Third World MAC's?

Discussion in 'Community' started by eclipse525, Aug 8, 2003.

  1. eclipse525 macrumors 6502a

    eclipse525

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2003
    Location:
    USA, New York
    #1
    Here's something i kinda wonder as of late. Instead of Apple focusing so much on the educational market. Why doesn't it try to 'woo' the governments of Third World countries and have their systems all Mac based. Instead of letting the Linux world capture the market. Which it has been doing as of late. Namely with South Africa and I believe Brazil.

    Any thoughts?




    ~e
     
  2. wdlove macrumors P6

    wdlove

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    #2
    Steve definitely needs to seize to opportunity to open new markets. Then we could see whole countries that are a Window's free zone. I'm sure that Bill Gates would take the chance to advance his monoply. Apple needs to be more agressive in new markets!
     
  3. Mblazened macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Location:
    The Valley
  4. eclipse525 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    eclipse525

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2003
    Location:
    USA, New York
    #4
    Not with enought incentive. Need to spend money to make money(or rather capture market share)
     
  5. wowoah macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2003
    Location:
    Berkeley, CA
    #5
    Same reason why Prada doesn't sell bags in Botswana, it's too expensive for the Botswanans. Linux is stable, powerful, adaptable, free, and runs on cheap, widely-available hardware. MacOS is the property of Apple, which means that countries that employ it would have to pay premium prices for Apple licenses AND Apple hardware, both of which are way more expensive than the PC equivalent. Even if Apple were to swallow the cost in the short run in favor of the long run, it still means that these third-world countries will be dishing out cash for Apple in the long run. Linux is free and will always be free, much better investment.
     
  6. eclipse525 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    eclipse525

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2003
    Location:
    USA, New York
    #6
    <LOL!> .......Point taken.......I already knew that but just wanted to see what everyone else thought. .......Too funny.....you got me laughing on this end. It would be nice if they could pull it off. Hey, anything is possible. Time will tell.



    ~e
     
  7. Backtothemac macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #7
    Well, plus you have to regulate who gets systems in their hands that can render nuclear weapons in real time. G5's and some G4's have way, way to much power to sell to just anyone. That is why the US retailers cannot export out of the US, expecially to any nation with hostile nation status.
     
  8. MrMacMan macrumors 604

    MrMacMan

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2001
    Location:
    1 Block away from NYC.
    #8
    Since when did 3ed world become synonymous with hostile nations who want nuclear capabilities?


    I don't think the author was planing to sell then to N. Korea, most likely S America and such.

    Anyway all of the nations we have we have banned trading from, atleast the last I looked at the 'cannot export to' list.
     
  9. mymemory macrumors 68020

    mymemory

    Joined:
    May 9, 2001
    Location:
    Miami
    #9
    Is foma nation wants a computer they get it, a mac won't help a enemy nation to be more agresive. Plus, they rather get an AK-47 rather than a computer, when enemy nations start spending money in computers that will be a good sign, I didn't see any computer lab in Irak after this invation.

    Macs are too expensive and the industry world wide doesn't want to invest for the future, there is no money for that any more, athat was back in the 70's.
     
  10. Backtothemac macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #10
    No, not all 3rd world nations are on the "hostile nations list", but all of the nations on the "hostile nations list", are 3rd world nations.
     
  11. tristan macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2003
    Location:
    high-rise in beautiful bethesda
    #11
    3rd world?

    From what I hear, you don't even see that many Macs in Canada or Australia. Convert the currency, and a Powermac or Powerbook's like 5000 dollars! That's really expensive for most people.
     
  12. Gus macrumors 65816

    Gus

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2002
    Location:
    Minnesota
    #12
    I don't think he was referring the 3rd World countries as hostile in general. It's just that many of those countries don't have the wherewithall to regulate ho is getting these computers and who isn't. Think about it, if I wanted to get a computer for reasons that are bad, and my country was on the "do not sell" list, why wouldn't I just get someone in a 3rd World country to buy it for me? Without the regulation or policing necessary, it wouldn't be that hard. I think that was the point. Maybe I'm wrong though.

    Regards,
    Gus
     
  13. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #13
    People seem to not realise how much engineering (physical, not just computerised), money and resources are required to create usable nuclear weapons.

    At least dozens of brilliant scientists and engineers, billions of dollars worth of physical equipment and tons of raw materials plus a functioning nuclear reactor are required.

    No third world nation can throw together a nuke with a couple racks of G5 Xserves; it's as simple as that. Ditto for terrorist organisations, no matter how well funded.

    I think y'all have been watching too many James Bond-type flicks where evil masterminds plan to take over the world with their henchmen and well laid out lairs with scary-looking Eastern European guards toting MP5s.
     
  14. Gus macrumors 65816

    Gus

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2002
    Location:
    Minnesota
    #14
    I think you missed my point. I wasn't saying a 3rd World country could or would build these things, I'm saying that someone could gain access to the computers that are banned in other countries if they were sold in 3rd World countries. I do realize that it takes a lot of money and other resources to develop a nuclear program, and that isn't what I was implying. Usually, people who want a nnuke for bad things try to get it from someone who already has them, rather than buiding their own program, which would surely be detected by some other country before they even got it off of the ground. That's all I was implying.

    Regards,
    Gus
     
  15. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #15
    That term is outdated. I think most people on this forum are using the term for non-Western nations and non-Northeast Asian (Japan, etc.) nations.

    Here is a surprising list of SOME countries with GDPs above $10k (the US's GDP is about 36k, so about 10k is quite high):

    Saudi Arabia, Chile, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates.

    First, why would it have to be a THIRD-WORLD (rather, undeveloped/developing) nation? Do you think that the United States is really that great at regulating traffic of goods in and out of this country? I honestly doubt it. How about other non-3rd-world nations: Canada? Their immigration isn't very tight. Germany, GB, France? Do you think they have knowledge of every item going in and out of their countries? No, it is extremely easy to get a computer transported from any country to any other.

    Moreover, if someone does have access to weapons-grade plutonium/uranium, the ability to engineer one or more nuclear weapons, and the means to deploy said weapons, do you really think that it is going to be that hard for him to get a hold of a computer?

    If the world cannot even keep tabs on the transport of nuclear materials across nations, do you think that it can or needs to track every G5 that travels from place to place.

    Anyway, a G5 with Microsoft Word isn't going to launch a nuke.

    :D
     
  16. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #16
    oh, and no offense, but who doesn't "want a nuke for bad things?" Are there good things you can do with a nuke?

    my bad for double posting.
     
  17. eclipse525 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    eclipse525

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2003
    Location:
    USA, New York
    #17
    well...not to get too political, mainly because I try to avoid the topic at all cost, BUT Nuclear Energy is and can be a great a positive source of energy. Thing is...there are also sooooooo many forms of untapped energy sources out there that just make sense in a "what works" world, that Nuclear can be avoid all together if we really wanted too. That's brings us to another point. If we all live in a "what works" world, we would have one standard that everyone would build upon. NO Window's, NO OSX, NO LINUX, Etc. Just a standard that kicks butt and works.....


    ~e
     
  18. idkew macrumors 68020

    idkew

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2001
    Location:
    where the concrete to dirt ratio is better
    #18
    Re: Third World MAC's?

    a MAC is a specific address (number) every internet connected/able device owns.

    a Mac is an abbreviation for a Macintosh.

    one is completely different than the other.
     
  19. rainman::|:| macrumors 603

    rainman::|:|

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2002
    Location:
    iowa
    #19
    Someone really needs to define what "third world" we're talking about here. Are we talking middle-east, where countries have structured governments and some money to play with, or war-ravaged countries that have semi-functioning government, or collapsed/undeveloped nations that have minimal structured government with little money?

    because this topic has only focused on the ones that have nuclear programs, which isn't that many...

    pnw
     
  20. idkew macrumors 68020

    idkew

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2001
    Location:
    where the concrete to dirt ratio is better
    #20
    the third world is basically developing nations.

    here is a definition care of dictionary.com

    underdeveloped and developing countries of Asia and Africa and Latin America collectively; neutral in the East-West alignment

    i am not quite sure you/we are talking of the real third world.
     
  21. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #21
    Oh I agree that nuclear power is an excellent source of energy. However, when a country is purchasing weapons-grade plutonium (90%), you can bet it's not using it as a substitute for power-plant-grade plutonium (2-3%). It wouldn't make economic sense.

    Moreover, I referred to "nukes," or nuclear weapons...While nuclear energy is a viable and possibly positive use for nuclear material, the construction and deployment of nuclear weapons is not.
     
  22. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #22
    third world = any nation where 30% of the population hasn't seen electricity or flush toilets

    IOW, a bad place to sell Macs, a potential market for the iLoo.
     
  23. Gus macrumors 65816

    Gus

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2002
    Location:
    Minnesota
    #23
    Then that would make Iowa a third world country. ;) :)

    Regards,
    Gus
     
  24. tristan macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2003
    Location:
    high-rise in beautiful bethesda
    #24
    third world -> developing countries

    Yeah, the politically correct term is "developing countries" rather than "third world".
     
  25. eclipse525 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    eclipse525

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2003
    Location:
    USA, New York
    #25
    How about this....

    'One World Country' with 'Regions' still in development.<smile>



    ~e
     

Share This Page