Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Be Good

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 209 posts

Re: Be Good

#171

Post by SwellJoe »

I find it somewhat amusing that pg suggests in the footnote that Microsoft ought to recommend their customers switch to Mac OS X.

The problem with that is that there is one supplier of hardware for Mac OS X: Apple. And they charge a significant premium for that hardware. Kinda like IBM back before Microsoft pulled a fast one and licensed their OS to all comers and (benevolently) changed the face of personal computing. pg recognized the evil that was IBM, but fails to recognize the same evil in Apple, because the facade is so much nicer to look at.

Re: Be Good

#172

Post by pg »

SwellJoe wrote: post #171

I find it somewhat amusing that pg suggests in the footnote that Microsoft ought to recommend their customers switch to Mac OS X. The problem with that is that there is one supplier of hardware for Mac OS X: Apple. And they charge a significant premium for that hardware. Kinda like IBM back before Microsoft pulled a fast one and licensed their OS to all comers and (benevolently) changed the face of personal computing…

Not all computers are bought new. There are very inexpensive Apple machines: used ones.

A Powerbook G4 like the one I use for everything seems to cost around $500 on eBay, and I suspect that offers a net better experience than the average Vista user gets.

Re: Be Good

#173

Post by SwellJoe »

pg wrote: post #172
SwellJoe wrote: post #171

I find it somewhat amusing that pg suggests in the footnote that Microsoft ought to recommend their customers switch to Mac OS X. The problem with that is that there is one supplier of hardware for Mac OS X: Apple. And they charge a significant premium for that hardware. Kinda like IBM back before Microsoft pulled a fast one and licensed their OS to all comers and (benevolently) changed the face of personal computing…

Not all computers are bought new. There are very inexpensive Apple machines: used ones. A Powerbook G4 like the one I use for everything seems to cost around $500 on eBay, and I suspect that offers a net better experience than the average Vista user gets.

There were used IBMs on the market, as well. Does that invalidate your argument about IBM? One of your premises is incorrect. Which one is it?

Re: Be Good

#174

Post by pg »

SwellJoe wrote: post #173
pg wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not all computers are bought new. There are very inexpensive Apple machines: used ones. A Powerbook G4 like the one I use for everything seems to cost around $500 on eBay, and I suspect that offers a net better experience than the average Vista user gets.

There were used IBMs on the market, as well. Does that invalidate your argument about IBM? One of your premises is incorrect. Which one is it?

What I said was that if Microsoft cared about users, they'd recommend they switch to OSX. You replied that Apple hardware comes at a premium. I replied that this premium is less than the difference between new and used hardware, and that using OSX only costs about $500. Could you find a laptop capable of running Vista for significantly less than that? If not, how am I mistaken?

Re: Be Good

#175

Post by plinkplonk »

pg wrote: post #174
SwellJoe wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were used IBMs on the market, as well. Does that invalidate your argument about IBM? One of your premises is incorrect. Which one is it?

What I said was that if Microsoft cared about users, they'd recommend they switch to OSX. You replied that Apple hardware comes at a premium. I replied that this premium is less than the difference between new and used hardware, and that using OSX only costs about $500. Could you find a laptop capable of running Vista for significantly less than that? If not, how am I mistaken?

to be fair though, when someone says "you should switch from X to Y" there isn't an implicit "you'll have to use second hand / used versions of Y" attached to that message.

e.g the statement "you should switch from [cheap car] to [expensive car] because expensive car is much more comfortable" does NOT carry the "I meant a used [expensive car]" implication.

Most people would understand that the first statement implies you should pony up the price differential because the extra comfort is worth it.

It is bad enough that Windows has a monopoly and uses it to gouge customers. Why would anyone want to replace a software monopoly with a software and hardware monopoly?

Re: Be Good

#176

Post by ricky »

It struck me that this essay shares many things in common with the last chapter of Guy Kawasaki's book, "The Art of the Start". That chapter is called "The Art of Being a Mensch", and argues that to build a lasting organization, you need to help lots of people, do what's right and pay back society. Sounds about right to me.

Re: Be Good

#177

Post by cowsandmilk »

related to malaria, maybe you want to look at Amyris Biotechnologies as a living example of similar ideas to what you describe. They started with Bill and Melinda Gates money to produce artemisinin, which the grant stipulated had to be produced without a profit, but have taken that technology and have used it to grow an amazing Biotech startup that most PhDs in the field would die to work for. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation isn't usually thought of as a startup incubator, but this is one example of a company that started from the idea of treating malaria, and continues with that idea as they apply the same technologies to solve the other needs they see in the world.

Re: Be Good

#178

Post by [deleted] »

pg wrote: post #174
SwellJoe wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were used IBMs on the market, as well. Does that invalidate your argument about IBM? One of your premises is incorrect. Which one is it?

What I said was that if Microsoft cared about users, they'd recommend they switch to OSX. You replied that Apple hardware comes at a premium. I replied that this premium is less than the difference between new and used hardware, and that using OSX only costs about $500. Could you find a laptop capable of running Vista for significantly less than that? If not, how am I mistaken?

[deleted]

Re: Be Good

#179

Post by SwellJoe »

pg wrote: post #174
SwellJoe wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were used IBMs on the market, as well. Does that invalidate your argument about IBM? One of your premises is incorrect. Which one is it?

What I said was that if Microsoft cared about users, they'd recommend they switch to OSX. You replied that Apple hardware comes at a premium. I replied that this premium is less than the difference between new and used hardware, and that using OSX only costs about $500. Could you find a laptop capable of running Vista for significantly less than that? If not, how am I mistaken?

As plinkplonk pointed out, you're suggesting it is good for consumers to choose a single supplier solution for both hardware and software. Not just any single supplier, but very nearly the highest cost supplier (you can spend more, but you get better quality hardware if you do). I just think there is a very clear comparison to be made between IBM in 1983 and Apple today, and it seems that your enjoyment of Apple products (and/or dislike of Microsoft products) has blinded you to that very clear comparison.

Apple isn't quite in the position of dangerous strength that IBM almost had, but IBM also had competitors (Commodore, Apple, Atari). I merely think that a Mac system (even a three year old one) is not the ideal computing option for the average consumer. Additionally, I think an Apple monopoly would be every bit as dangerous as a Microsoft monopoly. Apple has a long history of taking advantage of the dedication of their users.

I come down on the side of Open Source solutions to this problem, though Linux also has problems of its own, it does solve the problem of having a single supplier for any element of the system. With things like the Asus eee lowering the price of a laptop dramatically, while avoiding reliance on Microsoft (or Apple), I think things are looking up.

In short, I think your IBM vs. Microsoft as Robin Hood analogy should be applied equally to Apple, though Apple has managed to hold tight the reigns such that no Robin Hood can spring into existence to bust up the control Apple has over the Mac market. Note that I don't have a problem, in particular, with Apple or Mac machines or Apple making money...just like I didn't have particular problems with IBM back in the day. I just think it's amusing that Apple gets a pass, while Microsoft is Robin Hood for cleverly thwarting the IBM monopoly on the PC. Pot, kettle, yada yada yada.

Re: Be Good

#180

Post by tx »

pg wrote: post #174
SwellJoe wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were used IBMs on the market, as well. Does that invalidate your argument about IBM? One of your premises is incorrect. Which one is it?

What I said was that if Microsoft cared about users, they'd recommend they switch to OSX. You replied that Apple hardware comes at a premium. I replied that this premium is less than the difference between new and used hardware, and that using OSX only costs about $500. Could you find a laptop capable of running Vista for significantly less than that? If not, how am I mistaken?

If Microsoft cared about users, they'd recommend they switch to OSX. If Microsoft cared about programmers, they'd recommend they switch to Debian-based Linux.

For $500 I'd rather be working on 1 year old ThinkPad T60 (2MB of RAM, Core Duo 2) with Ubuntu on it.

Post reply on HN