How Much Should Computers Cost?

Economists say...
Since when have economists been right about anything?
We are in an economic crisis, I think that shows how good the economists are...
WALOOB.
Del

While I won't argue with you about whether or not economists have ever been right about anything or not, what does that have to do with the current economic crisis?

Unlike climate science and global warming, there is no real consensus among economists. Some are Keynesian, others follow Adam Smith. It's not the economists that created or caused the economic crisis. The fault(s) can be spread among a lot of different classes - bankers, or banksters if you like, politicians, lobbyists (in the US...don't know their equivalent in the UK or elsewhere in the World) and some blame even being placed with economists.

In general politicians grab an economic philosophy that's convenient and one that they believe will give them the highest probability of re-election (or line their pockets). Then they push that philosophy with all their might. Is that the fault of the entire group of economists?

No more so than it being the fault of the scientific community when politicians muck up the environment in an effort to save it is when they (the politicians) create ineffective regulations and laws based on what a group (large or small) or scientist support.

This clown economist is probably trying for a Nobel prize

WALOOB

...(???) WALOOB ? ... [? We All Love Open Office, Babe! (?)]

even google-search provides little, but for a social-site user-name

Anyhow, the price of computers ids ok. The price of MS products is too high considering the quality, built in obsolescence and obscene proffits.
Del
(Now look, you've pushed me over into rant mode)

Take it easy Del, it's just another silly Blog.

It's like saying that a hammer is too cheap, if a person purchases one and then proceeds to make a living with it by building things.

A computer is just another tool............................or toy, depending on how you look at it.

Is that benefits or dependents. Either way they are placing value on the need to have a computer readily available not what one is willing to pay for a new one.

These "economists" must have forgotten what they learned in Econ 101 to make way for the esoterics of Econ 501.

US$100.

Why the hell not?

Raw material cost A + Conversion cost B + Labour C @ (25% of A+B) + Profit @ (15% of A+B+C), Packing and freight extra (not more than 1% of total cost so far)

If a normal laptop weighs 1.5kg (say 3 lb) ... and costs $500, it is way too expensive. The cost is likely to be less than $50. The price is what the traffic will bear.

i would love to buy a Ferrari if its cost is calculated on this basis.

Order 2 - at that price I want one as well!

R&D is a parameter that is somewhat to evaluate but is a big part of any high tech equipment.

My former employer used to say that a new high tech equipment must hit the market at at least 6x its manufacturing cost to be viable. This is needed to cover R&D, support, warranty, overhead...

A computer is worth exactly what someone is willing to pay for it.

Software, on the other hand, is generally over-priced. This is evidenced by the fact that there are a whole lot of people generating Open Source solutions that often out-perform the high-priced commercial options...

A whole lot of people using open source? In percentages what would that be? Maybe 0.5%?

Which browser are you using? Firefox and Chrome seem to have significant market share. Open Source.

How many "free" apps are you running on your system?

Open Source is not only the operating system. I would suspect that very nearly 100% of computers have at least one Open Source application installed- even those that are supposedly pure Windows. Mac OS's are based on BSD- an Open Source operating system.

You are obviously connected to the Internet. Linux owns a pretty good share of the server operating systems...

My point is that, if the commercial developers actually produced software at a reasonable price, one would not see a large community (large in reference to numbers, not percentage) pursuing alternatives to the commercial solutions.

I am sure if computers were similarly over-priced, there would be a much larger community of users building their own from basic components- something that is not all that difficult to do.

I have built my own - the newest were too expensive in India at the time (early 90's) so I would tuck the cards in my baggage.

I was really glad when the prices came down - saved many headaches.

Nowadays computers like cars are manufactured in many countries around the world using different quality of materials and workmanship and become a household furniture. Therefore its price should be cheap especially when manufactured in undeveloped countries with low quality materials and workmanship.

It bears repeating, as too many people try to finesse a simple fact:

Any item is worth, what the people in the market are willing to pay for it.

Period, end of sentence. There are - obviously - plenty of implications and elaborations. Nonetheless, in economics, there is nothing more to it.

The Slate writers are free to pay more, or donate to my favorite charity or some such. They have no particular entitlement to establish my economics.

I build my own machines from carefully selected components. I would typically have to pay twice as much for an off the shelf machine with the same performance.

So, yes, I think the typical store bought machines are overpriced but, then, if you can't build 'em, what're your choices?

Now... software/os prices for Windoze machines... don't even get me started!

Hooker

No problem - don't buy it.

Today I look at building my own PC about the same as digging up the yard to put in new grass - I hire someone or buy of the shelf in the case of a PC.

Why do economists have a say in how much a product is worth, particularly if it's a tool. Increasing the value of a tool beyond its market value would deny economic opportunities to a user or at least make it much more difficult to break even, especially in these difficult economic times. There is no reason to create a barrier to computers, especially in schools where students have limited financial means. Increasing the costs of computers unecessarily limits the benefits only to those who can afford it, and this also limits a nations capacity for increased economic growth. Other countries like Venezuela and Uruguay have realized the importance of computers and are manufacturing them at obviously low costs for the benefit of all their students so even the poor can learn. These computers are offered free to everyone with the goal of one laptop per child. To date, over 750,000 laptops have already been provided in Venezuela with another 900,000 this year and 3 million more by 2012. Uruguay has also provided 395,000 laptops to their children. (See MiamiHerald Sept.19/11).

Do these "free" lap tops run Windows?

Interesting. Seems there a bit of politics involved. What a surprise, considering the country in question!

Look here

Hooker

Bit of politics indeed, in the distribution, but I couldn't see any mention of the OS from that link. May need more research.

Well, the XO laptop runs off a slimmed down Fedora linux, so I guess its some linux derivative.

Hooker