[This is one of those stories](http://www.inc.com/tech-blog/buyers-remorse-over-windows.html) that you read expecting it to happen like this: writer illogically chooses Windows, realizes Windows sucks, more pain, buys a Mac reluctantly, falls in love. Except that in this version the story stops short of the buying a new Mac part.
It’s short and so let’s take a look at the story by [Renee Oricchio](http://www.inc.com/tech-blog/buyers-remorse-over-windows.html):
>My original plan was to upgrade to a Macbook Air. In the end, I could not justify the expense or stomach the transition of moving from Windows to the Mac. I blinked and picked up a full-size Toshiba laptop with Windows 7 for $329.
Wow, $329 is a price that I too think nothing could go wrong. ((Nope, that’s a lie.)) I am guessing you should have stuck to your original plan, but you didn’t ask me… Instead:
>It will do what I need to it to do. It’s faster. The screen is bigger so it’s easier to navigate large spreadsheets, view streaming videos and put together PowerPoints.
Ah, it *is* faster — I see now. I have also often heard that MacBook Airs are incapable of streaming videos and assembling PowerPoints’.
>That being said, setting up my new laptop, transferring files and reloading my key applications killed most of my Sunday afternoon.
Imagine how much longer that *slower* MacBook Air would have taken — weeks?
>Before the sun set on the day of purchase, Windows 7 froze on me twice and I got the “blue screen of death” once.
That’s what we call “user experience”, but at least the machine was $1000 cheaper.
At this point Oricchio goes into some analogies about buying things to only have them break down on you instantly — all of which you think is leading to the inevitable Mac purchase, but:
>There are two infallible truths about PCs.
This is going to be good…
>When Apple creates a product; the end user’s experience comes first, but they charge a King’s ransom for it.
I agree with you right up and until the “King’s ransom” part. Truth be told Apple just charges a reasonable price to make a great computer that doesn’t — oh I don’t know — crash. I won’t waste more time on this, but suffice to say there are a lot of people that think this are have also been proven wrong time and time again.
>When Microsoft creates a product; it’s all about what new code (features) can we slap on top of the old clunky, Byzantine code and call it an upgrade?
Wait are you asking me, or telling me? Either way: I disagree.
>And oh yeah, how cheap can we pressure the PC makers to keep their prices down? It is their only edge over the competition.
And *you* fell right into the trap even though you know better.
Now there is only one sentence left in the article, one, typically this is the one that says something like: “So I bought a Mac and it just works.” We have all read these stories, but not this time — not for Oricchio, nope:
>Mom was right; you do get what you pay for.
What? There’s quite a few things I don’t get here not the least of which is what I am supposed to glean from this “conclusion”.
What’s the resolution to the brand new crappy, but “fast”, computer that you just purchased?
If you “get what you pay for” does that not mean that in actuality you were incorrect in stating the “King’s ransom” bit about Apple laptops?
And if not, then do you not value you all the time you will waste “maintaining” your fancy, “fast”, new, $329, competitive edge, laptop?
You do know that you can return stuff right, specifically for reasons like “it crashed the first day”?
Are you aware that anytime I see your name as the author I will now skip past the article?
Well now you know and knowing is half the battle.