Slashdot Mirror
"Apple Tax" Report Backfires On Microsoft
Ian Lamont writes "A Microsoft-sponsored report that describes a hidden "Apple tax" has fallen flat among the technology press. Roger Kay's report (PDF) compares various PC and Mac configurations, and claims an all-Apple household's costs would add up to an extra $3,367 over five years. Tech columnists and bloggers have slammed the comparisons and claims made in the report — even Mac-baiter John C. Dvorak calls it propaganda. However, some Mac fans still see a pro-Microsoft press conspiracy. Even if the comparisons are questionable, Kay's report and the accompanying television ads have clearly struck a nerve among the Mac faithful."
Meanwhile, Linux users everywhere are scratching their heads.
The price tag clearly displays it before the 1,000 unit separator..
*scratches head*
The disappearing pencil trick. Let me show you it.
I buy and use what I like and what I feel lets me work best. I don't think the Apple Tax is that high (hell, it might not even exist), but if Apple can command that price and have people pay it, what's wrong with that? It's just economics: things are worth only what people will pay for them.
Those who anthropomorphize science and/or nature already believe in an intelligent designer.
See Page Three of the PDF:
"And by holding a price umbrella over the entire market, even with arguably better products, Apple allowed the entire Windows ecosystem to establish itself underneath."
Imaging that. Charging more for a better product!
Soccer Goal Plans
Are you kidding me? Apple has been the darling of newsrooms for as long as I can remember. There was a time you could walk into any newspaper or television newsroom in the country and not see anything BUT Apple computers. The press LOVES Apple. They slovenly follow every Apple product launch with almost rapturous attention (at the iPhone launch, I think I saw more than one reporter have an on-camera orgasm) and talk up even the most mundane Apple announcement. Hell, they've been treating Steve Jobs' recent illness as if the Pope himself had cancer.
Only the most rabid Apple fanboy (who thinks NOTHING good should ever be said of MS, and Apple can do no wrong) would think there is anything even resembling a "pro-Microsoft press conspiracy" out there. Most of the positive press coverage I see about MS is either when they have a MAJOR launch (the 360, a new Halo game, etc.) or is related to Bill Gates' considerable charitable activities (which *deserves* to be covered and extolled, if nothing more than to encourage other rich guys to do it). Most of their stuff barely gets a nod. I don't remember a single mainstream, non tech-press, story on the Zune launch, for example.
If anyone is getting cheated by the mainstream press, it's Linux. I've yet to see a single mainstream news story on THAT. It wasn't even mentioned in any of the news stories on the OLPC program (which got considerable press).
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
I'm pretty sure just about every self-minded tech journalist/blogger/twitterer/etc. would jump on the Microsoft bashwagon if it makes him/her look cool and worthwhile.
It doesn't matter if everyone bashes Microsoft. Apple is also a design firm, hence the Apple tax on the Apple logo. It's like paying 300 for a pair of Gucci sunglasses: they're damned good for your eyes but 250 dollars of it is a tax on design.
Viable Slashdot alternatives: https://pipedot.org/ and http://soylentnews.org/
On a high end window's machine you can easily spend just as much. That being said, Apple's generally are more expensive, but that being said, is it really a wise move for Microsoft to point this out? Shouldn't they just get some comedians to point out how Apple is full of chic jerks and PC's are where real computing is done?
The musings of just another geek and his junk.
There are so many things to pick at Kay's article, but that one point is a decent representative example. "Apple has done something we haven't been able to duplicate yet, but we think we've got it this time. Really! Not like last time, not at all."
For many people, even if Apple's prices are high, they're preferable to a typical Vista-based PC for reasons similar to why it's better to live in overly taxed Europe than under-taxed Africa.
Is Apple for years has made outrageous claims about performance and productivity (remember the intel snail ads? You don't? Here's a reminder...). I won't even talk about the wierd and inaccurate claims they make in their mac vs. pc ads.
But Microsoft (who has been quiet for ages!) makes one or two not even dubious claims (whoa - macs cost more - big news) and everyone gets all bent out of shape.
Most people I know do not buy a Mac, because they just want a web browser and a computer that can download photos from their camera -- both Windows and Mac OS X have been more than capable of doing this for years now. If that is all someone wants, why would (not "should") they pay more for Mac OS X?
Palm trees and 8
They are quickly revealed to you post install, if your time is worth anything that is.
Being an avid Linux user, I fully admit there is a linux tax. Lets see, I make roughly $18/hour. To build, install and trouble shoot a machine until it is running the way I like takes me probably on average an hour. So that is roughly an $18 dollar tax for using linux verse OSX or Windows! But the lack of hair restoration from dealing with Windows and the trying to get around the idiot proofing of OSX probably more then makes up for that.
Of course your 'Tax' may vary but for me I don't mind paying the linux tax.
Does it do what you need? Can you afford it? Then why worry about it.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Whats actually weird about the Microsoft ads, is instead of saying "Windows", they call it "a PC".
A PC is a hardware platform. It can run a variety of Operating Systems, many of which are not licensed by Microsoft and are not called "Windows". Heck, if you get just the right combination of "PC" hardware, and you have the right skillset, you can even run a slightly modified MacOSX on a "PC".
Despite the fact that way too many people are accustomed to assuming "PC" = "Windows" and Microsoft happily encouraging them to do so because that furthers the assumption that there is no such thing as a "PC" that runs anything else, "PC" does NOT automatically mean the same thing as "Windows PC"
In fact, taking the literal, original, generic meaning of "PC", which was "Personal Computer", the reference "PC" could even refer to a hardware sold by Apple itself. But at the very least, even if you take it to mean "IBM PC" "compatible", it still doesn't automatically mean "Windows".
Yes, I know I will get flamed by brainwashed sycophants and MS astroturfers. I don't care.
I'm tired of people saying their apple runs just as good four years later. Its almost technically impossible. Hardware degrades. It has nothing to do with the OS and no, the component quality in a macbook is *not* that much better than what you'd find in a high-end laptop. I guarantee you its NOT running as well as the first day you bought it, you just can't admit it to yourself. No CPU, RAM, harddrive, etc etc etc is going to run as well as it did after four years of usage unless its never getting used in which case the same principles can be applied to any other computer.
Not to defend Apple here, but please explain to me how, for example, a CPU or RAM "degrades". As far as I can tell, either it works or it doesn't. Does RAM run slower? That would be hard to believe, because it is externally clocked by the MB.
That's not to say that RAM or a CPU won't eventually -fail-, but until they fail they don't really degrade.
I call BS.
A house divided against itself cannot stand.
Seriously, before I ditched windows entirely I burned through more than $700/year in personal labor costs just to keep M$ software functional.
There's a reason why I BUY macs for all of my relatives after their PCs have died. It saves me time and money.
Maybe Apple is more expensive, maybe it isn't.
Did I miss the memo where we have abandoned capitalism? Demand and supply meet at the price point of agreement. I'm perfectly willing to pay what Apple asks for its products. Sure, I'd be just as happy to pay less, just as they would be happy to charge more. But that's not the point.
The point is: Is it worth it?
Standard PC with Vista - 2000
or iMac with Leopard - 2500
I'd rather pay for the second, because not everything is about price alone.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
What the hell are you talking about? Maybe you better clean out the registry on your windows machine, or better yet reformat, and find out how fast your machine used to be before you start trying to tell me about my much RAM is degrading. Yes, things like backlights on LCDs fade with use, and batteries have shorter lifespans, but that's normal wear and tear, the laptop itself runs just fine. I don't get any fewer floating point calculations per second, nor do my 3D rendered objects get any fewer frames per second. You can bitch and moan all you wish about how the Apple computers use standard components, but that doesn't explain why my Dell laptop fell apart after two years and my macbook pro is going strong after four. It's called QA/QC and it's expensive, look it up.
Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
I'm not surprised there's a backlash, I just read the report for the first time and I found it absurd
Let me state for the record that I use a mix of Window and Linux; that I own a Dell, two HP's, and an iPod; I write software for the Windows platform for a living. Let me also state that I do believe that Apple machines are more expensive than a typical HP or Dell box -- what your paying for is industrial design aka "style"; and, if you find a comparable HP or Dell desktop they're usually on par or pretty close to the Apple price, with the laptops still being slightly pricier. Having gotten that out of the way...
The report has the family buying a Mac Pro -- a workstation class machine???
For hardware upgrades, Apple's online store prices are quoted and then compared to Newegg prices, instead of HP or Dell online store prices.
It quotes an external Bluray drive to upgrade the Mac -- even though they have a Pro chassis to stuff an internal drive into
The report includes the cost for the Apple user to subscribe to Mobile Me, a service they can get for free from somewhere else like Google. It assumes the PC user will use MSN for free...
It has the Apple user buying home office software but not the PC user, you need to buy at least the basic Office pkg
The Apple price includes buying Quicken, software which is not included in the PC price
The cost includes an upgrade for the software on the Apple, but does not include any upgrade costs on the PC
The Apple user pays for software support, the PC user does not
The "Apple Tax" should amount to at most a few hundred dollars, if the report was honest.
The ease of installing software on many Linux distributions shouldn't be overrated.
Then please don't.
If I want to install OpenOffice...
it is easy to do that in one command in linux
It wasn't for me, just a few months ago. I wanted OO3, but all that was in the repository was OO2. So I had to add some obscure repository and key first. It wasn't particularly hard... but it was about on par with editing the windows registry. And I had to follow some online instructions on what exactly I needed to put in there.
Is tons easier than going to 10 different websites, downloading at least 10 install packages, installing all of them, etc.
No. apt-get is more efficient. Going to a website, downloading the program, and double clicking to install isn't harder, its just time consuming.
And then there is keeping all of that up to date.
These days most of them just prompt when they want to update. Again its not hard, its mostly just annoying. And the ones that don't auto-update simply require another visit to the website from time to time, or that you join a mailing list... its not hard... but yeah, its annoying and less efficient.
That said, if I don't want to install updates to something, most (but not all) programs have a simple checkbox to turn of auto updating. If I want to 'pin' something in linux, its not nearly so simple.
That's great, but unfortunately the following doesn't work, and it's what many users seems to think they want
apt-get install MSOffice Photoshop WorldOfWarcraft
Even something like Google Earth for Linux can't be "apt-gotten," unless that has changed in the past few months.
I've never seen any person actually buy the WiFi accessory except for morons. And this is including a whole host of people I know who have 360s who aren't tech savvy. They just plugged their's in to a router via the wired connection. The GGP's attempt to add that in as if it was some sort of mandatory cost (on top of all the other nonsense) just makes the post entirely laughable.