To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (24439 ) 7/9/1999 2:44:00 PM From: Dave B Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 93625
Skeeter, You're missing a couple of major points: 1) Customers may be buying those low end machines now to surf the web (my father bought one) but once they get them, they want to do more because they can . My father bought a $399 computer to surf the web, then he saw my scanner and decided he wanted to scan in photographs as well. So he bought a scanner and plugged it in. Once he's saves an image, it takes almost 5 minutes to bring it up on the screen. 5 minutes! And then half the time the image comes out in funky colors because the memory that came with the system is so low. He's had the machine in to the "shop" about a dozen times to have things fixed (some he caused himself as a naive user). He specifically told me one day that he would not buy one of these low-end machines again. The $399 systems are good to get people in the market, but after they start using them they'll want to do more. And once they see exactly what kind of performance they get with these more advanced capabilities, they'll be disappointed and their next system will be a more powerful system. Packard Bell tried to sell on price alone through retail and they succeeded in expanding the PC market just as e-machines is doing, but it died because quality and performance were still issues. 2) How can you even believe that technology won't advance? 10 years ago, the 386 was the standard and everyone was using DOS (Windows 3.0 was just about to appear). The pseudo-luddites like yourself had said that no one would need a 386 on their desktop -- it was for servers only. But you know what? We've had 486's and Pentiums and Pentium II's and Pentium IIIs since then. The low end is now a Celeron 400 which is roughly a PII 366 in performance; light years beyond the 386 that no one was supposed to need. Do you truly believe that in another 10 years, the low-end won't be a multi-gigahertz system handling our voice recognition tasks, full-speed video, 3-D windowing interfaces, and a ton of other tasks that we can't even dream of? How shortsighted. Technology can and will march on. Is a Celeron 3G processor going to be running 133Mhz SDRAM? I don't think so. I can't believe you sucked me back in to this discussion <GG>. Dave