And someone will always defend no matter what they do.
Really? Most people here often offer criticisms, sometimes well thought out, and sometimes just whiny rants.
I accept the expertise of others. I know how hard it is to build, deploy, and support large systems over many years. Many of the people whining do not, I propose.
Many of the decisions Apple makes are well thought out, in my opinion.
And the brief history of electronic computers tells me that most computer companies go out of business in waves, but the few that remain for decades have learned how to survive the changing global landscape.
Apple has survived because it cultivated its market carefully over many years. That's a business success, and in this case (compared to, say, Exxon-Mobil) one to applaud.
Compare that to Commodore. As a former Amiga owner (and there are many others here) it was a sad, but in hindsight an obvious, thing when Commodore went down hill. Commodore went down hill because it was managed poorly.
The small computer market has collapsed down to a few big players - Lenovo, Dell, HP (aka Compaq), and Apple. And out of all of them, I maintain Apple makes the best products (over all.)
So if Apple has discovered a pricing strategy that works for Macs then good on them.
Assuming we're all capitalists (small c) here, then we must accept that Apple executives are beholden to the company's owners. And Wall Street seems to think that Apple is doing fine.
I think Apple is doing fine. A fixed price schedule of $200/upgrade-step is part of the pricing strategy that continues to make Macintosh computers a viable product in today's market.
And looking at the other small computers out there, I am glad that Macs are still around.