Re: .Mac
Re: .Mac
- Subject: Re: .Mac
- From: Paul Richards <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 23:21:27 -0400
on 7/25/02 9:01 PM, Frank Petrie at email@hidden wrote:
>
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.
They and I still have to pay ISP costs on top of any fee for .Mac service -
that doesn't change. This is therefore meaningless.
>
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?
Nothing arbitrary about it. I know what software I paid for and when I paid.
>
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.
I see no point to this statement. If a person purchases .Mac service and
doesn't use the backup, (s)he is doing just that, letting it gather dust.
What does it matter whether it is purchased separately or as part of a
package? The money is wasted just the same.
>
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.
Maybe there's something out there of concern that I haven't heard of. The
only things I've heard any OS X users get jittery about are macro viruses -
ones that affect Word and the like. Are there large numbers of Unix viruses
running loose to which OS X is susceptible? I haven't heard of them. Forgive
my ignorance on this, Unix is not in my background.
>
Either way, the free ride is over. I know that I don't give my services
>
away for free? Do you?
I have never suggested that Apple's decision to start charging is wrong. It
is the structure of the pricing that I disagree with.
>
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?
What does it matter how good the deal is if you have no use for what's in
the deal? Do you buy a whole banana boat just so you can have one banana
split?
>
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.
Not entirely true. I have had repeated cases where a USB floppy drive has
come in handy, for working with small files transferred to and from both
Macs and PCs. But was Apple right in removing it from their standard
equipment? Other than that it left some of us scrambling a bit for externals
or other options, yes. As I recall, the biggest gripe was in the case of the
iMac users who didn't have CD burners or Zips or the like.
I don't consider this quite comparable. The SCSI/floppy thing left a bunch
of Mac users in a position of being forced into making additional
investments in hardware in order to retain capabilities WHEN they upgraded
to bigger/better/newer/faster Macs. The iTools/.Mac thing forces people to
make additional investments to keep services they already had with EXISTING
Macs, PLUS investment in stuff they don't even want in many cases.
Paul Richards
Syracuse Macintosh Users Group
Syracuse, New York, USA
<
http://www.iSMUG.com>
SMUG InfoLine (315) 695-8782
Macintosh is a trademark of Apple Computer, Inc.,
registered in the U.S. and other countries.
_______________________________________________
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.
| References: | |
| | >Re: .Mac (From: Frank Petrie <email@hidden>) |