Skip Navigation
107 comments

  • Most of Apple's history, actually.

    Macs have a reputation for being expensive because people compare the cheapest Mac to the cheapest PC, or to a custom-built PC. That's reasonable if the cheapest PC meets your needs or if you're into building your own PC, but if you compare a similarly-equipped name-brand PC, the numbers shift a LOT.

    From the G3-G5 era ('97-2006) through most of the Intel era (2006-2020), if you went to Dell or HP and configured a machine to match Apple's specs as closely as possible, you'd find the Macs were almost never much more expensive, and often cheaper. I say this as someone who routinely did such comparisons as part of their job. There were some notable exceptions, like most of the Intel MacBook Air models (they ranged from "okay" to "so bad it feels like a personal insult"), but that was never the rule. Even in the early-mid 90s, while Apple's own hardware was grossly overpriced, you could by Mac clones for much cheaper (clones were licensed third-parties who made Macs, and they were far and away the best value in the pre-G3 PowerPC era).

    Macs also historically have a lower total cost of ownership, factoring in lifespan (cheap PCs fail frequently), support costs, etc. One of the most recent and extensive analyses of this I know if comes from IBM. See https://www.computerworld.com/article/1666267/ibm-mac-users-are-happier-and-more-productive.html

    Toward the tail end of the Intel era, let's say around 2016-2020, Apple put out some real garbage. e.g. butterfly keyboards and the aforementioned craptastic Airs. But historically those are the exceptions, not the rule.

    As for the "does more", well, that's debatable. Considering this is using Apple's 90s logo, I think it's pretty fair. Compare System 7 (released in '91) to Windows 3.1 (released in '92), and there is no contest. Windows was shit. This was generally true up until the 2000s, when the first few versions of OS X were half-baked and Apple was only just exiting its "beleaguered" period, and the mainstream press kept ringing the death knell. Windows lagged behind its competition by at least a few years up until Microsoft successfully killed or sufficiently hampered all that competition. I don't think you can make an honest argument in favor of Windows compared to any of its contemporaries in the 90s (e.g. Macintosh, OS/2, BeOS) that doesn't boil down to "we're used to it" or "we're locked in".

  • Does more, lol. Think Apple might need a dictionary considering iPhone is just barely getting home screen customization and the Mac mouse actively works against doing anything.

  • That pin can be found for $30 or $35 on on ebay here and here, where it is described as being from the 80s and as an "employee pin".

    I was thinking that this might have been something aimed specifically at technology buyers in US schools in the 80s or 90s, to whom Apple offered substantial institutional discounts in a (relatively successful) effort to dominate that sector. However searching the phrase "does more costs less" i found this TV spot advertising the Quadra 605 which at $1000 was the cheapest computer Apple sold when it was introduced in October 1993 (and allegedly cheaper than something else they refer to as "PC Leading Brand" 😂). That system was sold under the LC and Performa brands up to 1996, but it was only sold as a Quadra until October 1994, so, to answer OP's question: that slogan was in use at least sometime in that year.

  • It doesn't even do anything more especially for the price. Just make an AMD rig that blows it outta the water ez.

107 comments