Comment by Karunamon | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Karunamon | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

This is the standard rebuttal to the standard Apple argument.

"Why not just build a machine out of individual parts X Y and Z for $nnn less than Apple's price"?

It completely ignores, at a minimum:

    - Apple vertical integration

    - All-in-one support/replacement

    - The OS

Yes, you can technically build a machine with equivalent hardware specs for some $dollars less. The target market is probably not interested in doing so, and they wouldn't get OS X anyways without hacking, which is half of the freakin' point.

Someone editing 4K+ video on Final Cut professionally wants a machine that runs Final Cut (which eliminates non-Macs), has the hardware to meet that use case, and that they don't have to screw with or have randomly break with updates (which eliminates Hackintoshes). We all agree with this yes?

Has Mac hardware carried a premium over equivalent specced individual parts since forever? You know the answer. The target market for the computer does. not. care.

Can we please not relitigate tired Mac-vs-PC arguments that are old enough to drink? They've never been relevant or interesting.

You miss the point. The OP only pointed out cheaper competitors, pointed out crappy ones. Someone said "What about this?" and that was derided for being not cheap or crappy. The intellectually honest answer would be "It might be nice, but it doesn't have an Apple badge on the front".

Yeah, there are valid points here, but don't expect "competitors are cheaper and suck" and "well, sure, but that one costs as much/more" when someone points other alternatives out.

It's like cherry picking cheaper competitors. Similar things happened with the AirPods.

Announcement article here, you can people claiming that nothing else exists and that this is a first.

Like with things like "multi device pairing" (common as dirt, and even NFC tap-to-pair exists. Shared pairing database? That's cool, very true).

Even down to people arguing how "innovative" the charging case was. Others point out that these exist and have, for years. "Oh, well, that case is bigger/looks clunky/you can be sure that it doesn't work as well".

When people point out that -similar- exist, "oh, well, they cost most".

> Someone editing 4K+ video on Final Cut professionally

As someone who works in this industry these individuals are becoming few and far between. Think it's time to stop pretending Apple is a major player in this area, they pushed and shoved FCP users right to the edge and many just made the jump to better supported software and high end hardware.

I was responding to "A 5k Monitor alone costs around $800-1000 and does not compare in quality to Apple displays"

In which my response was appropriate. The only difference from a monitor perspective is the Apple casing. We're not arguing specs of PC, OS, etc. but that the monitors do not compare to Apple.

Can you give me an example of a 5k isp monitor that costs less than $800 and has type c/thunderbolt ports?

"$800-1000 and does not compare in quality to Apple displays" I bought the LG 5k monitor from Apple for $949 and it's more than comparable.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com