Re: .Mac
Re: .Mac
- Subject: Re: .Mac
- From: Frank Petrie <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 21:01:55 -0400
On Thursday, July 25, 2002, at 05:38 p, email@hidden
wrote:
>
>> combined cost me considerably less than $100 PER YEAR.
>
>
Frank, I carefully emphasized the "per year" part of the cost because
>
that
>
seems to me to be an aspect that is being overlooked in attaching a
>
value to
>
all this.
But that's my point. Your membership probably thinks nothing of paying
more than that a year for AOL or MSN. And you STILL get annoying adverts.
>
My software is several years old since the last paid update and serves
>
me
>
fine. I _do_ have to make allowance for updates to OS X (I haven't
>
committed
>
to that as my primary OS yet for hardware reasons) but I still expect my
>
upgrade investment to be less than $100 per year.
If your software still serves you well and you have no need to update,
then don't. But I do have a question - how did you arrive at the price
of less than $100 per year? Is that an arbitrary price point or is their
formula that brought you to that conclusion? MS charges in that
neighborhood for Service Packs which are mainly bug fixes without the
inclusion of additional features.
>
> For me, I have no Virus software. And like most
>
> Mac users, even though I know better, I don't perform backups on a
>
> timely basis.
>
>
From personal experience, having the backup software is not going to
>
necessarily improve your backup habits. That part has to come from YOU.
I agree with the latter sentiment but I'm puzzled. Do you know of people
who went through the trouble of purchasing back-up software and then let
it gather dust? If so, as you point out, that's their responsibility,
not the manufactureres.
>
Antivirus software is the same thing. It's out there and monthly
>
updates are
>
generally figured in with the cost of the software. You still have to
>
make
>
use of what's available or it's a wasted part of the service.
I have to disagree here. OS 9 and before where relatively virus-proof
speaking from a virus standpoint. Now with our jump to Unix, users have
to break out of their complacency and develop new habits. My guess is
that most Mac users with older systems do not own such a piece of
software. And I believe that Apple includes the monthly updates as part
of your payment.
>
As to email, I like my @mac.com address and am willing to pay for it,
>
much
>
as I might pay for a vanity license plate. But not if the price is too
>
high.
I do think that two levels should be available - maybe something like
.MacFamily and .MacSOHO.
Either way, the free ride is over. I know that I don't give my services
away for free? Do you? Apple is a business and had to devise a business
model. The 'advertising' model has proven itself to be pretty much a
failure or, at the very least, an annoyance. The fact that you get
email, storage space and maintenance software all for one fee is quite
amazing. Can you name me a comparable deal currently online? Without a
doubt, the Marketing Dept. dropped the ball on this one big time. But
I've read elsewhere online that this uproar is very reminiscent of the
uproar of the removal of both SCSI and floppy drives. Today, users don't
even question those judgements. My guess is that there will be some
tweaking from Apple and some compromising from the user base.
My main concern is that Apple doesn't roll too many things in, thereby
discouraging developers from innovating.
Frank Petrie
V.P., Vendor Rep, Webmaster, Cog
SJAUG, South Jersey Apple Users Group
email@hidden
www.sjaug.org
_______________________________________________
augd mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/augd
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: .Mac
- From: Paul Richards <email@hidden>