[geeks] Apple vs. Sun

[Chris Hedemark]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On Wednesday, November 6, 2002, at 01:04 PM, David Passmore wrote:

> You really /are/ comparing apples and Oranges. The Apple is a desktop, 
> the
> Sun is a /workstation/.

Or vice-versa.

The word is diluted, and never really had a good solid definition 
anyway.

The Sun machine in question is a PeeCee with a SPARC processor.

> They're intended for two different audiences.

But a lot of us tend to do things that were never intended (and do them 
well).

> You're
> missing things like:
>
> * Quality and quantity of support, warranty

That goes well outside of the $2,000 budget for what you're talking 
about.  Sun support doesn't get worthwhile until you're on a contract 
with them.

> * Quality of components used; custom vs. mass-produced

Horse pucky.  Blade 150 is a PeeCee with a SPARC processor.  The Apple 
in question uses higher end PeeCee components, plus SCSI HDD, plus two 
PowerPC processors.

Components for both systems are mass produced.

> * Quality of product testing, manufacturing, and packaging

Yep.  Apple has Sun there, too.  Thanks for pointing that out.

> * I/O capabilities

Once again, Apple takes the cake.  SCSI vs. IDE for one.

> Sun machines are usually sold to companies at a discount, which varies
> between 20% and 40% most of the time, along with servers and support
> contracts.

So beef up the Blade 150 with a some more memory or something to get 
the price up to account for the nebulous discount.


Chris Hedemark
Hillsborough, NC
http://yonderway.com


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (Darwin)

iD8DBQE9yXeOYPuF4Zq9lvYRAgm3AJ4jTirwMxILtGkeoK5J3LDGmLu3JwCgqap9
ZeZSAXe2noNRyhYbNcBSN8c=
=IhFG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----