From: smoon@strfleet.gsfc.nasa.gov (Sang J. Moon)
Subject: Re: Macs cost too much (NOT!)
Organization: NASA GSFC Code 534.3
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 15:07:34 GMT

In article <14996@claris.com>, mike_steiner@qm.claris.com (Mike Steiner) writes:
> 
> In article <1992Aug11.234015.2689@CS.ORST.EDU>, pricec@prism.CS.ORST.EDU (price carl wayne) writes:
> > 
> > 
> > >   > Now, it's very clear that PC type computers outsell Macs (about
> > >   > 3 to 1 if you believe the industry statistics).  If technical
> > >   > superiority isn't the issue (which means we don't even have
> > >   > to argue over whether the Mac IS technologically superior or not),
> > >   > then I contend that price is the driving force.  The vast
> > >   > majority of consumers seem to vote for the PC.  So my conclusion
> > >   > is that, overall, the PC must be cheaper.
> > 
> > >   Initially, some PCs are cheaper.  Most people don't look beyond
> > >   the initial price and fail to take into account the long-term
> > >   costs of operation.
> > 
> > Out of curiosity, what exactlly are these long-term costs that are so much 
> > higher on a PC than the Mac?  I use both and can't think of any.
> 
> Training and support.  Financial reports from major corporations show that
> within two or three years, the extra costs in training and supporting people
> for DOS machines costs far more than the savings realized in the initial
> purchase.

At least with the state and federal agencies I've worked with, maintenance
is handled with companies so that a fee is paid ahead of time.  This fee
covers all labor and hardware required for any product.  The fee differs
between different companies, but there seems to be no distiction in cost
between servicing Mac or PC products.  Training is usually handled
in-house by someone whose job is to do training either for the mac or the
PC.  From my experience, training and support costs are not significantly
different between the PC or the Mac.  I've had to service PCs and Macs
and train people on both machines, and I have encountered more than my
share of problems on either machine.  The reason I like the Mac better is
because it had a nicer user interface, but it's not perfect and I can
live with the CLI that Unix and PC machine have.  Windows was inferior to
the Mac OS when it came out, but using Windows 3.1 on a 386-40 may impress
many mac users if they gave it a chance.  Windows NT isn't far behind, and
if it lives up to its hype, Macs may lose more of their market if prices
don't go down dramatically.  Many people have pressed the issue that it
is harder to handle hardware on PCs than on Macs.  This is true, but in
most cases it is not too much a problem.  Of course, I have supported PCs
and Macs most of my life, so I can handle most problems that occur on
either machine.  For the totally new user or someone who has only worked
with the software aspect of the computer, buying a Macintosh for themselves
is probably more cost-effective in the short-run.  But in the long run,
a user learns all about their machine and encounters and overcome problems
which take up significant time on either a Mac or a PC.  At least, this is
true from my 10+ years of computing.  The initial investment needed for a
mac is definitely much higher than a pc, but in the long run, the cost in
time, software, and hardware for corresponding systems is pretty much the
same.

Sang J. Moon

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc