Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

macintologist · Nov 15, 2005, 01:23 AM

I went to the Inflation Calculator and entered the price for the 1984 original Mac, which was 2499 dollars back then.

What cost $2495 in 1984 would cost $4618.17 in 2005.

Also, if you were to buy exactly the same products in 2005 and 1984,
they would cost you $2495 and $1347.94 respectively.

Ergo, Macs get cheaper by the year since they always stay in the 1000-2000 price range approximately?

Tesseract · Nov 15, 2005, 01:34 AM

Mac in 1984: $2499
Mac in 2005: $499
ergo, Macs get cheaper with time.

Mac in 1984: $2499
Mac in 2005: $19,448 [Xserve, maxed out]
ergo, Macs get (much) more expensive with time.

Part of the difference is simply due to Apple's product line expanding.

strictlyplaid · Nov 15, 2005, 02:43 AM

Originally Posted by Tesseract

Mac in 1984: $2499
Mac in 2005: $499
ergo, Macs get cheaper with time.

Mac in 1984: $2499
Mac in 2005: $19,448 [Xserve, maxed out]
ergo, Macs get (much) more expensive with time.

Part of the difference is simply due to Apple's product line expanding.

I don't think the xServe is a fair comparison... you'd have to compare to one of the mainframe/servers of the day, which was far more expensive. The Mac 128k is much more similar in capabilities (compared to the time in which it was made!) of the iMac or maybe the PowerMac, both of which are considerably cheaper in today's dollars.

That said, PCs are still a lot cheaper.

loki74 · Nov 15, 2005, 02:52 AM

Originally Posted by strictlyplaid

That said, PCs are still a lot cheaper.

Indeed. But, hey, you get what you pay for, right?

And I think that even if the price of Macs is going down, the solution I (and many others) need will cost a fair bit of money. I'm willing to pay. (As I'm sure everyone else here is as well.. or they probably wouldnt be here.)

Railroader · Nov 15, 2005, 03:15 AM

Originally Posted by strictlyplaid

That said, PCs are still a lot cheaper.

A plain light bulb is cheaper on initial investment also.

But a long lasting, lower energy consumption, flourescent bulb is cheap in the long run.

PCs are cheaper the day you buy it, but Macs are cheaper over the next three years.

Less software to buy as 90% of what the average consumer needs is preinstalled, No anti-virus/spyware/malware software to buy, and Longer product life.

One of the best financial decisions I made computer-wise was to switch to Apple computers.

strictlyplaid · Nov 15, 2005, 03:35 AM

Originally Posted by Railroader

A plain light bulb is cheaper on initial investment also.

But a long lasting, lower energy consumption, flourescent bulb is cheap in the long run.

PCs are cheaper the day you buy it, but Macs are cheaper over the next three years.

Less software to buy as 90% of what the average consumer needs is preinstalled, No anti-virus/spyware/malware software to buy, and Longer product life.

One of the best financial decisions I made computer-wise was to switch to Apple computers.

To avoid lockination (I'm looking in PowerMacMan/Lateralus' direction) let's not get into it.

PM me if you like.

Railroader · Nov 15, 2005, 03:39 AM

Originally Posted by strictlyplaid

To avoid lockination (I'm looking in PowerMacMan/Lateralus' direction) let's not get into it.

PM me if you like.

Huh, no, you PM me if you want to reply to my post. I stated what I believe.

Refute me if you want to, but you made a claim and I addressed it.

strictlyplaid · Nov 15, 2005, 03:41 AM

Originally Posted by Railroader

Huh, no, you PM me if you want to reply to my post. I stated what I believe.

Refute me if you want to, but you made a claim and I addressed it.

Doesn't being that self-righteous make you tired?

Welcome to my ignore list, pal.

wallinbl · Nov 15, 2005, 07:44 AM

Originally Posted by Railroader

Less software to buy as 90% of what the average consumer needs is preinstalled

I agree with the exception of MS Office. It's expensive to buy standalone, and it'll be nice if Apple ever comes out with an Excel replacement.

RAILhead · Nov 15, 2005, 08:25 AM

You two get a room!

Railroader · Nov 15, 2005, 08:37 AM

Originally Posted by strictlyplaid

Doesn't being that self-righteous make you tired?

Welcome to my ignore list, pal.

Huh? You've joined a good sized list of people who have promised me that but have eventually let me down.

You are one super sensitive guy.

Why didn't you PM me?

wdlove · Nov 15, 2005, 10:39 AM

That is awesome news that the price of the Mac has decreased over time. Steve has done a great job of keeping the price the same, but giving us more in specifications. Now if Steve would just advertise the Mac.

birdman · Nov 16, 2005, 01:43 AM

Railroader, I think what mr. plaid meant was that if we discuss the short- and long-term costs of Mac vs. PC ownership, Lateralus will lock the thread.

But I guess if he plonk'd you it's kinda moot now.

-birdman

loki74 · Nov 16, 2005, 02:27 AM

Originally Posted by strictlyplaid

Doesn't being that self-righteous make you tired?

Welcome to my ignore list, pal.

Okay... if your preminition of lockination is accurate, I fear what I am about to say may fulfill the profecy.

Frankly, you are the one being self-righteous. If you want to argue or refute something someone said, the ball is in your court--you've gotta PM them. Why should anyone PM someone asking, "Hey, would you mind denying what I say and arguing with me?" No, if you want an argument and you don't want in in the thread, you send the first PM.

Then you have the arrogance to block a person for 1) not doing something utterly foolish (PM you to request your argument) and 2) stating their beliefs.

================

Railroader: I would argue that I would buy an incandescent over a flourescent because it is dimmable and it has a nicer color, IMO. (If you get the "full-spectrum" ones). Macs have more features, and they look nicer. ...not like a florsecent bulb.

Perhaps buying a PC is actually more like buying a halogen--you pay more in general, and you risk burning your house down!

JoshuaZ · Nov 16, 2005, 02:32 AM

There are always two. A master and an aprentace. Both of whom will probably lcok this threat.

I need spell check.

strictlyplaid · Nov 16, 2005, 02:35 AM

Originally Posted by loki74

Okay... if your preminition of lockination is accurate, I fear what I am about to say may fulfill the profecy.

Frankly, you are the one being self-righteous. If you want to argue or refute something someone said, the ball is in your court--you've gotta PM them. Why should anyone PM someone asking, "Hey, would you mind denying what I say and arguing with me?" No, if you want an argument and you don't want in in the thread, you send the first PM.

Then you have the arrogance to block a person for 1) not doing something utterly foolish (PM you to request your argument) and 2) stating their beliefs.

Hey, thanks for the reprimand.

First, and I'm sorry this wasn't perfectly clear, but I suppose I should have said "PM me if you are interested in continuing the conversation." I wasn't interested enough to do it on my own.

Second, this not my first interaction with Railroader and my judgment is based on those as well. Sorry that I didn't start a separate thread about how much I hate Railroader and list his offenses; you can find plenty of others willing to do that if you like.

One more thing. How is it "arrogant" to block someone? I'm tired of hearing from Railroader; if I want self-righteous certainty on issues, I'll watch O'Reilly. It doesn't affect him -- or you, for that matter. (Incidentally, is it "arrogant" of me that I don't watch O'Reilly?)

Oh, and PM me if you want to continue this obviously personal conversation.

Railroader · Nov 16, 2005, 02:48 AM

Originally Posted by loki74

Railroader: I would argue that I would buy an incandescent over a flourescent because it is dimmable and it has a nicer color, IMO. (If you get the "full-spectrum" ones). Macs have more features, and they look nicer. ...not like a florsecent bulb.

Perhaps buying a PC is actually more like buying a halogen--you pay more in general, and you risk burning your house down!

Very good analogy. PCs=Halogen. Those cheap halogen floor lamps that if the fall over will burn your house down. That is, if the bulb isn't burnt out already.

And Macs=expensive dimmable flourescent bulbs. ?

Railroader · Nov 16, 2005, 02:51 AM

Originally Posted by strictlyplaid

Hey, thanks for the reprimand.

First, and I'm sorry this wasn't perfectly clear, but I suppose I should have said "PM me if you are interested in continuing the conversation." I wasn't interested enough to do it on my own.

Second, this not my first interaction with Railroader and my judgment is based on those as well. Sorry that I didn't start a separate thread about how much I hate Railroader and list his offenses; you can find plenty of others willing to do that if you like.

One more thing. How is it "arrogant" to block someone? I'm tired of hearing from Railroader; if I want self-righteous certainty on issues, I'll watch O'Reilly. It doesn't affect him -- or you, for that matter. (Incidentally, is it "arrogant" of me that I don't watch O'Reilly?)

Oh, and PM me if you want to continue this obviously personal conversation.

Huh, I was unaware we had much of a "history".

It's too bad that you hate me. I assure you, the feeling is unrequited.

Sometimes I'll disagree vehemently with someone's beliefs, but I certainly don't hate them.

And I'll always listen to them. And ocassionally, I'll agree with them.

I only ignore the flagrantly profane and vulgar.

wallinbl · Nov 16, 2005, 07:42 AM

Originally Posted by Railroader

Those cheap halogen floor lamps

Those things have 1200W bulbs in them. For the math challenged, that's the same as 20 60W bulbs. So, that would be a Prescott with a top end vid card.

Kevin · Nov 16, 2005, 08:13 AM

Originally Posted by strictlyplaid

Doesn't being that self-righteous make you tired?

Welcome to my ignore list, pal.

He wasn't being self righteous.

turtle777 · Nov 16, 2005, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by macintologist

Ergo, Macs get cheaper by the year since they always stay in the 1000-2000 price range approximately?

What kind of question is that supposed to be ?

-t

galarneau · Nov 16, 2005, 05:01 PM

Wasn't the Mac IIfx $10,000 back in the day?

http://everymac.com/systems/apple/ma.../mac_iifx.html

You could buy 3 Quad G5's with that much money today, even without factoring in inflation.

Kerrigan · Nov 16, 2005, 05:56 PM

Wasn't there one year when there was no change in the Mac desktop lineup? If I recall correctly, we went through a period where the G3 was stuck at 500mhz for around 12 months (or possibly longer).

teknopimp · Nov 16, 2005, 06:00 PM

it's hard to believe that the retail for my clamshell in 2000 and what i paid for my loaded 12" powerbook last year are about the same.

Psychonaut · Nov 16, 2005, 07:20 PM

A useful comparison would be that of their price to performance ratio in MIPS or FLOPS per dollar. Ray Kurzweil has made many examples using these to illustrate the exponential nature of technological development.

loki74 · Nov 17, 2005, 02:47 AM

Originally Posted by Railroader

Very good analogy. PCs=Halogen. Those cheap halogen floor lamps that if the fall over will burn your house down. That is, if the bulb isn't burnt out already.

And Macs=expensive dimmable flourescent bulbs. ?

Yesyesyes... I think this is much more accurate. Although if you don't mind I'd like to add one detail--expensive full-spectrum dimmable flourescent bulbs. Can't forget how much better the Macs look!!

On a side note--I find your most recent relpy to strictly plad to be very true. It is a shame he has (or at least appeard to have) jumped the gun and is unable to read it. *sigh* oh well.