Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #95845 > unrolled thread

[OT] Debate over: IBM confirms that Macs are less expensive than PCs

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

Contents

  [OT] Debate over: IBM confirms that Macs are less expensive than PCs Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-10-20 16:42 +0000
    Re: [OT] Debate over: IBM confirms that Macs are less expensive than PCs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-10-20 19:07 +0000
      Re: [OT] Debate over: IBM confirms that Macs are less expensive than PCs Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-10-20 19:19 +0000
      Re: [OT] Debate over: IBM confirms that Macs are less expensive than PCs JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-21 17:02 -0400
        Re: [OT] Debate over: IBM confirms that Macs are less expensive than PCs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-21 17:10 -0400
          Re: [OT] Debate over: IBM confirms that Macs are less expensive than PCs JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-21 17:45 -0400
            Re: [OT] Debate over: IBM confirms that Macs are less expensive than PCs Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-21 15:37 -0700
              Re: [OT] Debate over: IBM confirms that Macs are less expensive than PCs JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-21 18:57 -0400
                Re: [OT] Debate over: IBM confirms that Macs are less expensive than PCs Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-10-22 01:43 +0000
                Re: [OT] Debate over: IBM confirms that Macs are less expensive than PCs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-10-22 05:00 +0000
        Re: [OT] Debate over: IBM confirms that Macs are less expensive than PCs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-10-22 04:58 +0000
      Re: [OT] Debate over: IBM confirms that Macs are less expensive than PCs "Happy.Hobo" <Happy.Hobo@Spam.Invalid> - 2016-10-21 20:38 -0500

#95845 — [OT] Debate over: IBM confirms that Macs are less expensive than PCs

Contrary to the silly ignorant claims of resident dimwit trolls:

IBM found that not only do PCs drive twice the amount of support calls,
they're also three times more expensive. That's right, depending on the
model, IBM is saving anywhere from $273 - $543 per Mac compared to a PC,
over a four-year lifespan. “And this reflects the best pricing we've
ever gotten from Microsoft,” Previn said. Multiply that number by the
100,000+ Macs IBM expects to have deployed by the end of the year, and
we’re talking some serious savings.

Needless to say, the employees at IBM got it right. And with 73% of them
saying they want their next computer to be a Mac, the success will only
increase with time.

<https://www.jamf.com/blog/debate-over-ibm-confirms-that-macs-are-535-less-expensive-than-pcs/>

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#95850

In message <e6sagfFpjkiU1@mid.individual.net> 
  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> Contrary to the silly ignorant claims of resident dimwit trolls:

> IBM found that not only do PCs drive twice the amount of support calls,
> they're also three times more expensive. That's right, depending on the
> model, IBM is saving anywhere from $273 - $543 per Mac compared to a PC,
> over a four-year lifespan. “And this reflects the best pricing we've
> ever gotten from Microsoft,” Previn said. Multiply that number by the
> 100,000+ Macs IBM expects to have deployed by the end of the year, and
> we’re talking some serious savings.

> Needless to say, the employees at IBM got it right. And with 73% of them
> saying they want their next computer to be a Mac, the success will only
> increase with time.

> <https://www.jamf.com/blog/debate-over-ibm-confirms-that-macs-are-535-less-expensive-than-pcs/>

How strange that JF, who loves posting news articles, didn't post this
one.

Curious, isn't it? :D

Nice that IBM figured out in 2016 what some of us have been saying for
over 20 years.


-- 
Elves are wonderful. They provoke wonder. Elves are marvelous. They
cause marvels. Elves are fantastic. They create fantasies. Elves are
glamorous. They project glamour. Elves are enchanting. They weave
enchantment. Elves are terrific. They beget terror.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#95851

On 2016-10-20, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> In message <e6sagfFpjkiU1@mid.individual.net> 
>   Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Contrary to the silly ignorant claims of resident dimwit trolls:
>
>> IBM found that not only do PCs drive twice the amount of support calls,
>> they're also three times more expensive. That's right, depending on the
>> model, IBM is saving anywhere from $273 - $543 per Mac compared to a PC,
>> over a four-year lifespan. “And this reflects the best pricing we've
>> ever gotten from Microsoft,” Previn said. Multiply that number by the
>> 100,000+ Macs IBM expects to have deployed by the end of the year, and
>> we’re talking some serious savings.
>
>> Needless to say, the employees at IBM got it right. And with 73% of them
>> saying they want their next computer to be a Mac, the success will only
>> increase with time.
>
>> <https://www.jamf.com/blog/debate-over-ibm-confirms-that-macs-are-535-less-expensive-than-pcs/>
>
> How strange that JF, who loves posting news articles, didn't post this
> one.
>
> Curious, isn't it? :D

Not enough FUD value. ; )

> Nice that IBM figured out in 2016 what some of us have been saying for
> over 20 years.

Yep!

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#95885

On 2016-10-20 15:07, Lewis wrote:

>> <https://www.jamf.com/blog/debate-over-ibm-confirms-that-macs-are-535-less-expensive-than-pcs/>

Godo article.

> 
> How strange that JF, who loves posting news articles, didn't post this
> one.

And just why would you go so far as to add that to your post ? Really ?
has it every occured to you that I don't get to see all fo the internet
every day ?

And when is the last time you saw me argue that PCs cost less than Macs
over a 4 year period (cost of onwership).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#95887

In article <580a827b$0$41150$b1db1813$15bdbe48@news.astraweb.com>, JF
Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> > 
> > How strange that JF, who loves posting news articles, didn't post this
> > one.
> 
> And just why would you go so far as to add that to your post ? Really ?
> has it every occured to you that I don't get to see all fo the internet
> every day ?

why not?

it's expected that you see all of it by lunchtime.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#95888

On 2016-10-21 17:10, nospam wrote:

> it's expected that you see all of it by lunchtime.


BTW that article, while a nice read, was an infomercial for the company
that got the IBM contract to help deploy/preconfigure/manage the Macs.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#95890

On 2016-10-21 2:45 PM, JF Mezei wrote:
> On 2016-10-21 17:10, nospam wrote:
>
>> it's expected that you see all of it by lunchtime.
>
>
> BTW that article, while a nice read, was an infomercial for the company
> that got the IBM contract to help deploy/preconfigure/manage the Macs.
>
>
>

And does it change the facts and figures contained therein?

<http://www.computerworld.com/article/2998315/apple-mac/every-mac-we-buy-is-making-and-saving-ibm-money-ibm.html>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#95891

On 2016-10-21 18:37, Alan Baker wrote:

> And does it change the facts and figures contained therein?

No, the "infomercial" facts are not challenged. However, someone who has
vested interests in selling PCs could discredit that "article" as a mere
infomercial and telling potential customers to ignore it.

That cost of opnwership fopr a Mac is lower is no news. But what is the
big news in that is that IBM has become the largest installed base of
Macs. Of all the irony, IBM, the folks who started the PC, are now the
biggest Mac users.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#95896

On 2016-10-21, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 2016-10-21 18:37, Alan Baker wrote:
>
>> And does it change the facts and figures contained therein?
>
> No, the "infomercial" facts are not challenged. However, someone who
> has vested interests in selling PCs could discredit that "article" as
> a mere infomercial and telling potential customers to ignore it.
>
> That cost of opnwership fopr a Mac is lower is no news.

That doesn't change the fact that trolls and FUDsters constantly try to
claim Macs are overpriced garbage.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#95906

In message <580a9d78$0$29536$c3e8da3$c8b7d2e6@news.astraweb.com> 
  JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 2016-10-21 18:37, Alan Baker wrote:

>> And does it change the facts and figures contained therein?

> No, the "infomercial" facts are not challenged. However, someone who has
> vested interests in selling PCs could discredit that "article" as a mere
> infomercial and telling potential customers to ignore it.

There he is, folks, The FUD monster has found an angle!

A STUPID angle, to be sure, but an angle.


-- 
"I don't care if Bill Gates is the world's biggest philanthropist. The
pain he has inflicted on the world in the past 20 years through lousy
products easily outweighs any good he has done.... Apple is as arrogant
as Microsoft but at least its stuff works as advertised" - Graem Philipson

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#95905

In message <580a827b$0$41150$b1db1813$15bdbe48@news.astraweb.com> 
  JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 2016-10-20 15:07, Lewis wrote:

>>> <https://www.jamf.com/blog/debate-over-ibm-confirms-that-macs-are-535-less-expensive-than-pcs/>

> Godo article.

>> 
>> How strange that JF, who loves posting news articles, didn't post this
>> one.

> And just why would you go so far as to add that to your post

I didn't ADD it to my post, you ignorant FUD-spreading sack of shit. I
RESPONDED to JR's post.


-- 
"There's nothin' wrong with bein' a son of a bitch." -- Gaspode the
Wonder Dog

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#95894

On 10-20-2016 14:07, Lewis wrote:
> Nice that IBM figured out in 2016 what some of us have been saying for
> over 20 years.

I sure wasn't saying it _before_ OS X.  OS X came along right when OS 9 
was about to force me into Windows 2000.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web