Ballmer Scorns Apple As a $500 Logo

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.'"

Comments

It seems ironic...

[pushing-robot]

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.

Re:It seems ironic...

[jmorris42]

> ...that the head of Microsoft would apparently put no value on software.

Except we know the value of the software, Apple sells it seperately for $130, or about what an OEM edition of Vista Business adds to a typical Dell.

No, the price difference is so the Faithful can run around flaunting their glowing logo and think they are superior people. Bah.

Re:It seems ironic...

[Anonymous Coward]

You seem to be neglecting the difference between cost and value. Leopard may cost $129, the same as an OEM edition of Vista but I wouldn't take Vista for free (in fact you'd have to pay me a pretty penny to make me take it and use it) but I happily paid a $500 'logo tax' for my copy of Leopard.

Also, if you do the math (and assume it is a $500 logo tax) and use your Mac every day--for three or more years--that's less than $0.50 a day for a substantially better user experience.

Re:It seems ironic...

[djmurdoch]

The $130 doesn't get you an OS that will run on commodity hardware. First you have to pay the monopoly fee, i.e. the first copy costs $630, the upgrades are $130.

Re:It seems ironic...

[Penguin Follower]

hmmm. See, when I shopped for my Mac Pro back in 2007 and compared it to an equivalently equipped Dell Precision workstation, the Dell was actually $100 more. Most people are not comparing like hardware when they are looking at a Mac. I can't say for the iMacs if it holds true because I've never wanted an all in one computer, and so I've never bothered to do a comparison....

Re:It seems ironic...

[Elektroschock]

Apple is the most proprietary system.

So what is the difference?

Microsoft is ideological. Apple has its open source kernel, it has DRM, it sues bloggers, it is more stylish, it makes you appear homosexual, all of everything.

So why do people dislike Microsoft? Is it because the company plays straight evil. Because if lobbies foreign governments and obstructs interoperability and open source policies.

Re:It seems ironic...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm glad it makes one appear homosexual, because I am homosexual.

I also use a Mac.

Re:It seems ironic...

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

Yeah, there are times where Apples will actually be cheaper, but they update their product line less frequently than Dell. So sometimes there is a huge difference in price ( with apple's more expensive), and some times it goes the other ea slightly. I think when I bought my mac book it was $150 more than the equivalent Dell. But I could also have gone with a less powerful machine and saved more with Dell. That, I think is what most people think of. Apple's product line up has less offerings than dell, so Dell has some price points that Apple doesn't compete at.

Re:It seems ironic...

[arcsimm]

Funny, because when I ordered my Thinkpad T61p last year, I specced out an equivalent MacBook Pro and it cost about $600 more than the Black Slab O' Doom. Sure, it isn't made out of shiny brushed aluminum and it doesn't have a battery that will last for a 1000 charges (and then be un-serviceable without voiding the warranty on the whole damn thing) but I doubt anobody would impugn the quality of the Thinkpads, Lenovo or IBM.

Generally speaking, Dell isn't a good value, for sure, but if you shop around a bit you can get better system for a fair chunk of change less than a Mac.

Re:It seems ironic...

[unlametheweak]

No it's not just about software. When you buy an Apple computer, your not spending the extra $500.00 on hardware and software; you're spending the extra $500.00 on the Reality Distortion Field

Re:It seems ironic...

[jcr]

Except we know the value of the software, Apple sells it seperately for $130, or about what an OEM edition of Vista Business adds to a typical Dell.

We can therefore conclude that installing Windows on a PC degrades its value by $370. Good to know.

-jcr

Re:It seems ironic...

[FusionFox]

If being able to run games make it a

substantially better user experience?

then does my games console have a perfect user experience? It seems to do a better job of it than the PC I had before I bought my MacBook a few years ago too.

Re:It seems ironic...

[dgatwood]

CPU notwithstanding, that machine isn't remotely comparable feature-wise to any Mac built in the past five years or so, much less comparable to the MacBook Pro. It only has FireWire 400, its video is VGA-only, and it has no built-in camera. The MacBook Pro has FireWire 800 and dual-link DVI, has a MUCH better GPU, has a built-in camera, etc. The T61p just isn't in the same league.

The advanced docking station would cost you about another $300-$350 to give you DVI, and AFAIK you would still have a much slower GPU (another couple hundred of that cost) and no FireWire 800 or built-in camera (both of which would probably be $30-50 apiece to add). And there went basically every penny of your savings. That $600 can easily be explained away by differences in the hardware even if you ignore things like battery life, case design, etc.

If you don't care about those extra features, that's fine, but don't delude yourself into believing that the money you saved was because the product was made by Apple. You saved money because of the features you chose not to buy....

Re:It seems ironic...

[jimfrost]

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.

Re:It seems ironic...

[geek]

People don't compare like hardware because Apple doesn't offer anything within their price range. They STILL after over 12 years DO NOT HAVE A HEADLESS MID RANGE MAC.

You have no idea how many sales Apple loses for this very reason. So you either toss away a perfectly good monitor and get an iMac or you pay a ton of money for a PowerMac.

Apple is really screwing themselves. Virtually every single person I know who I've tried to convert to a Mac has refused because they don't want the expensive crap Apple is selling.

Re:It seems ironic...

[falconwolf]

Apple's product line up has less offerings than dell, so Dell has some price points that Apple doesn't compete at.

Though they may not realize it I think that's the biggest problem people have with Mac prices. Apple does not offer as wide a range of computer lines as Dell and other OEMs do. You can't get a tower Mac, one that's expandable/upgradeable for under $2000, I just checked the Apple store online and the cheapest Mac Pro is $2499. At the low end there's the Mac Mini, then there's the all-in-one iMac desktops. If you compare the prices of the Mac Pro with similar offerings from Windows OEMs they aren't as expensive as many make out to be though.

Falcon

Re:It seems ironic...

[kimvette]

The $130 doesn't get you an OS that will run on commodity hardware.

Let me introduce you to the hacintosh. Macs have been nothing more than commodity PCs in a proprietary case since they switched to the x86/x64 platform.

In the case of notebooks, it is also true the Macbook chassis is vastly superior to practically any "PC" notebook vendor. However I am going Dell Precision rather than Macbook Pro for my next notebook for two reasons: 1. Dell offers WUXGA resolution and 2) Dell offers a three-button "mouse" (trackpointer and touchpad), and one minor reason (a "powerslice" external battery which will allow the PC to run a full 10-12 hours). The price I negotiated Dell down to is about the same as a Macbook Pro 15 but I'll have a better optical drive, a magnesium alloy case (as opposed to aluminum), more RAM, higher resolution (with RGB-LED backlight!), faster CPU, faster video chipset, backlit keyboard, and no retarded one-button mouse (touchpad/trackpointer). Oh, and accidental damage coverage and three-year warranty with on-site service (although no "tech" will touch my notebook - I will insist on receiving the part only in the event that I need service).

I'd love to have gone with a Macbook even though it's commodity hardware - the Macbook is lighter and they're pretty, but on the other hand, I'm not retarded. I want two or three mouse buttons. Also, I'm not blind. I want high resolution because I design graphics, and now I am getting into embroidery and clothing design for a hobby. I need something better than 1440x900. Heck, my old (circa-1991) Latitude did 1680x1050, and my older Thinkpad had a three-button mouse. Jobs, please enter the new millennium. Most Mac users are at least somewhat computer-literate, certainly more capable than most Windows users, and can deal with a multi-button mouse/touchpad/trackpointer.

Oh, and Ballmer? My real work will be done in Linux. Windows will be only for games and embroidery design (I need to convert from .svg and .ai to .sew), and if I can get the embroidery software to talk to the machine while running under crossover office, so much the better - I may not need Windows at all. :D

Re:It seems ironic...

[Slumdog]

I'm sure he's looking at it from the view of, "Every computer in the world should be running Windows!"

I'd say he may be subconsciously thinking of Linux...Same hardware + linux = cheaper than with OS/X or Windows

Re:It seems ironic...

[RulerOf]

No, the price difference is so the Faithful can run around flaunting their glowing logo...

I have to admit that everyone I've met does like the glowing logo a lot. Personally, I can't see it when I use the machine, so I don't care too much.

I do however find it extremely hilarious when I see an Apple laptop in a TV show that the actors are (supposedly) using while the logo is unlit. That one always gives me a little chuckle.

Re:It seems ironic...

[mattsgotredhair]

protools. fuck you.

Re:It seems ironic...

[petermgreen]

What i've found with apple is if you start with a mac and try to find a PC that's as close as possible to it you will indeed get similar prices.

On the other hand if you start with a list of requirements and find both a mac and a PC to fit that list the mac will often end up far more expensive because you have to buy far more than you need in some areas to get what you require in others.

Do you really require server class processors and support for massive ammounts of memory or did you choose the mac pro simply because it is the cheapest mac with exapansion room.

Re:It seems ironic...

[M4N14C]

and no retarded one-button mouse (touchpad/trackpointer)

The trackpad is a multitouch device. If you place two fingers down and click its a right click. If you place two fingers down and drag its a scroll. Take a look at your notebooks buttons after two years. There's probably a hole worn in to the left button while the others look brand spankin new. I hated the one button crap until I figured that out. Now I have a macbook. I guess I'm tarded now.

Re:It seems ironic...

[Lars T.]

No, the price difference is so the Faithful can run around flaunting their glowing logo and think they are superior people. Bah.

No, we do it so people like you can feel superior flaunting your non-glowing logo. You need every little bit of joy in your life you can get, and we are quite generous.

Re:It seems ironic...

[flyingsquid]

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.

Re:It seems ironic...

[jmorris42]

> On the other hand if you start with a list of requirements and find both a mac and a PC
  to fit that list the mac will often end up far more expensive..

Exactly. Raise your hand if you NEED a Xeon with ECC memory on your desktop..... and you aren't a a very narrow band of major scientist, engineer, etc. who need lots of throbbing power and yet don't have access to a compute cluster. Almost by definition Apple has restricted their desktops to people spending OPM (and where the other people are idiots) or people with more money than brains.

The Mini is just a sad joke and the i* stuff is all in one crap about as expandable, customizable, etc as a toaster where you upgrade by forklifting in a whole new stack of machines. And people wonder why Apple's corporate penetration is non-existent. Corporations will throw a couple to the art dept if they bitch and whine enough, but that's it.

It's almost like Apple WANTS to keep the Mac a small exclusive club. Which is the truth. Apple is selling a premium brand experience and if it ever threatened to become mainstream the value would disappear.

Re:It seems ironic...

[PopeRatzo]

I agree. It's offensive of Ballmer to say that that Apple sells a $500 logo.

It's worth at least $750-800.

My loaded MacBook Pro was $4200. That's at least 3 grand in status that I can lord over the sad sacks in my Caribou Coffee Shop.

And worth every penny in my improved self-image and ability to strike up conversations with cute girls with eyebrow piercings. I didn't get that kind of play with my Lenovo, I'll tell you that.

It doesn't go anywhere past "Aren't Apples great? They have an almost "holistic" approach to computer design, don't you think?" but still...

Re:It seems ironic...

[FusionFox]

There's a difference between saying "I wouldn't get a Mac because their library of games is practically non-existent" and saying "Macs are bad computers because their library of games is practically non-existent".

I'd understand the first and recommend that people NOT get a Mac if they enjoy playing PC games.

Re:It seems ironic...

[purfledspruce]

Macs are way cheaper if you amortize the price of their useful life. My PC desktops generally last about 2.5 years, sometimes as much as 3. My Macs generally last about 4.5-6 years.

That $500 is a bargain, especially when you consider the time it takes to transfer all the programs over to a new system...

Re:It seems ironic...

[Jeremi]

About the one-button mouse: Apple's "Mighty Mouse," introduced in 2005, has no visible button, but can be configured in software to have 1, 2 or 3 buttons.

Alas, it never really worked right in 2-button mode. Specifically, if you have your index finger resting on the left side of the mouse, and press the right side of the mouse, it registers as a left-click rather than a right click. So you have to remember to lift your finger(s) off the left side of the mouse before right clicking every time. It drove me batty.

Re:It seems ironic...

[kimvette]

left-click: "normal" click
right-click: context menu
middle button: paste (in non-OSX *nix)
left+right: emulated middle click

yes, I need a three-button mouse/touchpad/trackpointer, or at minimum, a true two-button mouse.

Re:It seems ironic...

[ToasterMonkey]

Macs have been nothing more than commodity PCs in a proprietary case since they switched to the x86/x64 platform.

Yup, a commodity PC with bluetooth std, low power components, display brightness controlled by OS, working power management, extremely quiet, ah I give up, most of you lack the ability to differentiate any two computers from any manufacturer, and will never try.

Look, coffee makers and toasters are commodities too, but there's a helluva difference between $10 and $200 ones.
Same goes for about any product, as the price goes up, you generally are looking at totally different features. A $200 toaster ought to bake a freaking casserole for me, perfectly. You can't just write off expensive variants of cheaper products because they all make coffee, they all make toast, they all have four wheels, all show my TV signal, they all have the same system architecture, etc. There's so much more to it, and the most demanded features often get pushed down into cheaper products (the real commodities). Don't underestimate that effect, at some point a dual slot toaster might have been ritzy, who knows :)

Re:It seems ironic...

[Jurily]

that the head of Microsoft would apparently put no value on software.

Tell me. What does OSX have that Linux or Windows on a PC doesn't?

Software can be more easily replaced than the whole box.

Re:It seems ironic...

[gnasher719]

Err, They err, they do have UPGRADE written on the boxes.

Actually, they don't. And Apple's license doesn't mention "upgrade" anywhere. What it says is that you are allowed to install _one_ copy of MacOS X on _one_ Apple-labeled computer. Now in practice this means that the installation will be an upgrade, because you will have a very hard time finding a computer that is Apple-labeled, is capable of running MacOS X, and wasn't originally sold with a version of MacOS X installed.

On the other hand, this doesn't make much difference. Either customers have to follow the terms of the license, or they don't. In either case, whether the restriction is "upgrade only" or "Apple-labeled computer only", it is equally valid or equally invalid.

Re:It seems ironic...

[countvlad]

The AC was a douchebag, but I have to call shenanigans as well...maybe you meant "circa-2001"? You did NOT have a laptop that did 1400x1050 in 1991. The first Mac PowerBooks's came out in '91, and they had tiny monochrome screens, while the IBM thinkpads had some of the early 10" TFT LCDs. Most computers still used VGA, and were doing what...320x240 or 640x480 at the time?

Re:It seems ironic...

[Hognoxious]

I find it rather incredible that supposedly computer-literate people in the year 2009 still think Macs only have one-buttoned mice. Physically, yes. Functionally, no.

I'm thinking of inventing a one pedal car. Physically, not functionally; I mean that would just be silly.

To disengage the clutch, you press the pedal three times in quick succession. The engage the clutch, four times in quick succession. To increase the engine speed, two groups of three taps, and to decrease it, three groups of two taps.

The brake? That's important - you wouldn't want to run into anybody's arse, at least figuratively, and so it's configurable. Either you you type out "stop" in morse code or tap long-short-long-long-long-short while selecting any tune that has "Stop" in the title on the onboard mp3 player, provided you downloaded it legally from iTunes. Death to pirates, mwahahahaaha.

One other thing you might like to consider: The last time France lost a war was before macs had two button mice. That last time Germany started one was before macs had two button mice. And yet, still people mention those things. Go figure.

Re:It seems ironic...

[PasteEater]

Protools is the reason why every popular band's songs sound like overproduced shit. Protools has led to copypasted, phoney-sounding crappola which is not worthy of being called "music". Protools takes the soul out of recording.

What a stupid fucking thing to say. Pro Tools has nothing to do with why popular band's songs sound like overproduced shit. For that, you can turn to the producers, who in turn get their opinions from the marketplace. So far, people keep buying up the garbage that the major labels have been pushing, so guess what? It's going to stay that way for the foreseeable future.

If Pro Tools alone were the culprit, then ALL of the music being produced (Indie bands, Barbershop, whatever) would sound like overproduced shit. It doesn't. And since most of this music is recorded straight into Pro Tools these days, I guess we can eliminate Pro Tools alone as the sole reason popular music is shitty.

Instead, I think what you are getting at is that non-linear editing is making music homogenous, and taking the life (soul?) out of it. This could be a valid argument. It's too bad you didn't make it.

And yes, Pro Tools does run on Windows, including Vista. It is also pretty unreliable, at least when you are dealing with the TDM systems. The Macs run much more smoothly, and are much easier to troubleshoot when things (invariably) go wrong. Windows does have the advantage of being able to chase Unity though...

I'm not pulling this out of my ass; I have almost a decade of experience in the industry, and as I type this, I am mixing a commercial (in Pro Tools, on a 5 year-old Mac) for delivery on Tuesday.

I will agree with you on one thing though: Pro Tools is overpriced. If you want real sticker shock, try looking into Digidesign's hardware crossgrades. *Shudder*

Re:It seems ironic...

[fugue]

I've always been confused by the fact that very few companies seem to do this: "Here's a bonus tacked on to the top of your salary. It is earmarked for you to spend on our competitors' products. Tell us what's good about them." What am I missing?

Re:It seems ironic...

[maxume]

Too bad you blew all that cash, you could have tried a more direct approach.

Re:It seems ironic...

[bane2571]

The bit where the media finds out and rather than saying "Great, Ballmer is keeping an eye on the competition" they say "ZOMG! Ballmer prefers Apple over Microsoft!"

Re:It seems ironic...

[clifyt]

I've driven several 'manual' cars over the last few years that dispensed with the idea of the clutch all the while providing pretty much the same functionality.

That is one less pedal function from a well designed vehicle...when you look at OSs and realize they can be optimized to get rid of unnecessary interactions, you realize you can simplify these too.

Then again, when my clutch went out on my '71 triumph, I learned to match gears too...no need for that there either!

Re:It seems ironic...

[arcsimm]

I'm not deluding myself at all.

FireWire, video out, and camera conceded. I don't have any use for them, so they didn't matter that much to me. There is a slimline camera attachment available for about $80. Does anybody even use FireWire anymore? As for the GPU, though, you're very wrong. the Quadro FX 570M is an 8600M with fancy drivers -- exactly what the MacBook Pro had at the time, down to the amount and speed of the video RAM. That card was in fact one of the things I was set on getting with my laptop. The case features a lightweight magnesium alloy frame and battery life is competitive with the MacBooks.

The chips and ports you've mentioned cost, I'd guess, about $25 to Lenovo tops. If I *really* needed DVI, I might have looked elsewhere, but at the end of the day there's not nearly enough difference in specs and quality to justify the cost difference between my laptop and a 15" MBP.

Re:It seems ironic...

[ta bu shi da yu]

Well, I found it amusing to repeat Ballmer's quote, but change it slightly.

Original quote:

"Apple gained about one point, but now I think the tide has really turned back the other direction. 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."

Changed slightly:

"Microsoft gained about one point, but now I think the tide has really turned back the other direction. The economy is helpful. Paying an extra $500 for an operating system in this environment -- same piece of software -- 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."

CEOs of technology companies should be careful not to throw stones in glasshouses.

Re:It seems ironic...

[jc42]

I have wondered who besides Apple sells a 17" laptop with a screen that's 1900x1200 pixels or better. I haven't seen one. Of course, I could easily have missed it, because with most laptops, it's impressively difficult to discover the pixel count. They tell you the diagonal size, with no other numeric information. Even if you can dig out a "specs" page, often the pixel count isn't anywhwere to be seen.

Maybe they think that we're all too stupid to understand the concept of resolution.

Re:It seems ironic...

[jtn]

Really? I own a wireless Mighty Mouse, and the 2-button feature works fine without having to do what you suggest is necessary. I think it works exactly as advertised.

Re:It seems ironic...

[Kjella]

It's almost like Apple WANTS to keep the Mac a small exclusive club. Which is the truth. Apple is selling a premium brand experience and if it ever threatened to become mainstream the value would disappear.

You mean "premium brand" like the iPod, where surely all value must have left it by now? The truth is much simpler, Apple knows what they've got and they got comfortable margins on what they're selling today. They could quite easily release products more targeted at the mainstream, bringing their market share up and margins down, but they're afraid. They've been trying to battle it out with Windows once before and almost died from it. If they release cheaper macs like say a netbook or a regular desktop box people will choose that over more expensive macs so there's no risk-free attempts. I'm fairly certain buyers of all prices classes would be interested in a machine that "Just works". To put it a little bluntly, I think many people would be better off with a 500$ machine they paid 800$ for and knew how to use than a 800$ machine they don't. But once you start going down that path it might be hard to pull out should it go badly, and you know Microsoft will not make it easy on you.

Re:It seems ironic...

[alienw]

Who the hell actually expands and upgrades their PCs these days, though? This isn't 1997, you can't just buy a computer and just replace the motherboard and CPU every 2 years. Unless you play a lot of video games (in which case Macs are not really an option), I do not see why you would need to upgrade a machine if it had decent specs when you bought it. It's a pain to even add RAM these days, since by the time you get around to it, the type required will already be obsolete and expensive. And really, just about everything you might need to add is available as a USB device.

Re:It seems ironic...

[MemoryDragon]

Actually the mini has found its nieche, it is used by htpc enthusiasts they love this machine due to the fact that it is very low on power consumption (the current model is 13 watts on idle, and 28 watt on full load, and neglegtable on standby)
It is also loved by home server enthusiasts and collocation people due to the same reasons!
The main issue is that there are not too many machines with the same low power/price ratio in the pc arena, I only can remember one from ACER but I am not sure if that one is not even more expensive!
It might be a joke for the average geek but it definitely has found its market and given the monthly sales numbers form amazon it is one of the most successful products in apples computer line up!

The funny thing is that the current mini is not that much of a joke anymore actually it has quite nice hardware, but you get notebook performance, which is enough for many people for the tasks the mini is intended for!

Re:It seems ironic...

[MemoryDragon]

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!

Re:It seems ironic...

[7 digits]

> "Here's a bonus tacked on to the top of your salary. It is earmarked for you to spend on our competitors' products. What am I missing?

The PR disaster, of course.

Re:It seems ironic...

[Just Some Guy]

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.

I do too: it means Bill has more porn than he can watch in a lifetime. That's only explanation I have for being able to flat-out tell the wife that she can't have something you can trivially afford just because you don't like it, rich guy or not.

Not that he's far off the mark, but...

[cizoozic]

Jealousy is a stinky cologne, Stevie. ;)

Additional Ballmer comments...

[Brett Buck]

"And, they keep changing the OS and user interface faster than we can copy it! Bastards"

          Brett

Misdirection

[schmidt349]

I pay the extra $500 not so much to get the Apple logo on my computer as to keep the Microsoft logo (and hence the Blue Screen of Death) off of it.

Re:Misdirection

[MrCrassic]

I don't agree with a lot of Apple's vice-grip control over their software and hardware, but I'd gladly pay $500 in order to install OS X legitimately and still be able to use Windows when I need to.

Actually, I'd probably be able to SAVE in doing so, since refurbished Macbooks and Mac Pros can run cheaper than new Dells and carry the same quality and warranty policies as their off-the-shelf products. All I know is that my next notebook is absolutely going to be a Macbook or a Macbook Pro. I'm done with Windows-only machines.

Re:Misdirection

[fastest fascist]

Rumour has it there's a non-Microsoft OS available for PCs, as well. In fact, I heard something about them having some kind of "year of the desktop" promotion and giving it out for free. I can't remember what it's called, maybe someone here can help...

Re:Misdirection

[torkus]

Apple is any better? It's not like MS sues people for running windows on non-standard hardware. It's not like MS refuses to 'license' applications for windows mobile. It's not like MS requires you to become a paid developer to write applications for their mobile OS either.

I'm no MS fanboy, but i'm no huge apple fan either. Both do their share of questionable things but I'd have to say that MS is actually the more open of the two.

And really, one look at the prices and specs of the new mini's should tell you that apple's grossly overpriced. I can buy a better specced *laptop* for less than the cost of a mini.

Re:Misdirection

[The Bungi]

the Blue Screen of Death

1996 called, he wants his meme back.

Re:Misdirection

[torkus]

My reply was to a comment about business practices. Just because someone has the "right" to do something doesn't make it a fair or acceptable business practice.

Furthermore, the hole we've dug with "licensing" software might make it possible for them to require you use their hardware but that's actually up for debate in the courts right now.

My original point stands - MS will not sue you for installing their OS on whatever hardware you want. They may have their faults but MS does far, FAR less to limit what you can do with their software/hardware then apple.

Re:Misdirection

[Cheech Wizard]

Just because someone has the "right" to do something doesn't make it a fair or acceptable business practice.

Problem is, each of us have a different opinion as to what is "...a fair or acceptable business practice..." BTW - No, MS won't sue anyone for installing Windows on any hardware it will run on. Microsoft is a software company and always has been. If MS tried to define what hardware Windows would run on they'd be out of business.

Re:Misdirection

[leomekenkamp]

You mean this one?

Re:Misdirection

[Creepy Crawler]

STOP!

Kernel Time!

Re:Misdirection

[Draek]

It's called FreeDOS, but it's a product made by some commie bastards copying the work of honest American workers, the popular and much loved MS-DOS. It's also "Open Source" which is commie talk for "hacking tools", so don't allow your child to use it or he'll become a dirty, smelly commie hacker.

Just stay with the products of honest American companies like Windows Vista, you support our economy, you spit on the face of those commie bastards, and you get a solid, reliable product as only good ol' American craftmanship can produce.

I've also heard some rumors of a "Lenix" OS or something, made by some finnish commie but trust me, son, you don't wanna piss off the boys at the NSA by using that. I've even heard it includes some sort of "manifesto" with it, fucking commies, always trying to brainwash you with their commie crap.

Re:Misdirection

[jwdav]

If all you compare is processor speed and RAM&HD size only, perhaps ... however the Dell is either missing or has lesser quality Processor: Celeron vs Core2 Graphics: nVidia 9400M vs intel X3100 RAM: DDR3/1066 vs DDR2/667 FireWire 800 vs MIA DVI/DisplayPort vs VGA Wireless N vs MIA Bluetooth vs MIA GB Ethernet vs Fast Ethernet Form Factor Power Consumption iLife Software

Re:Misdirection

[Nick Ives]

So you'd disagree with MSs OEM licensing practices then? You think you should have the right to install the cheaper OEM copy that you bought on a different computer when you upgrade?

MS and Apple are both proprietary vendors. They both have the right to dictate terms. FOSS developers also have that right, that's what gives the GPL power.

If you don't like proprietary vendors then don't support them with either cash or mindshare i.e. by using pirated copies.

Re:Misdirection

[jellomizer]

I don't see where you can honestly say you pay an extra $500 for the logo. Every time I check prices of Apples vs. Other brands out there and match them spec for spec EVEN THE SPECS THAT I PERSONALLY DONT NEED I find the cost difference is about +/- $100 - $150. I may be paying $500 for hardware features that I don't need but I am not Paying $500 for the Apple Logo. Spec for Spec Apples prices are comparable to Dells, Lenovos, etc...

End of the world

[oldhack]

I'm agreeing with Balmer... so hell has frozen over.

I've better go dump all my money while I can. Maybe I'll get a mac.

Many differences but...

[kandela]

There are many differences between Microsoft and Apple but Balmer does have a point. Apple really make you pay for their branding.

How much is it really worth to have a white laptop for instance?

Note: Maybe this is flamebait, but if so the article/Balmer is/are trolling.

Re:Many differences but...

[bennomatic]

How much is it really worth to have a white laptop for instance?

It's an especially interesting question when there are people who will then pay an additional $200 to get a black MacBook.

Re:Many differences but...

[nEoN nOoDlE]

How much is it really worth to have a white laptop for instance?

According to Apple, about 50 bucks less than having a matte black one.

Re:Many differences but...

[LWATCDR]

First of all I don't think the price difference is anywhere near $500.
The simple truth is that Apple doesn't make any cheap PCs. They all seem to be well made with good components and with good support. All that really does cost money. I have only owned three apple products and all of them are iPods. They are all well made and have outlasted every other MP3 Player I have owned. My old Nano is just sitting since I got a touch but it works just fine.
Ballmer may be correct. Except that what that means is that people will settle for Windows but they still really want a Mac. That makes Windows what you get when you can not get anything else.
It also means that Windows could loose to Linux since it is even cheaper.
Not a good place to be. They are in the middle.
Plus Apple can always produce a cheaper PC if they want to. Can Microsoft make an OS cheaper than Linux?

Re:Many differences but...

[sigismond0]

Hahaha, Apple has good support. You had me going until you said that seriously.

As opposed to...

[zr-rifle]

>paying $500 more to get a logo on it?

As opposed to paying twice for the same, crappy OS...

I suppose it would be better, in a moment like this, to look for free alternatives... right?

and with that same philosophy

[FudRucker]

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

Re:and with that same philosophy

[Anonymous Coward]

You're new to /. aren't you?

Re:and with that same philosophy

[Anonymous Coward]

musta been a type-o, i think he meant linux is THE shit. ;-)

Re:and with that same philosophy

[rackserverdeals]

As much as I hate doing so, I have to agree with Ballmer.

These large banks made a real mess of our economy and I reckon it'll take a long time to work things out. The way I see it, the economy grew too fast on nothing but hype, similar to the dot-com era. Except this time, it was much bigger and touched a lot more people.

The government is going to be pumping money into the system to keep it from collapsing before the reality of our economy can come closer to the myth that was pushed the last few years.

This is far from over even though a lot of us aren't even feeling it yet.

This is the ideal situation for FOSS to shine. Maybe a slogan like "Save an employee, use Free/Open Source Software" might be good.

Re:and with that same philosophy

[dprovine]

You've hit it, I think.

Some years ago, as I recall, Microsoft was saying that "Linux is cheaper than Windows only if your time is worthless". That's far less true now than it was then, if it's even true at all any more.

But as regards OSX, the shoe is clearly on the other foot: I have and use both Mac and Windows machines on a regular basis, and Windows is only cheaper than a Mac if your time is worthless. I got my wife a Mac laptop a few years ago, and we have spent exactly zero time fussing with the OS. Never had to hunt for a driver: anything we plugged in just worked. It's never crashed; it's never gotten infected; the Time Machine backups are fantastic and painless.

Ballmer would never admit that his "only if your time is worthless" argument applies to Windows now just as it applied to Linux 10 years ago, but that's where he is.

And at the rate things are going, with the latest Ubuntu, the "time is worthless" argument hasn't got long to live.

Buy Apple Stock Now!

[db32]

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?

Re:Buy Apple Stock Now!

[Your.Master]

As I recall he was laughing at the idea of selling the 1st gen iPhone for $700, and telling them to lower their prices and at least add 3G. And they kind of did, which means Ballmer was kind of right.

He's not totally wrong

[blackholepcs]

Well, I'd rather pay $100.00 for the Microsoft logo and whatever I choose to spend on hardware that I put together and be able to play every game I want to play than pay $500 dollars for a logo and be limited to canned hardware configurations and nominal game and software titles. Not trying to be anti-Apple or pro-Microsoft here. He just has a bit of a point. In today's economy Apple has to be feeling the sting. It's there own fault for being overpriced on pretty much every level. That said, I'd love to have a Macbook. But I can't afford even a Netbook right now.

Re:He's not totally wrong

[bennomatic]

Games are fun and all, but if we're talking about waste in our economy, there's three things wrong with your argument:

• Most games have no productive output or result.
• Most games sap significant time, which could have been used to earn money or add something productive to the world.
• I'm guessing the games you're talking about cost you money.

Please note: the following comments are not about you personally; I do not know you. The comments are a broad-strokes response to anyone who makes this argument.

So, congratulations. You saved $100 for the privilege of spending $600 on games in the life of the OS installation, wasting 1000 hours in the interim, severely limiting your social life and development of your social skills, increasing your later-life health-care costs due to lack of exercise and poor nutrition, adding another $75 to your electric bill and 600 pounds of carbon emissions to the environment due to the energy usage while you're playing those games on your high-powered gaming system.

If you love games, great. But from a more holistic perspective, it's a dubious argument.

Re:He's not totally wrong

[Hatta]

How exactly is reading a book any more productive than playing a game? How is it mutually exclusive with family time? What does the world benefit from me writing or painting amateur crap that no one wants to look at?

Time enjoyed is never wasted. Just because you can spend time gardening and get a tomato doesn't make it superior to spending time playing games. I can just buy a tomato, spend my time playing games, have more fun than I would gardening, and I come out ahead.

So really, my point is, playing games is productive time. It's product is fun. Not that I hate gardening or spending time outside. I just get sick of this "my leisure activity is better than your leisure activity" bullshit. No, it's not.

Ballmer -1 Troll

[javacowboy]

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.

Re:Ballmer -1 Troll

[Draek]

Apple offers real value because OS X is a better operating system than Windows

Prove it. For me it may be since OSX is UNIX, but the way I see it, for most people one's a stupidly bloated system that runs all their apps, and the other's a stupidly bloated system that only runs special versions of some of their apps.

Apple has essentially taken away the high-end PC business away from Microsoft.

Prove it. I've yet to hear about a large business standardizing on Apple products, I've yet to hear about a serious gamer using Macs, so I'd like to know which definition of "high-end" are you using, and the stats backing up your claim.

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.

Interesting that they still maintain more than 90% marketshare worldwide with that "wrong strategy", though. Despite the horridness of Vista, people *still* appreciate being able to use their older apps on their newer PCs, who would've thought.

Go ahead, mod me down Troll or whatever, for defending Ballmer against a poor Apple apologist here on Slashdot. But facts are facts, and no matter how much you try to deny it, Apple isn't the dominant force in the industry today, Microsoft is so this isn't Ballmer trying to steal Apple's customers, it's simply Ballmer looking down on a competitor's tactics. And he's right.

Re:Ballmer -1 Troll

[wickerprints]

What has OS X been doing for years that Windows 7, which hasn't been released yet, can't, which makes it so superior?

I fixed your sentence.

Re:Ballmer -1 Troll

[wickerprints]

None of your reasons is meaningful because you fail to consider the fact that Micrsoft used anticompetitive practices and developer lock-in to leverage an inferior product into the dominant consumer and enterprise OS. Businesses use Windows because their IT supports it, developers support it, OEMs support it, ad nauseam. It's not because it's a better product--it's because everyone and their mom has been stuck with it, like lousy VHS tapes. There are numerous examples in our economic history that show that the dominant technology is not always the "best."

What Microsoft has failed to recognize for the past 8 years is that Steve Jobs' Apple Inc. isn't interested in playing that game any more. He is way too busy pushing Apple in the direction of emerging consumer technology. He wants Apple to not lead market share per se, but to lead the direction of the market. That's what the iPod and iPhone did. That's what Jonny Ive's design has done. I find it hilarious that people talk up all these competitors (Nokia, RIM, LG, Samsung, and Palm for the iPhone, and Creative, Microsoft, for the iPod), and say how they now offer better features and hardware than the Apple products they wish to "kill." They forget that before Apple even broke those markets wide open, NONE of those companies made jack SHIT. Where was the Zune before the iPod? Where was the Storm or Pre before the iPhone? Where was any of all this sudden innovation in hardware design before Apple made their mark? The competitors play catch-up because they lack the vision to lead. They are too busy resting on their laurels and squeezing every last dime out of the consumer. If Apple costs more (and I'm not necessarily convinced one way or another), I'm willing to pony up to support a company that has the balls to lead, because in the long run we're all the better for it.

The whole tech industry and the consumers who use their products owe a huge debt of gratitude to Apple for lighting a massive bonfire under the collective asses of all the industry competitors. No other company in the past decade has done more to set a fierce competitive landscape in the realm of hardware, software, and product design. If it weren't for Apple we'd still be stuck with shitty Windows Mobile on 2" tiny non-touchscreen devices that looked uglier than a crack-addled stepmom on an alcohol binge.

Re:Ballmer -1 Troll

[wickerprints]

Wrong. They've used that to *maintain* their dominant position, but they attained it by riding on IBM's name *and* recognizing that the PC market was in sore need of openness and competition, instead of every company building their own little island, as Apple et al had been doing until that point.

Ah, so now I see--you're absolutely right. Microsoft didn't steal, lie, and cheat their way into becoming a monopoly. They did it by "innovation,"--embrace, extend, extinguish.

But the Air is "cheaper" than the Adamo...

[MrCrassic]

Since the article used the Adamo as their example, I went ahead and did a price check between a Macbook Air and an Adamo.

Turns out that for only $300 MORE, the Air will provide you with a CPU that's 400 MHz faster, the 128 GB SSD and dedicated graphics, along with OS X Leopard and the ability to run Windows Vista (probably better than the Adamo can).

Aren't CEOs of software megaconglomerates like Microsoft supposed to do this kind of research before talking smack?

Ballmer, open an Apple machine

[edivad]

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).

The slashdot monkey island is in Riot

[stokessd]

Man, it's a hailstorm of flung turds already and we are only a few posts in.

All the fanbois calm down now....

Ballmer has shown that he in public seems really out of touch, his views on the iPod and iPhone show how what he says isn't the market view. I suspect that he has to say those things, and deep down is actually pretty scared about the iPhone etc. But he can't come out and say, "damn, they really target their niche really well", because that's not his style. Microsoft targets it's niche equally well, business is a sea of Dells running MS OS's, so it's not like he doesn't know about marketing to your core.

Once again he has missed the point, apple machines do cost more, but you get a unique product. There are precious few PC's out there that are concerned with how the back of the unit looks or cable management, etc. Apple is selling a higher caliber piece of gear than the generic best-buy special. Take a look at the apple keyboard vs. any other PC keyboard. You may or may not like the design, but the differences are clear.

With a mac product, you can run ALL software, the converse is not true. That's worth some money to lots of people.

Like any unique product, you will pay for it. but for a lot f people it is worth it.

Ballmer has to say those things regardless of what he believes inside, he's the voice of Microsoft.

Sheldon

Paying $500 for an OS that works, however...

[Simon Brooke]

OK, I'm no fan of Apple. I have never owned a Mac, and I haven't programmed on one since 1986. But, when you pay $500 extra for a Mac - if you do - you're getting more than a logo. The hardware is significantly better than average PC hardware. But more significantly, the OS actually works. Personally, I hate it - I intensely dislike the fact that when you get under the covers, it looks like UN*X but it isn't UN*X in a lot of ways that matter. It's essentially NeXT Step, and I hated that, too.

But, it works, and Windows really doesn't. Personally, I think Ubuntu or Debian are much more user-friendly and productive, and you don't have to spend $500 extra for them - but you put a Mac OS box next to a similarly specced Vista box and ask, 'will the user of the Mac be $500 more productive over the life time of the machine than the user of the PC?' the answer has to be 'hell, yeah!'

Re:Paying $500 for an OS that works, however...

[Karlt1]

But more significantly, the OS actually works. Personally, I hate it - I intensely dislike the fact that when you get under the covers, it looks like UN*X but it isn't UN*X in a lot of ways that matter. It's essentially NeXT Step, and I hated that, too.

How is OS X which is certified Unix (http://www.apple.com/macosx/technology/unix.html) not Unix?

Re:Paying $500 for an OS that works, however...

[RedK]

I just tried that on my HP-UX 11i v3 box and it doesn't either. Ditto my Solaris 10 server. Aren't HP-UX 11i and Solaris 10 Unix either ?

Re:Paying $500 for an OS that works, however...

[Egdiroh]

it looks like UN*X but it isn't UN*X

He said of the operating system that has been certified as UNIX.

In honor of this guy, here's a list of super developer assumptions.

1. My user space software MUST be installed in directories that normally require system level access to add anything too.
2. No one would ever need multiple versions of my software installed at the same time so it's okay if I make them impossible to co-exist
3. People always install software locally and not in a shared directory.
4. People always just randomly spew files anywhere they want in /usr/local so that's what my installer should do
5. People always have have dedicated home directories for each machine that they might be simultaneously logged into so it's ok for my software to only allow one instance per home directory to be running at a time.
6. No one will ever try to X Forward my app.
7. My software will always be on a host by way of it's packaging system so it's okay for me to require that system to be in a good state with regard to my software's packages before running my software.
8. No one else would ever pick the same names as me for my project's library files. So I don't have to giver people ways to resolve collisions.
9. My user-space program should use a privileged network port.
10. My program can use a hard-wired network port because nothing else could ever want that port and the end-user could never have a need to run it on an alternate port
11. All connections from a given IP are going to be from the same instance of my program.
12. My program needs to have it's own user with a specific username.
13. My program needs to have it's own user with a specific UID.
14. My program's installer can add it's own user by just writing to /etc/passwd and /etc/shadow.
15. My program needs to have it's own group with a specific group name
16. My program needs to have it's own group with a specific GID.
17. My program's installer can add it's own group by just writing to /etc/group.

If you think that something that has been certified as UNIX isn't UNIX in all the important ways, those important ways are probably your assumptions, which may have even been on my list. And many of those assumptions might work in the case of a single machine with only one user who is also it's administrator, but will eventually break down. I suggest that if you find OS X, not to be UNIX in the right ways that you take some time, and consider how you opperate and ways to make it more robust.

Re:Paying $500 for an OS that works, however...

[Simon Brooke]

What you consider to be Unix is most likely actually Linux. In reality, Mac OS X is a lot closer to Unix than Linux is, as OS X is indeed certified Unix while Linux is considered a clone of Unix.

I was using UN*X when Linus Torvalds was still in primary school. I've used, administered and programmed on nearly every variant of UN*X there's ever been, except Xenix and Minix. There are at this moment in this house machines running BSD, AIX and Solaris as well as four different Linux distros on three different processor architectures, and yes, they're all mine. So don't tell me what I'm talking about.

What I'm talking about is that in UN*X you can start with the init process and trace through shell scripts and textual config files to see how every service is started; and if things get buggered, you can fix them with a text editor. With MacOS (as with NeXT Step before it, and with KDE and with Gnome), the users with their pretty pointy clicky tools can make messes that the pretty pointy clicky tools can't get them out of. But with KDE and Gnome, underneath those pointy clicky tools are textual config files which you can fix when the users bugger them up. With NeXT Step and MacOS, the config is in binary files you can't edit except with the pretty pointy clicky tools, so when the user has buggered the machine to the point where the pointy clicky stuff won't run (which was fairly easy on NeXT Step but, to be fair, seems to be a bit harder with MacOS XX), you're stuck.

And that's why MacOS X is not UN*X, no matter what it says on the tin. UN*X is a collection of small tools each of which does one thing well, and which communicate between one another with plain text streams and files. MacOS isn't like that.

Re:Paying $500 for an OS that works, however...

[Karlt1]

What I'm talking about is that in UN*X you can start with the init process and trace through shell scripts and textual config files to see how every service is started; and if things get buggered, you can fix them with a text editor. With MacOS (as with NeXT Step before it, and with KDE and with Gnome), the users with their pretty pointy clicky tools can make messes that the pretty pointy clicky tools can't get them out of.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Launchd

bet Ballmer's happy the vista logo is only $250

[swschrad]

on the other hand, the vista window is a much-better known logo. like Mr. Yuk (tm) it serves as a valuable consumer warning device.

Annoyed

[dko1625]

Some one is annoyed for not having nailed down the hardware side ;-)
Linux enthusiast, Mac@home and Windoze@work user

Hardly surprising...

[tgibbs]

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.

Re:Hardly surprising...

[DerWulf]

why would you want to? To run apps that aren't available on mac os for starters. Saying "licensed Hardware" is a nice euphemism for a vendor locked-in OS. I don't have a problem with it but personally I find it ridiculous to pay extra for a simple chip or modified bios or whatever tells OS X it's okay to install on the mac hardware.

Actually more like $650...

[DoofusOfDeath]

OS X: $500
dark turtleneck + horn-rimmed glasses: $150

Re:Actually more like $650...

[isBandGeek()]

Watching the man in Redmond throw a chair across the office: priceless

Re:Actually more like $650...

[stephentyrone]

Anyone who would wear a turtleneck and glasses that only cost $150 together is *obviously* not a mac user.

(I kid... sorta...)

Is there a gas leak in here?

[cizoozic]

I wouldn't take Vista for free but I happily paid a $500 'logo tax'

Why can't people just prefer apple, and not be fanatical about it? Oh, right, because then that wouldn't justify the increased expense.

Personally I like the hardware and design of the MacBook Pro, the software is nice too, but for me it's not worth the extra coin.

Re:Is there a gas leak in here?

[RulerOf]

Personally I like the hardware and design of the MacBook Pro, the software is nice too, but for me it's not worth the extra coin.

As someone who doesn't live his life on his laptop, four features, the aluminum chassis, backlit keyboard, and bluetooth and wifi that work correctly almost 100% of the time, the extra $900^H^H^H

Okay, I lie a little, I know I paid too much, but the features that made me choose a Macbook Pro (in 2007, before aluminum chassis came on Macbooks) over another OEM's Windows PC were easily worth maybe 400 of my extra dollars.

Also, with regards to the AC above you, I much prefer Vista to Leopard :-P

Re:Is there a gas leak in here?

[Moofie]

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?

Re:Is there a gas leak in here?

[jedidiah]

> Why can't people just prefer apple, and not be fanatical about it?

I think this perfectly sums up the problem with Balmer's rantings.

Apple gives people good reason to be fanatical.

An "extra $500" for a machine that may last you awhile may not be such a bad tradeoff.

Re:Is there a gas leak in here?

[daath93]

I am fairly fanatical about Microsoft. I enjoy just about everything they make.

I hate just about everything Apple makes.

Lets see how fast i get modded Troll.

Somehow

[hey!]

Ballmer has failed to cast his Svengali-like spell over me. I... I just don't know. It's just that for some reason I cannot explain, I am able to control the impulse to go out and buy a retail copy of Windows Vista Ultimate.

Sometimes it seems that I can go days without even thinking about it. This very morning, I got out of bed, and got myself a cup of coffee, and it didn't even occur to me that if only I had Microsoft Select Plus licensing, I might have Windows Embedded Enterprise in my coffee pot.

I wonder. Does this mean I have developed some kind of unusual resistance to Ballmer's powers of persuasion? Does this mean that I, unlike so many millions of others, have somehow managed to penetrate that fatal glamour?

That makes me feel so... so... special.

So...

[wampus]

This is where fanboys decide the talking points for the next month or so and shit them all over the internet?

That's silly

[mosb1000]

Apples are selling just fine, what is he talking about?

Ballmer needs Apple

[Alain Williams]

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.

Its not just the logo...

[Anonymous Coward]

One thing Apple offers is good service. A user who isn't technical can buy their computer, their OS, and in a number of cases, the applications they use on a day to day basis (iWork for example) all from Apple. Instead of being shunted around between the hardware company, the OS vendor, the app maker, and perhaps some third party that is blamed for a driver issue, a user can just call one point of contact and most likely have the problem solved. Or, they can go to a Genius Bar and bring the machine and show the problem in person.

Of course, one personal account is statistically insignificant, but I can compare support experiences on a personal level (as opposed to calling a business support line.) For a problem in a laptop, one PC maker put me on hold for 2-3 hours, read a script demanding running diagnostics even though the problem was quite obvious, then pretty much said to go pester the OEM for the part for a replacement. When I had bad RAM in a new Macbook, I went to a Genius Bar, and they just swapped out the entire machine with a new one.

Business or premium PC support is different, but it definitely costs enough that brings the $500 to $1000 price difference way closer.

For the cost difference, less aggravation for a user who is more focused on the work they are doing as opposed to the computer can be worth it.

Another thing not factored in is OS X. OS X to some may bring the "Apple tax" gap closer together.

One can argue the security issues about OS X versus Windows, but because the malware makers are gunning for Windows with relatively few exploits for OS X in the wild, one doesn't have to be as on top of computer security. I can run an OS X box using the default browser without antivirus software and not really have to worry about the box ending up as a botnet client (although there are always Trojans). This would be pure suicide if I did the same with Windows and IE and no antivirus software. OS X is a lot more forgiving for people who are not atop things when it comes to securing their computer.

There is no Microsoft computer.

[Chris Tucker]

But there ARE a variety of Apple computers, each somewhat different than the others. The Mac OS installer is smart enough to know which Mac it's being installed on, and configures itself accordingly.

As for Windows. Well, now. HOW many motherboards are out there? How many different video and sound cards? How many webcams and microphones? How many fiddling little DLLs and drivers?

And Windows has to accommodate them all. Or, rather YOU, the users, have to accommodate them all on your own, by seeking out and downloading the latest drivers for some card made in China using FSM knows what revision of onboard firmware.

MS sells HOW MANY versions of XP and Vista? How many versions of Windows 7 will there be?

Mac OS X. One box, one version. Install on as many Macs as you own. Got the last version of Mac OS X and you just bought the latest? Go ahead, SELL the old one or give it away.

Apple Doesn't Care!

Same with their iLife and iWork application suites.

They WOULD rather that you didn't upload the DVD to Pirate Bay or the like. But they don't make anyone phone home or authenticate an install or give you grief if you don't have the serial number from the box.

ALL my installs of OS X have been from previously owned install DVDs. NEVER a problem. NEVER an authentication from Cupertino required.

Office? Feh! iWork, US$80.00 retail, probably less with an academic discount. iLife, same price.

Other software? Photoshop? Please. Graphic Converter uses most PS plug ins and filters. Outlook Express? I can manually infect my Mac with viruses and trojans without any help, thank you very much.

Mail app or Eudora work just fine for me as email applications. And neither will do anything I don't explicitly authorize.

Internet Explorer? Please! Don't make me laugh, I have chapped lips! Firefox makes IE its bitch 24/7.

Mac OS vs. Windows? Two Words: TIME MACHINE!

So, yeah, Ballmer, you sweaty little monkey, shrieking and throwing your feces at passersby, that logo IS worth the extra money to me.

If only because YOU don't see a penny of it.

been said already...

[nEoN nOoDlE]

This is definitely the pot calling the kettle black. How much am I paying exactly for all those "Built for Windows" stickers I've had to scrape off?

From my experience...

[fluch]

I'm a post graduate student who has not so many bucks (Pounds in my case) lying around, either. But still, in June as soon as Apple releases their Snow Leopard I will go for a 24 inch iMac. Will cost me about 1085 Pounds as a student (incl. wireless mouse/keyboard), but for this money I get a computer which provides me with excellent value for the price: huge screen with high 1920x1200 resolution, excellent operating system with hardly any anoyances, things-just-work environment whit all the things I (!) need.

I have already an 20 inch iMac with Leopard at the office and therefore I know that it provides me whit precisely my needs. And compared to other students and member of staff which opted for Windows machines the iMac outperfomes them with respect to usability and complete lack of any problems (you have no idea how much problems the Windows machines have in the Windows centric world we have at our office!).

Anyways ... I for myself don't mind if Balmer keeps dreaming or throwing chairs. ;-)

*Yawwwwwn*

[American Terrorist]

Apple has always been more expensive. Some people like to pay for the polish, so what else is new?

So is a $1,300 Microsoft "SeniorPC" a Better Deal?

[theodp]

Microsoft is touting $1,300 SeniorPC Packages. According to the sales pitch, it's "what seniors want in a PC." Think SteveB feels this a better value than a Mac? :-)

Linux, Macs, and Windows PCs

[falconwolf]

Personally I like the hardware and design of the MacBook Pro, the software is nice too, but for me it's not worth the extra coin.

When I switched from Windows to OS X and got my MacBook Pro I first compared it's price to those of Windows OEM laptops and the prices were comparable. While an HP laptop cost about $50 less a Dell cost about $200 more for similarly configured laptops. So I didn't pay extra. I've had my MBP for about 20 months now and in that tyme I haven't had nearly as many problems with it as I have had with the Windows, or Linux, PCs I've also had.

Falcon

Re:Linux, Macs, and Windows PCs

[NormalVisual]

On the flip side though, since I bought my wife's MacBook in August of 2007, I've had to replace a battery and the keyboard (no, nothing was spilled on/in it :-)), and I also have had the power supply die in my dual-CPU Power Mac, which thus far I've not replaced because I'm not paying $200 for a proprietary sub-350 watt supply that for any other computer would cost $40. None of the other four machines that see regular use running Linux or Windows have had any problems of any sort in that same period of time.

I understand that the plural of "anecdote" is not "data", but my personal experience with post-iMac G3 Apple products is that they haven't been nearly as reliable as the machines I put together myself. My iPods, Apple IIs, and older Macs all keep going like a Timex watch though.

Re:Linux, Macs, and Windows PCs

[falconwolf]

You must have been looking at the wrong Dell one then

Yea, Dell makes it harder to find a computer than Apple does. Does a buyer want a Home/Home Office system, a small to medium business system, or a large business system? Of course there are other choices. And they all come with different configurations and different prices. However when I looked there was 3 Mac laptop lines, MacBook, MacBook Air, and MacBook Pro. It's quite easy to see which one a buyer would want to buy. I just checked Dell again. Home and Home Office does not have a 17". Small Business has three, the lowest price one is $600 whereas the other two start at $3405, $700 more than the 17" MacBook Pro. Now for large business, there are 2, the Dell Precision M6400 with a 2.66 GHz Core 2 Duo CPU, 17" UltraSharp(TM) WUXGA (1920x1200) RGB LED Display, 4.0GB, DDR3-1066MHz SDRAM, and 320GB Hard Drive, 7200RPM with Windows XP (which is being End of Lifed) cost $3,168. The MacBook Pro with the same configuration is $2800. What about the other one? Instead of XP it comes with Redhat Linux and cost $3090 for the same cpu, graphics, and hdd.

With the exception of the $600 laptop all of the laptops above cost more than the 17" MacBook Pro. You may say "but you looked at 17" laptops". Yes I did. One of the things I got it for, photography, the larger screen is better. For photography I also want a big hdd and high resolution display as well as a fast processor.

Falcon

Re:Linux, Macs, and Windows PCs

[maxume]

A couple of weeks ago, I had to replace the battery in my timex watch.

Re:Linux, Macs, and Windows PCs

[lordsid]

In my situation my company purchased my laptop. Now I was given a choice, laptop or desktop, whatever I wanted within a reasonable budget. Now for some odd reason I chose the MacBook Pro.

Given the pick of any laptop, isn't that the one you would pick? Throw on top of that one of the most stable and easy to use operating systems I've ever experienced. I can't think of a reason you would want to use anything else. I could put windows on it if I wanted to.

Setting cost aside what machine do you really want? Considering the life of the unit would you rather have the machine you want or just make do with whatever machine was the cheapest? I use this laptop every day of my life (sad I know) why not shell out that extra $500 for the reason the machine is worth it. Like in my MacBook Pro's case solid construction, great keyboard, great track pad, easy to view screen, accessible peripheral ports. I've never had to replace a part on this machine except for the power supply which suffered a cord injury. My only real complaint about this machine is how warm it gets, but its either sitting on a laptop pad, or on my desk.

Now compare this to my previous experience owning a Dell Inspiron. The Inspiron was bought on a budget a lot smaller then the MacBook Pro budget. In all in the first year of owning the laptop I replaced the following under warranty:
Modem 3x
Motherboard 2x
Screen 1x
Keyboard 2x

Owning the Inspiron was pure hell. Add on top of that having to deal with Windows and the number of driver issues the machine had I never wanted to buy a Dell again (nor have I).

So after two and half years of owning this MacBook Pro I still have a complete working machine with no hardware issues with nothing ever having to be replaced.

Here is what I have noticed regarding computer (and auto) manufacturers. As of late they have moved to a business model where they create a product that lives through its warranty period and not much longer after that. At which point it costs a considerable amount of money to repair or replace. Now Apple on the other hand has always striven to build a solid product. I respect them for this. There are certain aspects I don't like about Apple, like Steve Jobs for instance, but this amount of dislike absolutely pales in comparison to that for Microsoft and other PC manufacturers.

In the coming years in the tightening of the economy I predict the successful companies will return to making quality products that last longer. Mainly due to people realizing they can't economically replace their laptop/car every 3 years.

I am not a Mac Fanboi. I simply found something that works better then windows/PC could ever dream of. If I don't have the option of Mac OS X on the "appropriate" hardware then my next choice is Ubuntu for its simplicity. I've personally switched 12 friends and family to using it exclusively.

Re:Linux, Macs, and Windows PCs

[Ixitar]

I, on the other hand, bought a refurbished PowerBook 5 years ago and had zero problems with it. The only reason that I upgraded to a new MacBook Pro has been that I needed a larger disk and the 4GB of ram along with the ability to run Java 6. This was in January and I have had zero problems with it.

I understand that there are those that seem to just run into problems with their Apple products. There are always the occasional bad batches.

I like the Apple Macintosh systems, because I am a former NextStep developer. I have owned Apple computers since Mac OS X first came out. Before that, I have owned various PCs running Microsoft DOS and Windows. I have even tried Linux.

I am by no means a fanboi, but am sick of hearing people who bitch and moan about the price of a Mac or that Apple does not open up Mac OS X to run on a generic Intel system. One of the reasons that Apple's systems work so well is that they control the hardware as well as the software.

If you think that Apple's prices are too high, then don't buy one. Do you bitch and moan that a Mercedes is too expensive when you are buying a car? Or do you look at cars that are in your price range?

BTW: I got over 5 years use out of my PowerBook before I desired to upgrade to a MacBook Pro. I think that I definitely got my money's worth.

Re:Linux, Macs, and Windows PCs

[falconwolf]

first, 'upgrade' was referring to using drivers that reenable the disabled features of the pro card's drivers.

If a pro card is installed but features are disabled that's stupid, and I don't want to be a customer of said business. All this does is increase the cost.

secondly, unless your photography somehow involves high end opengl 3d acceleration needs, then i think you have been misled about what the 'pro' card gives you

Fact is is that while online graphics may not need much it's totally different for print. High res and deep colour depths are important for some things. If you're getting married and higher a photographer you want your photos to be as good as they can be. The same if you're an ad or commercial photographer or a fine art photographer. Pro photographers can go through tyme, hassle, and money to make sure what they see on their monitor matches what they print. An Eizo monitor, even a 24" can cost thousands of dollars. NEC and LaCie are just as expensive. Monitors with an S-IPS/H-IPS type panel can be quite expensive, but of you make your living in photography or other graphics arts you need such a monitor. Once you have a good monitor you then have to use a colorimeter like an Eye-one or Huey to calibrate the monitor. If you're also doing the printing yourself and not having a pro lab do it you also have to calibrate the printer. Going through all this you don't want a cheap graphics card driving your monitor.

Falcon

you forgot

[commodoresloat]

to whine about the mouse.

Apple's margins have to come down

[Animats]

The basic problem is that the price point for a computer is now $299. Apple can get away with some brand premium, but not $500 any more.

This won't kill Apple. Their volume products, the iPhone and the various iPods, are down into that price region already.

Also, the era of "bling" is so over. Walk into any jewelry store today. It will be empty of customers. (Or, quite possibly, an empty storefront.)

I do Windows support from my mac

[grapeape]

I took the Mac plunge a couple years back and wouldnt buy anything else hardware wise now at least when it comes to notebooks. I need something reliable, portable and fast so far OSX fits that bill.

For me the best part about OSX is its portablity, try taking a harddrive out of a windows machine and moving it to another non indentical one and see what happens. With OSX as long as its an intel moving to an intel or ppc moving to ppc its just plug and go doesnt matter if its a core or core2 or what model. Better yet try troubleshooting a hardware problem on one windows machine by simply holding down a key on bootup to boot from another machine without having do anything without having to touch the innards.

As for price, my macbook (I dont own a pro) has better specs than the T61 for which I paid $200 more.

$500 for logo or $500 for a real operating system?

[almondo]

Perhaps Apple buyers are really just paying $500 to avoid Microsoft products. And judging from the loyalty of Apple users, one could easily conclude that they find it to be a good investment.

Re:So which hardware _is_ better?

[peragrin]

want to know a hint? 90% of people will never upgrade their computer beyond ram and Hard drives.

laptops should show you the truth of that. by the time a computer is old enough to start upgrading parts the entire system is generally not worth it. cpus generally need new motherboards.

I use macs precisely because once I max out the ram the machine will last long enough(4-5 years) that by the time I want to upgrade again I might as well buy a whole new machine. simply because of CPU upgrades alone.

I have built my own machines. I have run windows, and Linux. I have bought from Dell, apple, IBM, and Acer. In the end you have to find a machine that works the way you do. I don't have to fuss with my Macs. I don't have to tweak them. I don't have to download driver updates that crash out the machine(windows and Linux) to maintain what i already have.

Everyone is different. Like some people like to tweak their cars some geeks like to tweak their computers. Some like spending their money on fancy stuff, but most prefer to buy a mid priced car that just works with minimal maintenance.

It's not the logo

[MartinSchou]

It's the ease of use.

Personally I run Windows. At home and at work. I've used a Mac maybe a grand total of 48 hours in my life. That should tell you where I'm at with bias.

I also do tech support for printers. I suspect maybe half a percent of our calls the user is running OS X. Solving issues there is very simple (again I've not really used a Mac):
*Unplug the printer
*Go to system, printers, control/right click, reset printer system
*Reconnect the printer (or add it if it's a network printer)
This works in 95% of all cases

Windows:
*Unplug the printer
*Empty the printer queue
*Delete the printer
*Disable firewall programs (even for USB printers, and don't ask my why that works)
*Reconnect the printer (or add it if it's a network printer)
This works in 50% of all cases

Fewer steps, huge difference in effectiveness.

If it doesn't work ...
Mac:
*Unplug printer
*Reset print system again
*Create a new user account
*Run a file system fix
*Add printer

Windows:
*Unplug printer
*Delete printer
*Get customer to run a batch file from a special folder on the CD
***This is an issue in an of itself, as quite a lot of customers think you're telling them to open either the C or D drive ("well, which one" is a classic. DVD doesn't help: "I don't have a V drive")
*Hand holding them through this uninstall ("Yes, now you click next")
*Run MSconfig to disable all startup items and non-microsoft services and reboot
*Doublecheck that their AV and firewall is disabled (Norton's older programs are notorious about running anyway)
*(Realise that the customer is using a wireless network and a special service/startup item is used to activate their wireless NIC - applies only to network printers)
*Add the printer again
*Reboot to normal mode again

Then of course there are issues with routers that don't function well with IPv6 (or Vista's implementation of it). While it's cool that Windows finally has an IPv6 stack for those that need it, it's not cool that it'll break the network. I only know this because of the issues we have with it. Disabling the IPv6 stack on Vista computers on the network probably solves about half of the issues we cannot solve otherwise. Again, nothing I've seen happen on Mac OS X, but we don't have nearly as big a pool of cases to pick from.

Sure, we don't get as many calls about OS X as we do Windows. But the market share for Mac is much higher than the number of issues we have compared to Windows. Either Windows has dumber users, or Windows does something much worse than the Mac does with regards to printers. My guess is mostly the latter.

Has anyone else noticed?

[jcr]

Seems like the only way that Ballmer can get any press these days is by trolling. When was the last time he had this much attention? Wasn't it when he was laughing at the iPhone?

-jcr

Monopoly fee?

[RulerOf]

First you have to pay the monopoly fee

You know I asked the Mac geniuses at the Apple store about that one, but was rather dismayed when they wouldn't let me pay with Monopoly money.

Re:So which hardware _is_ better?

[torkus]

Well, bunches of people replace laptop batteries but anyhow...

Your rant about drivers and crashes and tweaks is so 1995. You don't *have* to update drivers in windows and, assuming you don't install some stupid spyware, you can pretty much leave a windows box alone and just install the standard updates. Apple does updates too . Nothing to see here, move along.

And still, that's all about the OS. The *hardware* is the same once you discount the pretty case Apple puts it in.

It's about service.

[Alchemist253]

My bias: I primarily run Linux (writing this on a Debian workstation), so I suppose I might be more of a "Microsoft basher" than an "Apple fanboy."

However, one thing I will say about Apple is that it has arguably the best customer service of any large company I have ever dealt with in ANY FIELD.

Fortunately, Apple products tend to "just work" and continue "just working" so I don't have to deal with service that much. However, when I have I have been impressed.

When I called Apple support for a particularly obscure software problem, within I got conferenced in with an OS X software engineer who had kernel HFS code in front of him. Keep in mind, this was the standard consumer 800-number level support! How often would this happen at, say, Microsoft?

I broke one of the mechanical components of my iPhone, walked into an Apple store, and within ten minutes walked out with a replacement phone - no arguing, frustration, or upselling attempted. Along the same vein, a friend of mine had a laptop that was YEARS off warranty, and when the DVD drive finally died Apple still offered to repair it at no charge.

I've even gone into the Apple store to look at accessories like earphones and had a salesperson tell me that a different retailer was having a sale that I should check out to save money.

My point I suppose is that the "Apple tax" (or what I would more formally refer to as the "brand premium") is in no small part to pay for having a large number of well-trained (even more with respect to customer interaction than technical skill) employees with sufficient authority to actually deal with problems. Apple takes the attitude that customer satisfaction is more important than low prices - and I thank them for it.

Re:Actually

[zippthorne]

Uh, Windows Vista Ultimate Edition is less than $300 at Newegg.

And that's the full retail version. It can be had for less than $200 if you don't care about the twenty minutes of useless support you'll be missing.

What 3rd party software are you including that bumps up the price by almost 100%?

Time out

[XanC]

It's not violating any license to install software on a machine that doesn't meet the hardware requirements. It's just that the result will be unsupported and possibly unsatisfactory.

Let's Say SteveB is Right

[coaxial]

Full Disclosure: I own a 17" macbook pro, and an 160gb ipod classic. Prior to that, a 17" powerbook g4. I don't consider myself a mac fanboy, but a unix fanboy. I switched from 14 years of Linux to macs because I got tired of dealing with drivers. That said...

Let's say SteveB is right. Apple charges a premium for its logo. I think he's right to a certain extent. Many pundits have deemed Apple a "luxury brand". Jonathan Ive has defined a look for Apple. It's clean. It's pretty. It looks different. It sets trends. Most importantly, people like it enough to pay for it.

Now the question that SteveB, Alex Bogusky, and the rest of Microsoft, are going to do about it besides whine, because so far that's all they've done.

Take one apart

[tkrotchko]

"it is also true the Macbook chassis is vastly superior to practically any "PC" notebook vendor."

It is most assuredly not true. I have a 2 year old MBP, and I replaced the hard drive last fall.

Let me tell you that is a nontrivial exercise because of a few factors:

1) The case is beautiful, but you must remove 20+ screws and you have to take the entire notebook apart to change the hard drive
2) The screws are very tiny, and the case doesn't really fit together that well. If you don't get just right, the clever magnetic catch doesn't release properly. Then you get to take it all apart again.
3) The cables are held in place with adhesive tape (!!!!) inside.
4) The holder for the hard drive was clearly built for cost and is not well engineered.
5) The wiring overall inside is cheaply done.
6) I've taken apart a Mac Mini, and the construction of the MBP internally is similar.

So I use my MacBook pro, and I like it, but I compared it to the laptop work provided me (a high-end HP).

1) Things like hard drives and memory come apart with no screws. They simply pop out without disassembling
2) There is no tape on the inside of a comparable HP laptop. If you have to disassemble it, it's pretty easy, and there are not 20 screws in the entire machine. The wiring is done far more intelligently.

The HP is simply engineered better than the MBP. Now I'm not saying every HP laptop is well engineered and put together, but the laptops that in the same price range as the MBP are simply better machines.

Re:Take one apart

[xero314]

I replaced the HD in an MBP just about 2 months ago. Yes it's more work than it should be but it's a 20 minute job, not that big of a deal.

The reason the HP you compared it too seems so much easier to maintain is because it's a cheap bulky monstrosity, made of plastic and other disposable parts.

Re:Take one apart

[Ma8thew]

The new Macbook and Macbook Pro have much improved hard-drive access. Apple even shows you how to do it in their manual.

Re:Take one apart

[EvilIdler]

That's an old MBP. Look at the new one. A panel you open with a latch, and one screw holding the harddrive in place.

Re:Take one apart

[SwabTheDeck]

It is most assuredly not true. I have a 2 year old MBP, and I replaced the hard drive last fall.
Let me tell you that is a nontrivial exercise because of a few factors

This has all been resolved on more recent versions of the MBP and regular MB. I have a white Macbook 13" and changing the hard drive is just about as easy as you could make it be on a notebook. 3 screws hold the hard drive/ram cover in place. Once that's off, you pull a tab and the drive slides out easily. There's a sheath around the actual drive (as is the case in most notebooks) that has maybe 6 screws and that pops off easily. The whole process of replacing a drive takes less than 5 minutes. Adding or replacing RAM takes less than 2 minutes. Can you easily get to other components like the CPU or the HSF(s)? Not really. It's not perfect, but I think Apple at least took customer feedback on hardware access into consideration and made some changes based on that.

As a side note, we're rapidly approaching a point where portable devices are going to be designed with absolutely no intention of being user serviceable. As price and size continue to shrink, it'll be impractical to try to repair or upgrade a portable device. You'll just throw it out and buy a replacement. So, enjoy groaning about hardware access while you can. It's going away faster than you think, and I don't just mean for Apple products.

Re:Take one apart

[ukyoCE]

Most people I know don't buy a laptop concerned about opening it up and poking around inside. If I were making the GP statement about Mac laptop chassis, it'd be referring to:

1) Better keyboards than most laptops (this is partially due to better software, but still important)

2) Smaller + lighter

3) Better port positioning. No having to close the lid or lean way over to try to plug things into the back.

4) The trackpad+scrolling (again, partially software-solution with the scrolling, at least it's a lot better than my dell laptop's wonky attempt at having a separate scroll area on the side of the trackpad)

5) The latches and power connector (the magnetic power connector is very handy, and the power brick+extension too, as long as you didnt get the one revision that was huge and super-hot)

I've never needed to open up my mac laptops beyond removing the sony exploding battery to put in the free replacement.

Even so, I wouldn't expect a mac laptop to be as easy to get around inside as a HP or Dell that's twice as big. I'm also not sure I would call a laptop twice as big and heavy "simply better engineered", but I guess it depends on what your priorities are.

You're doing it wrong

[Rix]

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.

Re:You're doing it wrong

[falconwolf]

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.

After dealing with all the problems I had with Windows PCs as well as Microsoft wanting to treat me like I'm a criminal I did not want to get another Windows PC.

Falcon

Re:You're doing it wrong

[MeNeXT]

You calculate the value of a PC by how long it lasts (time and usefulness) compared to the price you paid. I still have a useful 2001 G3. After eight years it comes out cheaper than any PC.

When you keep on buying the cheapest you start to forget what value is.

Re:I've always found it ironic...

[Draconix]

We do it because Sony fanboys are almost as fun to troll as furries. :)

Let me run a little calculation...

[l00sr]

Microsoft(R) Windows Vista Ultimate (TM): $320
Microsoft(R) Office Professional (TM): $500

Linux: $0
OpenOffice: $0

I know, the Microsoft cds come with exclusive high-tech copy protection and DRM, but is it really worth the extra $820? Or is it just branding?

Where's my $99 PC?

[Hercules Peanut]

My Mac cost $599 . So where are all of these Core2 Duo PCs for $99?

Re:Ballmer is a tired old man, it seems to me.

[Malevolyn]

He's not lonely! He's got his developers, developers, developers, developers!

Re:developers

[TaoPhoenix]

Isn't he down to developers, developers? They just laid off a bunch.

Please learn something and answer later.

[falconwolf]

Why don't you learn something, like reading comprehension?

I was using the term "pro" for cards capable of doing 3D for quality and use pro 3D apps vs 3D for speed in games.

As part of comprehension, can you put out where I said anything about speed or gaming?

And I've already said in this thread that the cards usually could be upgraded to the "pro"/quatro version since it was the same GPUs but sold for different markets and that they was marked up in price a lot due to that. And that your laptop price comparison didn't made much sense because of that since the Quatro cards are overpriced.

You did say Bullshit, you didn't knew what I meant in the first place, the Macbook Pro DON'T have a Quadro card but it's still just fine for your purpose. As I posted people say the GeForce and Quatro cards are the same. They may be wrong but if so can you cite where they are not?

In any case it's useless discussing it with you since you will always be focused on your opinion/bias and want to interpret things in ways which suits you.

Yeah it's a waste of tyme discussing this with you, because of your bias not mine. I've provided links to back up what I say but all you do is talk without backing it up. If you can't use reason I see no reason to continue.

Falcon