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.
Meanwhile Linux users everywhere are scratching their heads.
No, no we are not. We're used to this shit from Ballmer and Co. Surprised that they turned their sites on Apple with it?
No, I've bitched about this before and I'm sick of hearing about "hidden costs" that you don't pay when you install Linux or OSX or whatever but that you pay later. Or the cost to train to a new OS being a "hidden" cost because Microsoft starts these reports with the assumption that everyone already knows Windows XP.
I'm not scratching my head, I'm sick of it. And I hope that this finally causes people to realize that you can only assume the price of what you initially pay for software because they all have flaws and problems down the line. It's a futile exercise to try to itemize that in a cost list because--surprise surprise--you're often subjective and biased when you do it!
Microsoft conveniently ignores these "comprehensive" reports when they ask you to upgrade to Vista despite all the retraining and migration problems you will have.
My work here is dung.
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.
"Meanwhile Linux users everywhere are scratching their heads..."
trying to figure out how to install their word processor on the newest ubuntu distro
You have to admit, they are really well hidden.
That's because using Linux gives you dandruff.
I'm just kidding.
Living in a basement is what gives you dandruff. :)
http://twitter.com/onion2k
Millions of smug Mac users and the four hundred smug Linux users pointed and laughed, having long given up trying to convince their Windows-using friends to see sense.
"There's a reason the Unix system on Mac OS X is called Darwin," said appallingly smug Mac user Arty Phagge.
"It can't be stupid if everyone else runs it," said Windows user Joe Beleaguered, who had lost all his email, business files, MP3s and porn again. "Macs cost more than Windows PCs."
"Yes," said Phagge. "Yes, they do."
Ubuntu Linux developer Hiram Nerdboy frantically tried to get our attention about something or other, but we can't say we care.
http://rocknerd.co.uk
Five licenses, less than $200:
http://www.amazon.com/Apple-Version-10-5-6-Leopard-5-User/dp/B000BR0NPO
(and no feature variation betwixt home and work)
How much will 5 upgrades to Windows 7 cost me?
William
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
They only talk about the hardware, not the software. Most people I know buy a Mac because of Mac OS X and iLife, not because the machines "look good".
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.
He has a point. Macbook discoloration (pre-unibody), case chipping (pre-unibody, and this has happened to mine as well), as well as razor-sharp edges on all unibody macbooks. That and the overuse of heat paste, the general heat problems, screen backlighting unevenness... these are things I haven't seen on my dell, oddly enough.
Viable Slashdot alternatives: https://pipedot.org/ and http://soylentnews.org/
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.
Software Installation Reboot Tax
Virus Tax
Anti-Virus Installation Reboot Tax
MS Word Document Corruption And Formatting Instability Tax
MS Office 2007 UI Redesign Tax
Windows Genuine Advantage Tax
Windows Update Reboot Tax
DRM Tax
Internet Explorer Web Deficiencies Tax
Idiotic Advertising Campaigns Tax
Ballmer Squirt Tax
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
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."
Apple's core market is not just the delivery of a commodity computer and a commodity operating system. It is the end to end receipt of a solution. People that buy Apples buy them because you will get good service out of their store, and you will get solid hardware that works.
There is a reasonable premium to be charged for that and I don't think arguing Mac on price is alone is really indicative of the kind of market people have. Some people are willing to pay a good premium for a good experience. I for one have had an absolutely excellent experience with Macintoshes. I tell myself the same thing as I tell everyone else. If you want the best possible consumer experience, and you don't mind paying more, just go and buy a Macintosh. It's the simplicity of experience, that people pay more for.
I will have to say, that I don't have the money, so right now I'm running a home built dual Opteron with yesterday's CPUs (Opteron 270s), using Windows Vista Business on one drive and Linux on another... but, hey, if I did have the money, I'd buy the Mac.
This is my sig.
So there isn't really a conspiracy here, but there is an undercurrent fighting against the pro apple news. The loudest news about apple is pro apple, but only a little less loud is the anti apple news and complaining that said devices aren't perfect. How many people here on slashdot railed against the Mac because it didn't have a command line for so long? Or rail against the iPhone because it's not 100% open or doesn't support Ogg? These are valid arguments, but as people speak out, the almighty dollar takes over, and some journalists pick up on this sentiment and look to make money off it. They establish their niche in reporting and, often, becomes as dogmatic as the pro apple news, and many times stops providing any real content and just keeps finding more ways to say "apple sucks."
You might think "well duh, of course there are two sides to the story why are you saying this" but if you are swept up in the bipolar press, you aren't realizing there is a third voice, very quiet and very small. Those are the moderates who are actively trying to be objective and are somewhere in the middle. But in just about all news these days, not just tech news, objectivity doesn't sell very well, only the extreme viewpoints do.
Of course, all of this does not include the fact that Microsoft has a vested interest in getting as many journalists on their side as they can and if they could would bribe anyone and everyone into believing their OS is best. There is a small, anemic conspiracy there, but that's not Apple specific, that's Microsoft trying to fight against any and all competitors. They've done this with Linux before too.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
When I, a security engineer, buy a machine, I'm not the the average consumer. But my wife is.
If her current Dell laptop broke, I know what her requirements are. She wants something with a 15 inch screen and it has to do what she wants, basically surf the web, email, and edit her photos in Lightroom, that's really all.
To purchase a 15" Dell will cost me about $800-900 shipped.
To purchase a 15" Mac will cost me $2000, minimum.
For the average consumer, I think people can see that some Mac's are overpriced.
If the vendor of the word processor (like Word Perfect) cares, then they will make
a shiny happy installation program just like any other commercial software vendor
on the planet (including Oracle).
Otherwise, I can just just double click on the binary package (like an MSI file)
or just search for "word processor" in my package manager. There is a shiny happy
GUI for this and everything.
1998 called, it wants it's FUD back.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Depends. In some places, we have truth in advertising laws. If you say something about a competitor's product, it has to be true. Apple had to withdraw some adverts because they made unsubstantiated claims about Microsoft products, and Microsoft should be held to the same standards. If they claim an equivalent Mac is more expensive, then they need to be able to justify this. Comparing a Core 2 Dell against a Xeon Mac is not a fair comparison, as the article in El Reg demonstrated; the Dell with almost identical hardware (slightly smaller hard disk) was $500 more expensive. This is not just spin, it is outright dishonesty.
The previous Microsoft adverts were much better. They didn't try to claim that they were cheaper, they pointed out that there were a lot of niches where Apple has no equivalent product. This is entirely true. My last two computers have been Macs, but if I look at their current product line I don't see anything that fits the niche that I fit in.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Well, the fact of the matter is: Mac comes with just about everything. Non-linear video editing, photo editing and organizers and they're very powerful. The systems you buy at BestBuy or any other shop are kinda bare compared to that just to keep the costs down. If you have to include a comparable video editing package on Windows you'll add easily $200-500 and Adobe's Photoshop Elements or something comparable is also at least a $100.
I have to support systems in a corporate setting and I have everything here from Dell to IBM to HP to Fujitsu-Siemens including Apple. I like so much better to deal with Apple for support. If they notice you know what you're doing, they'll just quit reading their script and send you on to either an engineer or somebody to arrange for a repair or replacement part. And the package with the new hardware comes in the next day with FedEx or UPS, you put in the old hardware, rip of a sticker and while the delivery guy is still standing there you give it back. Dell especially can have you on the line literally for hours and you're still not past an indian guy reading scripts and the hardware comes in on a weekly schedule even though we have (had - cancelled after several horror-stories) 'gold' support. The Apple server systems have next-day (usually same-day) on-site support for at least 1 year or 3 years when you buy the extended warranty package. IBM and HP have similar support but you need to pay them a lot more money (we pay IBM several 1000's per year for that type of support on just a single system)
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
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!
Only idiots buy all their equipment from high street retailers and pay full price, I expect better from /.ers
Most of the consumer market isn't made up of /.'ers, let alone the informed.
The disappearing pencil trick. Let me show you it.
Xbox Live =$50/year = $250 for 5 years.
Unncessary to play the vast bulk of games. You can also get it for around 35/13 months by buying subscription cards. But if you want to play figures 15/month WoW subscription for 5 years = $900.
Hard drive $100/$150
Already comes with the 360 unless you buy the crappy Arcade. But even still isn't necessary unless you play online which most games are single player anyway.
Batteries for controller $20 (play charge kit)
Or you can spend 6 dollars and get a set of rechargables.
Total = $470
Oh noes! Not 470 dollars!
Add the $200 for the arcade to get $670. And people say PC gaming is expensive.
If you want to play any games from the last couple of years you would have spent at least 670 if not more on your PC.
At least you online for free.
For some games. If you want to play any decent MMO you are going to pay way more in fees over the same 5 years than anyone would pay for a 360 pro and a 5 year subscription to Live. And they would have enough money left over to buy at least a dozen or more games in that same period and still come out ahead.
A decent graphics card is only $200, if a pc is relatively new it should run most games (maybe not at full settings but at 720p shouldn't be a problem).
Yeah but it's going to cost you around 600-800 dollars to build a system (assuming you do it yourself) that will be able to do that. So basically your whole argument seems moot.
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.
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.
You still haven't convinced me. Why I should pay more now (Apple License and a Windows License) for a mac with bootcamp, when I can just have my regular ole PC (Just a windows license) to play games?
Because if you really are beta and alpha testing games, wouldn't you like a PC that had the games aspect totally isolated from your "working" OS?
With the Mac, you have the choice of running OS X, running Windows in Bootcamp (for games) or running Windows in some kind of VM (for any other Windows app and even some games). Add Linux to any of those variants as well and that's more choice than you get with any other system.
Plus you can use the Windows install you already have so it's not like that's extra - in fact it makes less sense for you to buy a new PC since it duplicates your Windows license.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
It explicitly includes a Mac owned by a child who lives on-campus at a university. However, I doubt the Apple Police are going to come after anyone because they live in off-campus housing but still use their parents' family pack license.
Ugh.... It's "affect".... But that's not the issue here.
like this? You should start an article, don't you think?
Technically, what you are telling me is that my parents server, a machine bought in 1999, should be extremely slow. It's been running 24/7 for the last 5 years or so. (Same thing for my dads laptop, which was bought in 2000, IIRC... but that one doesn't run 24/7, but at least a couple of hours a day)
I'm not saying it doesn't degrade, I'm not an electrical engineer, but if it does, the effects are insignificant. If it slows down 0.0001% (number pulled from somewhere very dark), it simply doesn't matter.
This is not about belief. You asserted something, and I asked you some evidence. You said, wikipedia it, but there is no article. Google does have some interesting links, but nothing that I can comprehend. Where is the article for the layman, stating that after (for example) 5 years with moderate usage, his computer will run at about 25% of original performance? Not everyone is an electrical engineer, and I cannot asses such things.
Hmm, $3,367 over five years for a household...
Am I the only one who thought that paying an extra $600/year per household to escape the burden of dealing with Windows (for all users, not just non-techie ones) wouldn't be that unreasonable a price?
Try again. This time with real numbers.
Xbox 360 arcade can handle most saved games. It does after all come with a 512MB memory card.
So $169 from Dell if you're patient.
Xbox Live Gold is $30 a month if you buy it in January. So 5 years = $150
That's all you need $319 for 5 years of gaming. (Of course then games etc.)
I don't need Wifi. I use a primitive technology called CAT5. Since there is a conveniently placed cable plug right next to my television.
Meanwhile I just built a quadcore system and it cost me about $1200. Impossible to buy as a mac. And also a fare penny more than my Xbox which I own not because it's cheaper but because it's a better gaming system.
I would love to buy a 17" mac, but every time I look at the price it insults me.
I find it really difficult to make the case that macs are not significantly overpriced, especially for people who use macs primarily as a windows machine. The paper points out the obvious: spec-for-spec, PCs destroy macs in terms of value.
The only way I can see anyone justifying paying this premium is if they're dead-set on use OS X. Otherwise, it's a waste of money.
Note that I'm not saying that macs are bad --they're fantastic. But Mercedes are also fantastic, but are overpriced compared to similarly equipped cars.
And as for market share, Apple doesn't *want* a large market share. If they did, they would lower their prices. They have a strategy that gives them insane margins, and it works. In would be crazy for them to wade into the low-margin ring that Dell, HP, et al fight in.
Computers are no "investment". But that most PC machines are virtually worthless after a few years and Macs still sell for good money is just a fact.
RPMs and DEBs are just different. While I am a fan of apt-get, they make a lot of assumptions and take away from a lot of the configurability that an rpm allows. Of course, the same old argument between Linuc and Windows in general, is that it is whether or not it is useful to the average individual to take the time to learn the difference, and as usual no, but just the same, that is no reason to take such configurability away. Most people never install anything ever, especially not system "stuff". So where is the line? Each to their own :)
:) as for what apt-get does is store the metadata such that it can know what script sets have already been run, and if others need to be run, etc. The limits comes down to what the package maintainer chooses to put in their install script.
I find it funny, and a little sad when I hear people trying to tell other people what to do or how to standardize Linux. If you make hardware and you would like your hardware to work with other peoples hardware, and both pieces of hardware are in development, then there is room to suggest a standard and find some way for your stuff to work together in the end. On the otherhand, if someone writes a great program, but only specifies dependencies in a README, but never bothers to package it, you have three(ish) basic options: 1) Deal with the fact that it isn't package and compile it yourself. 2) wait for someone to package it for your system, then install it, or 3) Package it yourself.
Not to make it out to be more work than it is, but packaging takes time and effort. From what I have seen, programmers are almost always a different group of people from package maintainers. Any project that packages its own software likely has the job of just package maintenance.
deb packages are also very configurable. I don't think there is anything they can't do. Technically, there is nothing in its design to stop someone from a deb package running the binary every time you install it and never actually installing anything. Just the same, debs can install repositories, it just isn't standard to do that. Personally, I think it is better to let people choose whether or not they want their installed third party software to be self maintaining along with the rest of the system. If there is a repo, make note of it on the website and in the documentation. All a deb has is metadata, install script, uninstall script, and files. This means debs can do anything scripts and files can do.
rpms are easier to build and maintain. debs are much more of a pain in the ass. debs are convenient for the vast majority of users, and they are a lot of work. Would deb users like to see every project out there have a deb available? Of course! But at the sacrifice of development time, or your own? Even if debs were "always better in every way", you are only talking about an end product and not the time that went into putting it together.
So whenever I hear someone say "I wish there was a deb", I say "Your probably not alone, why don't you go do that! Never done package maintenance? Wonderful, here's the manual and if next week you are still confused, i'd be happy to walk you through it."
Linux is about personal responsibility that can ideally easily benefit everyone, imo. Not everyone can really handle that.