Slashdot Mirror
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.'"
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
Jealousy is a stinky cologne, Stevie. ;)
"And, they keep changing the OS and user interface faster than we can copy it! Bastards"
Brett
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.
why pay X amount of dollars for microsoft-windows when you can get Linux for FREE!
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
I seem to remember some other Ballmer moments of insight on Apple. There was that interview where he was laughing about how the iPhone was junk and Windows Mobile is the bestest evar. He also had some pretty amusing comparisons and whatnot between the wildly successful iPods and the Zune. I mean really now...aside from not selling for crap...the whole mass suicide on New Years was amazing...Apple clearly is failing because they haven't managed to have all of their products of a given model crash at the same time...
Seriously...this guy has a long track record of saying absolutely moronic shit, why does anyone take anything he says seriously? He will fucking kill Google right?
The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
Ballmer is just trolling. He knows that Apple offers real value because OS X is a better operating system than Windows, which means that Apple has essentially taken away the high-end PC business away from Microsoft.
He should know that trolling isn't going to bring those high-end customers back to Windows. Maybe he does, who knows?
Microsoft has repeatedly chosen to patch Windows instead of rebuilding it from the ground up as a modern operating system, the way Apple did with OS X. They should have known 8 years ago that this was the wrong strategy.
This space left intentionally blank.
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?
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. ... 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.
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,
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).
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.
The CB App. What's your 20?
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.
The Linux desktop is Ballmer's real nightmare... and it is getting closer.
According to Apple, about 50 bucks less than having a matte black one.
Don't trust a bull's horn, a doberman's tooth, a runaway horse or me.
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.
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
Should there be a Law?
I prefer Apple, and I don't have to justify the increased expense to you.
It is worth the extra coin to me, and you can do whatever makes you happy.
What's the problem?
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
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.