Ballmer Scorns Apple As a $500 Logo

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Ballmer Scorns Apple As a $500 Logo

Posted by timothy on Saturday March 21, 2009 @06:25AM from the upholding-shareholder-value dept.

theodp writes "Speaking at a conference in NYC, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer did his best to refan the flames of the Mac vs. PC rivalry: 'Now I think the tide has really turned back the other direction [against Apple],' Ballmer said. 'The economy is helpful. Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment — same piece of hardware — paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be.'"

12 of 1,147 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

It seems ironic... by pushing-robot · 2009-03-21 06:27 · Score: 5, Insightful

Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment — same piece of hardware — paying $500 more to get a logo on it?
...that the head of Microsoft would apparently put no value on software.

--
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
1. Re:It seems ironic... by jimfrost · 2009-03-21 07:45 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  There is truth to this, but generally speaking I've found Apple's product quality -- likelihood of failing, durability of construction -- to be superior to Dell. Sometimes very, very superior. It's no accident that I buy Apple laptops instead of Dells these days, that's experience both ways. Even if the Apple is more expensive based on the spec sheet it certainly is not in terms of expected life and ongoing maintenance costs. Dell laptops were typically failing inside of two years; Apples pull five before I retire them (with two typical service issues usually in the first year), and seven to failure. When put in that perspective Apple is very inexpensive. I note that I have had similar experiences with Thinkpads, which are priced pretty much the same as Apple's stuff. Makes you think.
  Even if the hardware is equal the software surely is not. The $130 price point quoted above is for an upgrade -- something Microsoft charges anywhere from $90 to $160 for on the desktop, depending on version. But that doesn't tell the whole story as Macs include a lot more software in-the-box, enough to make it useful without buying anything else. Once I get done buying antivirus ($50) and back-up ($80) software for my Windows PC I'm already eating well into the so-called Apple Tax ... and that's before we talk about maintenance costs. Where Microsoft puts in applications that are clearly checkbox quality, Apple's bundled applications are often superb -- similar to things I have to pay hundreds of dollars for on Windows. All this adds up to significant value in the software package.
  But none of this is or was a primary motivator for me. No, it was maintenance costs that drove me to try Apple again in 2001. Windows installations were requiring significant maintenance every 3 months, like clockwork, and total failures requiring from-scratch rebuilds were near universal within 18 months. I had hoped that XP would improve things, and it did from the standpoint of corrupted disks, but malware costs with XP have been out of sight.
  OS X has been a dream come true in terms of maintenance -- there are glitches, but so far none have taken more than 90 minutes to solve, most take only a couple of minutes, and the sum total of such glitches over eight years I can count on my fingers (though it does take both hands). I have never had to rebuild a Mac from scratch! I am still amazed at that fact. Time savings in a single year completely swamp any extra money I pay to Apple for hardware.
  Then there are the little things. Let's say that fifth year comes around and I buy a new laptop to replace one that's really old-in-the-tooth. Bringing the new one on-line requires connecting it to the old one during set-up and waiting for data to transfer between them. When you get done the new one is a newer, shinier version of the old one -- all applications and documents are transferred neat-as-you-please. The first time I did this my jaw dropped; the process typically takes many hours with Windows because it's effectively impossible to transfer application installations due to the registry.
  It's things like that which will keep me buying Macs. Real thought and effort goes into making them work well long-term. Much longer hardware life coupled with much lower maintenance costs equals huge savings in my book.
  YMMV, and probably does. I find Windows indispensable in some areas and still have plenty of Windows boxes around. Still, the Macs are workhorses that do their jobs and let me spend my time doing what I bought the computer for rather than just trying to keep it running. I'll take more of that, thanks.
  Maybe Win7 will be an improvement. Vista sure wasn't, what a disappointment.
  
  --
  jim frost
  jimf@frostbytes.com
2. Re:It seems ironic... by flyingsquid · 2009-03-21 09:02 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I find it very telling that Steve Ballmer won't let his kids use an iPod, and Bill Gates won't let Melinda use an iPhone. Instead of saying, "hm, maybe I should build a product my own family members would want to use" they're trying to push their own family members into using Microsoft products. They're using their position to force a market to accept a Microsoft product that it doesn't really want... only in this case it's their position as a husband and father, and the "market" is their own family.
  I'm not saying that denying your family iPods and iPhones constitutes some kind of spousal abuse or child abuse. But I am saying that this attitude is counterproductive as a corporate leader. Your family and your market is telling you something about the kind of products they enjoy using and will pay money for. Instead of listening, and producing products that emulate the best qualities of Apple's products, you're trying to tell your family and your customers that no, you don't really want the things you think you want. You actually want what we're giving you.
3. Re:It seems ironic... by MemoryDragon · 2009-03-22 00:14 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Tell me. What does OSX have that Linux or Windows on a PC doesn't?
  Actually a backup capability which really works...
  You are not even forced to upgrade to a higher version of the same operating system for a half working restore...
  Unix tools out of the box,
  No file locking, which makes it important if you do some serious development!
  No registry which is the root of many evils in windows.
  A system administration frontend which does not try to make you insane by distributing its functionality over 15.000 ui dialogs.
  User Access Control which actually works as expected!
  A filesystem which does not fragment as hell in serious development tasks.
  A real working distributed component framework all the infrastructure is built upon which actually is usable!
  It does not thrash my harddisk for minutes after bootup with tasks hidden by the process explorer (happend to me in vista)!
  It does not lock my ui half a minute after showing it because it needs to load other things, und just tries to give the impression of being usable while it clearly isnÂt.
  It comes with SSH and VNC and Xwindows out of the box.
  The file sharing capabilities and printer sharing capabilities are superior thanks to Rendevouz!
  Dashboard actually is usable instead if trying to pointlessly shove the widgets into the working area of many people!
  It has a browser which follows web standards which are newer than 2003!
  It has users who do not insist of using a 10 year old browser despite being numerously the victims of worms and virii induced by the shortcoming of this browser!
and with that same philosophy by FudRucker · 2009-03-21 06:32 · Score: 5, Insightful

why pay X amount of dollars for microsoft-windows when you can get Linux for FREE!

--
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
Buy Apple Stock Now! by db32 · 2009-03-21 06:32 · Score: 5, Insightful

I seem to remember some other Ballmer moments of insight on Apple. There was that interview where he was laughing about how the iPhone was junk and Windows Mobile is the bestest evar. He also had some pretty amusing comparisons and whatnot between the wildly successful iPods and the Zune. I mean really now...aside from not selling for crap...the whole mass suicide on New Years was amazing...Apple clearly is failing because they haven't managed to have all of their products of a given model crash at the same time...

Seriously...this guy has a long track record of saying absolutely moronic shit, why does anyone take anything he says seriously? He will fucking kill Google right?

--
The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
Ballmer -1 Troll by javacowboy · 2009-03-21 06:36 · Score: 5, Insightful

Ballmer is just trolling. He knows that Apple offers real value because OS X is a better operating system than Windows, which means that Apple has essentially taken away the high-end PC business away from Microsoft.
He should know that trolling isn't going to bring those high-end customers back to Windows. Maybe he does, who knows?
Microsoft has repeatedly chosen to patch Windows instead of rebuilding it from the ground up as a modern operating system, the way Apple did with OS X. They should have known 8 years ago that this was the wrong strategy.

--
This space left intentionally blank.
Ballmer, open an Apple machine by edivad · 2009-03-21 06:43 · Score: 5, Insightful

Take a MacPro, open it, and compare it with stuff like Dell or Sony or HP. Is it a little more expensive? Yes. It is worth it? Hell, yeah.
There is no match as far as how clean and robust is the build, compared to other top-brand PCs. Absolute absence of flying around cables, top of the line electronic components, maximum care down to the very little details.
But this is a known thing to everyone that actually opened an Apple and other brand-name PCs.
Ballmer, ... God's gift to every person in the world that does not really love Microsoft. Or for people, like myself, that could happily live even w/out them.
He has been able to drag Microsoft, once perceived as technology source with fairly large following, down to the nobody-cared status, as far as all the new technologies being introduced.
One failure after another, with Microsoft not being able to push new technologies even in their own niche (see Vista fiasco for one).
Hardly surprising... by tgibbs · 2009-03-21 06:50 · Score: 5, Insightful

The price differential exists precisely because the head of Microsoft doesn't understand what it is about Apple software that causes many people to consider an Apple computer to be worth a few hundred bucks more than a similar-spec Windows machine.
Ballmer needs Apple by Alain+Williams · 2009-03-21 07:01 · Score: 5, Insightful

Ballmer wants the world to focus on the idea that the desktop fight is only between M$ and Apple. If he can do that then, perhaps (please -- hopefully), that people will not start using a Linux desktop.
The Linux desktop is Ballmer's real nightmare... and it is getting closer.
Re:Is there a gas leak in here? by Moofie · 2009-03-21 09:39 · Score: 5, Insightful

I prefer Apple, and I don't have to justify the increased expense to you.
It is worth the extra coin to me, and you can do whatever makes you happy.
What's the problem?

--
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
You're doing it wrong by Rix · 2009-03-21 10:25 · Score: 5, Insightful

I can find a laptop that will suit my needs for $700 or so. That its specs are different than the lowest priced Mac laptop is totally irrelevant, because it meets my requirements.

You don't calculate the Mac tax by comparing similar PC and Mac systems, you calculate it by comparing the PC you would buy with the Mac you'd have to buy.