Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ncis.llnl.gov!helios.ee.lbl.gov!nosc!ucsd!rutgers!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn ) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple Subject: Re: Lasers cost cutting secret. Message-ID: <9755@smoke.BRL.MIL> Date: 1 Mar 89 06:21:03 GMT References: <8902281447.aa18108@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) ) Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD. Lines: 17 In article <8902281447.aa18108@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) writes: >>>How is it that Laser can make a profit selling "basic computing" at prices >>>Apple seems unwilling to compete with? >>I suppose that letting another company sink millions into research and then >>"borrowing" the ideas that work out best could cut down on some overhead. >R&D costs are SUNK (gone, kaput, spent years ago!). Development is ALREADY >PAID FOR (whether or not in retrospect it was a good idea). Besides, the >Apple 2 line already has profited Apple enough to make Midas jealous. You talk about faulty economics, then come up with a lulu. I don't know all the reasons that make Apple products seem over-priced, but in addition to having to maintain the corporate operation (including R&D), it must include financing whatever customer support advantage Apple theoretically offers over "clone" manufacturers. (The support might not really be what it should be, but it probably IS a factor that influences many purchasing decisions.)