Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!wuarchive!uunet!mcsun!unido!gmdzi!strobl From: strobl@gmdzi.gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc Subject: Re: give me solid facts: why is the mac better than MeSsy DOS/WINDOWS Message-ID: <4236@gmdzi.gmd.de> Date: 5 Mar 91 16:41:32 GMT References: <91.056.16:01:18@ira.uka.de> <672@newave.UUCP> <1991Feb28.015446.16531@eng.ufl.edu> Organization: GMD, Sankt Augustin, F. R. Germany Lines: 29 ingemar@isy.liu.se (Ingemar Ragnemalm) writes: ... >I look in the catalog of our local dealer. They have Macs, IBM and Nokia >(PC clones, supposedly high quality). They don't have lowest-possible-price >PC clones, you know the ones that work for two days before needing the first >repair. I always bought one of those lowest-possible-price PC clones for my private purposes - the third one just a few months ago - and never had any problems with them. In fact, there is *one* problem - what to do with the old machines - they work perfectly well, but nobody wants to buy an old, slow machine, if the ads are full of fast, cheap new ones. So I let my children play with the old machines, perhaps *they* are able to break them. :-) >... >Yes, I know there are cheaper clones around, so you can get a "noname"-style >PC for less that a comparable Mac. A Mac can fail too, but I do believe >that they have a higher quality than the low-budget PC clones. Sure you might >find a cheap PC that works for a while - if you are lucky. The last sentence is an exaggeration. IBM PC clones and Macs aren't that different inside. Sure you might find a clone that breaks after a short while, if you are unlucky. I haven't observed much difference between the failure rate of PCs of known high-quality brand, and no-names. Wolfgang Strobl #include