Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Thumannator · Jul 22, 2002, 11:10 AM

It seems to me that Apple may have scammed us all into beta testing their webmail. I mean, they develop it, take suggestions and improve it. Then, just as they are about ready to take it out of beta testing, they will incorporate it into .Mac, and charge for it. Could just be me I suppose. What does everybody think? I have never taken part in much beta testing, so maybe this is just a normal way of doing things. Still, I am feeling a bit ripped off.

libraryguy · Jul 22, 2002, 11:13 AM

I thought the exact same thing the other day. I sent in a great deal of feedback to Apple for their webmail page as I'm sure many other people did. So, they use our feedback to make it a lot better and then reward all those who sent in feedback by charging for it. It really pisses me off that the whole time they were testing it and asking for our feedback they knew damn good an well what they were going to do with it. They made it sound like it was just a new addition to iTools but they had other motives.

MacGorilla · Jul 22, 2002, 11:14 AM

Relax, this is the way beta testing goes. Besides, Apple was under NO obligation to tell you their future plans.

kman42 · Jul 22, 2002, 11:14 AM

Just another .mac thread with a slightly different slant. Send your thoughts to Apple and get over it already.

There are now several other options for entertainment here. Go check out the pics for the alleged new Powermacs or read the speculation/wish list for 10.3.

kman

jwblase · Jul 22, 2002, 11:15 AM

So, by your logic, all beta testers for consumer applications are being ripped off? Beta testing is exactly that: Preparing an application (or service) for real world use. Whether they charge for the final product has absolutely no bearing on the beta testing at all!!!

Brazuca · Jul 22, 2002, 11:38 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by jwblase:
So, by your logic, all beta testers for consumer applications are being ripped off? Beta testing is exactly that: Preparing an application (or service) for real world use. Whether they charge for the final product has absolutely no bearing on the beta testing at all!!!<hr /></blockquote>I understand that, but you don't beta test software that you won't use, do you?

This is just icing on the cake. Screw it all. I'm done liking Apple.

dwishbone · Jul 22, 2002, 11:59 AM

well, this i .Mac angle I cant agree with.
yes apple was using its iTools users as beta testers for the new webmail. like you all I was outrage by .Mac.
but, with the beta testing slant this thread has...beta does not mean free.
quite often software developers release betas of their products to either a select few or sometime to to public to ue and send feedback. that does not mean that the final product will be free to everyone (or anyone) that tested it.
I don't think th apple has .Mac in mind when they came up with the idea for .Mac nor do I think they planned to charge for iTools when it was introduced. They do have every right to charge for it, but the way they have rolled it out is really really bad. 0-100 in one day. Yes I know it is $50 for people that have it, but I know several people that were about to get iTools accounts. This jipped them out of $50 since they waited to long. No payment plans were a big mistake. bot $50 and $100 is a pretty high price to pay at once...especially considering what you can buy for under $100. Appleneeds to sweeten the deal for many people to subscribe to .Mac.

brachiator · Jul 22, 2002, 12:26 PM

I have to agree w/ Brazuca and the general thrust of this thread.

The question isn't whether beta does or should equal "free for life."

The issue is whether Apple is the sort of company one wants to have warm, zealous, or loyal feelings toward -- the sort of feelings that would make me want to beta test and send feedback just for the hell of it.

Tell me its a trial period for a later-to-be-paid service -- fine. Tell me that you don't know what it will become later, but you want feedback -- great.

But put up a service like iTools that is *built in to the install process*, touted as a bonus for Mac loyalists -- especially early adopters from the PB, like me -- and *then* announce that the whole friggin' thing, even the 5 meg email account, is going for a hundred bucks a year -- I say screw 'em, too.

Apple gets a lot of mileage from we enthusiasts on the basis of being "NOT Redmond." If you wanna dispute my sense of betrayal with arguments that Apple is a business like any other (true, but so what?) -- then that is just how you are inviting me to treat it -- no loyalty, no zealotry, no evangelism (except that in my enlightened self-interest... ;-)

The sad thing is that I will NOT sign up for .mac, while I was willing and hoping to (and send feedback to this effect) *pay* a few bucks a month for a larger @mac.com mailbox. Its a great suite of services, but somehow Apple never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity!

dwishbone · Jul 22, 2002, 12:51 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by brachiator:
Its a great suite of services, but somehow Apple never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity!<hr /></blockquote>Yes, Apple has a habit of shooting themselves in the foot on a regular basis don't they.

mchladek · Jul 22, 2002, 12:56 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by brachiator:

The sad thing is that I will NOT sign up for .mac, while I was willing and hoping to (and send feedback to this effect) *pay* a few bucks a month for a larger @mac.com mailbox. Its a great suite of services, but somehow Apple never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity!<hr /></blockquote>I find it extremely ironic that we bitch and moan about M$ forcing their products onto Windows users than we turn right around and say we want to use as many Apple products as humanly possible. If you don't like a service/product Apple is providing Don't purchase it! There are tons of other e-mail/webspace providers out there. Use one of them. Granted you can't use iPhoto's homepage plug-in, but there are other options out there!

If you guys are so ticked off by 'Apple apologists' you should be just as upset with yourselves thinking that if you aren't using Apple products you're using crap.

I think Apple's .Mac services are great and will happily pay the $50 for the first year; I'm sure they'll add several neat features throughout the year. If not I'll reaccess if it's worth $100 in a years time (but that's a long ways off). That doesn't mean I'm a Mac Zealot or 'Apple apologist' just because I like .Mac. If you use Windows does that make you a Microsoft Apologist? No. I have a M$ trackball sitting on my desk right now. Why? Because I believe M$ makes some damn fine input devices. Does that mean I agree totally with M$? No. I will never use Windows until M$ changes its position on open-source and media owner rights (ripping MP3, burning CDs, etc.).

It's the same thing with Apple. If you don't like .Mac don't purchase. That doesn't mean you have to hate Apple and everyone else does too. It just means you don't purchase that product.

Brazuca · Jul 22, 2002, 01:10 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />I find it extremely ironic that we bitch and moan about M$ forcing their products onto Windows users than we turn right around and say we want to use as many Apple products as humanly possible. If you don't like a service/product Apple is providing Don't purchase it! There are tons of other e-mail/webspace providers out there. Use one of them. Granted you can't use iPhoto's homepage plug-in, but there are other options out there!

If you guys are so ticked off by 'Apple apologists' you should be just as upset with yourselves thinking that if you aren't using Apple products you're using crap.

I think Apple's .Mac services are great and will happily pay the $50 for the first year; I'm sure they'll add several neat features throughout the year. If not I'll reaccess if it's worth $100 in a years time (but that's a long ways off). That doesn't mean I'm a Mac Zealot or 'Apple apologist' just because I like .Mac. If you use Windows does that make you a Microsoft Apologist? No. I have a M$ trackball sitting on my desk right now. Why? Because I believe M$ makes some damn fine input devices. Does that mean I agree totally with M$? No. I will never use Windows until M$ changes its position on open-source and media owner rights (ripping MP3, burning CDs, etc.).

It's the same thing with Apple. If you don't like .Mac don't purchase. That doesn't mean you have to hate Apple and everyone else does too. It just means you don't purchase that product.<hr /></blockquote>I think I'm a bit more selfish than you imagine. I'm interested in Apple's success not because of some ethereal goal such as "a new standard of civilization and world peach", but because I want better hardware, software at cheaper prices. Since this is the basis of our capitalist system, I seem to be in luck.

If (IF) this turns out to be a bad move for Apple, as some of us believe, and it leads us into another "Clone wars" or "no CDRW" crisis, it may mean reduced marketshare, less software, less hardware, slower CPU (is this even possible?), etc. And since I need to do work with my computer, I may actually have to go to Windows (argh!!!). So I may "hate Apple" (as you characterize it) because it is jeopardizing *my* consumer welfare. I could care less if Steve or Phil get a few more private jets. I want more for less. Don't you???

[ 07-22-2002, 01:14 PM: Message edited by: Brazuca ]

brachiator · Jul 22, 2002, 01:13 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by mchladek:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by brachiator:

The sad thing is that I will NOT sign up for .mac, while I was willing and hoping to (and send feedback to this effect) *pay* a few bucks a month for a larger @mac.com mailbox. Its a great suite of services, but somehow Apple never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity!<hr /></blockquote>I find it extremely ironic that we bitch and moan about M$ forcing their products onto Windows users than we turn right around and say we want to use as many Apple products as humanly possible. If you don't like a service/product Apple is providing Don't purchase it! There are tons of other e-mail/webspace providers out there. Use one of them. Granted you can't use iPhoto's homepage plug-in, but there are other options out there!

If you guys are so ticked off by 'Apple apologists' you should be just as upset with yourselves thinking that if you aren't using Apple products you're using crap.

It's the same thing with Apple. If you don't like .Mac don't purchase. That doesn't mean you have to hate Apple and everyone else does too. It just means you don't purchase that product.<hr /></blockquote>When I write "zealot" or "evangalist" I am referring to myself as well -- I don't use that term as a derogatory. (Apologist is something else...)

Of *course* there are other options, and of course I won't buy from Apple except where it suits me. That is not the point. The point is, again, that apple gets a LOT of value out of the goodwill of Mac users. I'm just applying your economic view to the goodwill equation: piss me off and lose the goodwill -- Apple is just another company to me, then. Lose the goodwill and thus lose the sufferance, the word of mouth, and the evangelism. Mac users talking up and demonstrating their Macs to PC users is probably as valuable as any "switchers" campaign. Well, by going out of its way to lose the goodwill, Apple loses a big chunk of that free advertising.

And let's not forget the subtle but valuable advertising benefit of the "@mac.com" email suffix! That, as the ICANN wars prove, is valuable trademark property. Every email I send out on my account is advertising for Apple, as is everytime someone goes to look at my travel pix on my iTools homepage.

I would be *really* surprised if Apple has done a complete economic valuation and analysis of the situation and its decision!

brachiator · Jul 22, 2002, 01:19 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by mchladek:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by brachiator:

The sad thing is that I will NOT sign up for .mac, while I was willing and hoping to (and send feedback to this effect) *pay* a few bucks a month for a larger @mac.com mailbox. Its a great suite of services, but somehow Apple never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity!<hr /></blockquote>I find it extremely ironic that we bitch and moan about M$ forcing their products onto Windows users than we turn right around and say we want to use as many Apple products as humanly possible. If you don't like a service/product Apple is providing Don't purchase it! There are tons of other e-mail/webspace providers out there. Use one of them. Granted you can't use iPhoto's homepage plug-in, but there are other options out there!

If you guys are so ticked off by 'Apple apologists' you should be just as upset with yourselves thinking that if you aren't using Apple products you're using crap.

It's the same thing with Apple. If you don't like .Mac don't purchase. That doesn't mean you have to hate Apple and everyone else does too. It just means you don't purchase that product.<hr /></blockquote>When I write "zealot" or "evangalist" I am referring to myself as well -- I don't use that term as a derogatory. (Apologist is something else...)

Of *course* there are other options, and of course I won't buy from Apple except where it suits me. That is not the point. The point is, again, that apple gets a LOT of value out of the goodwill of Mac users. I'm just applying your economic view to the goodwill equation: piss me off and lose the goodwill -- Apple is just another company to me, then. Lose the goodwill and thus lose the sufferance, the word of mouth, and the evangelism. Mac users talking up and demonstrating their Macs to PC users is probably as valuable as any "switchers" campaign. Well, by going out of its way to lose the goodwill, Apple loses a big chunk of that free advertising.

And let's not forget the subtle but valuable advertising benefit of the "@mac.com" email suffix! That, as the ICANN wars prove, is valuable trademark property. Every email I send out on my account is advertising for Apple, as is everytime someone goes to look at my travel pix on my iTools homepage.

I would be *really* surprised if Apple has done a complete economic valuation and analysis of the situation and its decision!

mchladek · Jul 22, 2002, 01:26 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Brazuca:
I think I'm a bit more selfish than you imagine. I'm interested in Apple's success not because of some ethereal goal such as "a new standard of civilization and world peach", but because I want better hardware, software at cheaper prices. Since this is the basis of our capitalist system, I seem to be in luck.

If (IF) this turns out to be a bad move for Apple, as some of us believe, and it leads us into another "Clone wars" or "no CDRW" crisis, it may mean reduced marketshare, less software, less hardware, slower CPU (is this even possible?), etc. And since I need to do work with my computer, I may actually have to go to Windows (argh!!!). So I may "hate Apple" (as you characterize it) because it is jeopardizing *my* consumer welfare. I could care less if Steve or Phil get a few more private jets. I want more for less. Don't you???<hr /></blockquote>LOL! Yeah, I think you are a little more selfish then I thought

Unfortunately Apple's never been about cheap hardware, and probably never will be. Software prices aren't dependent on what OS you're using (or shouldn't be in theory).

You don't really hate Apple; you hate that Apple isn't giving you what you want! True capitalism (as Adams described it anyway) is that if you see a market for something, you provide it. If you want cheaper hardware/software, don' want to use M$'s products, and think there's other people out there in the same boat then start your own business to provide that. Capitalism is not about 'Oh! Well, this company isn't providing what I want so I'll complain like hell and then just settle for this other company.' It's about being a consumer and if you don't see a market being filled properly then you become the manufacturer.

All I can say is be patient if you don't want to start your own company. Just as your own moods/attitudes/ideas change, the computer industry will not always be dominated by M$ with Apple being a small niche product. Comapanies will come and go, and one day that perfect company may pop up for you (although it may not last too long <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> ).

CarpetFluff · Jul 22, 2002, 01:32 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> I would be *really* surprised if Apple has done a complete economic valuation and analysis of the situation and its decision! <hr /></blockquote>I understand your point and to some extent I agree, but I've given this a lot of thought and I'm pretty sure they must have evaluated the response from their user base. It is possible that we are kidding ourselves that our support is vital (I know for one thing that i've been instrumental in the purchase of around 30 macs myself). Apple is going after market share, Windows has a huge user base but very little loyalty, it's possible that they feel going after market share would make a loyal user base superfluous.

Apple pretty much knows that most of us won't switch to Windows over something like this so they're willing to take the risk and I'm not sure that they wouldn't be every bit as bad as Microsoft if they ever grew to that size.

Just a thought.

Dan Szwarc · Jul 22, 2002, 01:36 PM

Hmmm. "Apple changes mac.com and starts charging for what was once free."
Or would you rather have "Apple stops providing free service with no alternative, free or for money."

Either way are you "scammed"? No. You used it for free. They promised nothing. You promised nothing. They take it away if you don't pay.

Sounds like capitalism to me. Sit down and get used to it.

Me? I'm getting my own domain name. No more "free services" are gonna disappear forcing me to change my email. I'm becoming a paying customer.

mchladek · Jul 22, 2002, 01:36 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by brachiator:
When I write "zealot" or "evangalist" I am referring to myself as well -- I don't use that term as a derogatory. (Apologist is something else...)

Of *course* there are other options, and of course I won't buy from Apple except where it suits me. That is not the point. The point is, again, that apple gets a LOT of value out of the goodwill of Mac users. I'm just applying your economic view to the goodwill equation: piss me off and lose the goodwill -- Apple is just another company to me, then. Lose the goodwill and thus lose the sufferance, the word of mouth, and the evangelism. Mac users talking up and demonstrating their Macs to PC users is probably as valuable as any "switchers" campaign. Well, by going out of its way to lose the goodwill, Apple loses a big chunk of that free advertising.

And let's not forget the subtle but valuable advertising benefit of the "@mac.com" email suffix! That, as the ICANN wars prove, is valuable trademark property. Every email I send out on my account is advertising for Apple, as is everytime someone goes to look at my travel pix on my iTools homepage.

I would be *really* surprised if Apple has done a complete economic valuation and analysis of the situation and its decision!<hr /></blockquote>I agree. I think actions speak far greater than words. (This is directed strictly to you): If you are upset with Apple's policies then don't buy .Mac and don't promote Apple's products. It might take a little while but Apple will see when it starts to lose it's user base and its market share isn't increasing that it made a wrong turn somewhere and try something else to fix the problem. The fault I see in most people is that they want things their way or not at all, and they want it now. Be patient people.

Brazuca · Jul 22, 2002, 01:39 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by mchladek:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Brazuca:
I think I'm a bit more selfish than you imagine. I'm interested in Apple's success not because of some ethereal goal such as "a new standard of civilization and world peach", but because I want better hardware, software at cheaper prices. Since this is the basis of our capitalist system, I seem to be in luck.

If (IF) this turns out to be a bad move for Apple, as some of us believe, and it leads us into another "Clone wars" or "no CDRW" crisis, it may mean reduced marketshare, less software, less hardware, slower CPU (is this even possible?), etc. And since I need to do work with my computer, I may actually have to go to Windows (argh!!!). So I may "hate Apple" (as you characterize it) because it is jeopardizing *my* consumer welfare. I could care less if Steve or Phil get a few more private jets. I want more for less. Don't you???<hr /></blockquote>LOL! Yeah, I think you are a little more selfish then I thought

Unfortunately Apple's never been about cheap hardware, and probably never will be. Software prices aren't dependent on what OS you're using (or shouldn't be in theory).

You don't really hate Apple; you hate that Apple isn't giving you what you want! True capitalism (as Adams described it anyway) is that if you see a market for something, you provide it. If you want cheaper hardware/software, don' want to use M$'s products, and think there's other people out there in the same boat then start your own business to provide that. Capitalism is not about 'Oh! Well, this company isn't providing what I want so I'll complain like hell and then just settle for this other company.' It's about being a consumer and if you don't see a market being filled properly then you become the manufacturer.

All I can say is be patient if you don't want to start your own company. Just as your own moods/attitudes/ideas change, the computer industry will not always be dominated by M$ with Apple being a small niche product. Comapanies will come and go, and one day that perfect company may pop up for you (although it may not last too long <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> ).<hr /></blockquote>hehe...I actually would argue that there is no such thing as unselfishness...but I digress.

Capitalism is actually much more complicated than that, as I'm sure you know. The interaction between customers and producers is a necessary characteristic of a system which relies on Comparative Advantage and thus Specialization. Not everyone can, nor should, open a company.

Customers demand more for less. Companies try to supply less for more. The equilibrium (where the lines cross) is the optimum point. The great aspect of this system is that there are significant incentives for companies to lower their cost in order to gain customers. The result is that we see faster computers, better OSs, for lower cost.

But consumers have an *obligation* to fight for their welfare. It makes companies work harder at making better products. There is nothing wrong with being selfish....

But you know all that <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

[ 07-22-2002, 01:43 PM: Message edited by: Brazuca ]

Bruce O'Neal · Jul 22, 2002, 01:48 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by mchladek:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by brachiator:
When I write "zealot" or "evangalist" I am referring to myself as well -- I don't use that term as a derogatory. (Apologist is something else...)

Of *course* there are other options, and of course I won't buy from Apple except where it suits me. That is not the point. The point is, again, that apple gets a LOT of value out of the goodwill of Mac users. I'm just applying your economic view to the goodwill equation: piss me off and lose the goodwill -- Apple is just another company to me, then. Lose the goodwill and thus lose the sufferance, the word of mouth, and the evangelism. Mac users talking up and demonstrating their Macs to PC users is probably as valuable as any "switchers" campaign. Well, by going out of its way to lose the goodwill, Apple loses a big chunk of that free advertising.

And let's not forget the subtle but valuable advertising benefit of the "@mac.com" email suffix! That, as the ICANN wars prove, is valuable trademark property. Every email I send out on my account is advertising for Apple, as is everytime someone goes to look at my travel pix on my iTools homepage.

I would be *really* surprised if Apple has done a complete economic valuation and analysis of the situation and its decision!<hr /></blockquote>I agree. I think actions speak far greater than words. (This is directed strictly to you): If you are upset with Apple's policies then don't buy .Mac and don't promote Apple's products. It might take a little while but Apple will see when it starts to lose it's user base and its market share isn't increasing that it made a wrong turn somewhere and try something else to fix the problem. The fault I see in most people is that they want things their way or not at all, and they want it now. Be patient people.<hr /></blockquote>since when has apple been concerned with market share? i guess there are better and bigger fish to fry, but we (mac users) must have some degree of scale if we are to influence and change the world.

brachiator · Jul 22, 2002, 01:49 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by mchladek:
If you are upset with Apple's policies then don't buy .Mac and don't promote Apple's products. It might take a little while but Apple will see when it starts to lose it's user base and its market share isn't increasing that it made a wrong turn somewhere and try something else to fix the problem. The fault I see in most people is that they want things their way or not at all, and they want it now. Be patient people.[/QB]<hr /></blockquote>Yes, and it is a catch-22, because like Brazuca, I want Apple to prosper for my own selfish reasons! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

Anyway, my overall response to apple will not be to switch to a PC, but in the short-term not to buy new hardware.

To be intellectually honest, though, this means that Apple *should* charge me the 130 bucks for 10.2! Since it is (likely) an update that will give me a couple more years on my G3 Powerbook, the 130 bucks will likely be all apple gets for those years (unless I just start getting really spendthrift...)

mchladek · Jul 22, 2002, 01:52 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Brazuca:

But you know all that <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> <hr /></blockquote>And of course you know that our posts agree with each other 100% <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

Developer · Jul 22, 2002, 02:30 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by brachiator:
To be intellectually honest, though, this means that Apple *should* charge me the 130 bucks for 10.2! Since it is (likely) an update that will give me a couple more years on my G3 Powerbook, the 130 bucks will likely be all apple gets for those years (unless I just start getting really spendthrift...)<hr /></blockquote>From a marketing point of view they should charge you $ 129 for an upgrade (from any prior OS) and $259 full price. Since everybody has any prior OS it would be the same, except nobody would have complained.

That's what Microsoft does and it works quite well as we know.

Brazuca · Jul 22, 2002, 03:01 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Developer:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by brachiator:
To be intellectually honest, though, this means that Apple *should* charge me the 130 bucks for 10.2! Since it is (likely) an update that will give me a couple more years on my G3 Powerbook, the 130 bucks will likely be all apple gets for those years (unless I just start getting really spendthrift...)<hr /></blockquote>From a marketing point of view they should charge you $ 129 for an upgrade (from any prior OS) and $259 full price. Since everybody has any prior OS it would be the same, except nobody would have complained.

That's what Microsoft does and it works quite well as we know.<hr /></blockquote>Yes, marketing can do "wonders". But I wonder, doesn't the fact that M$ has 90%+ marketshare help it charge monopoly prices? It's a bit different than Apple since they are in an uphill battle to gain users.

Developer · Jul 22, 2002, 03:27 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Brazuca:
Yes, marketing can do "wonders". But I wonder, doesn't the fact that M$ has 90%+ marketshare help it charge monopoly prices? It's a bit different than Apple since they are in an uphill battle to gain users.<hr /></blockquote>Sure that helps. But I don't think Windows updates are overpriced. They use it to charge monopoly prices for Office.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />It's a bit different than Apple since they are in an uphill battle to gain users.[/QB]<hr /></blockquote>OS updates don't gain Apple any users. Mac sales do.

Brazuca · Jul 22, 2002, 03:35 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Developer:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Brazuca:
Yes, marketing can do "wonders". But I wonder, doesn't the fact that M$ has 90%+ marketshare help it charge monopoly prices? It's a bit different than Apple since they are in an uphill battle to gain users.<hr /></blockquote>Sure that helps. But I don't think Windows updates are overpriced. They use it to charge monopoly prices for Office.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />It's a bit different than Apple since they are in an uphill battle to gain users.<hr /></blockquote>OS updates don't gain Apple any users. Mac sales do.[/QB]<hr /></blockquote>yes, yes. I think I agree with that. My point was that high upgrade costs are factored into the total cost of owning a mac. Especially in relative terms (when Windows price doesn't go up but macOS does).

This is a bit more complex than I'm ready to argue right now. I'm out of underwear.