IBM.

No, No, No!!  I'm not trying to compare features as I am the price
differential.  Granted, one should compare an Apple with an IBM, and an Apple
clone with an IBM clone, but that's not possible.  Now when comparing low cost
systems, you want to find the lowest price to portray each computer in the
best light.  I found relatively low prices for the clone to show that a person
who wants to buy an low end system with a broad user base can find it cheaper
(not necessarily better) with a clone.

Sorry if I've caused any confusion about this whole thing.


UUCP: crash!pro-truckstop!pkovac
ARPA: crash!pro-truckstop!pkovac@nosc.mil
INET: pkovac@pro-truckstop.cts.com