Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

"Apple Tax" Report Backfires On Microsoft

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the taxes-were-due-yesterday dept.

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.

50 of 993 comments (clear)

  1. How is it hidden? by AlterRNow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The price tag clearly displays it before the 1,000 unit separator..

    *scratches head*

    --
    The disappearing pencil trick. Let me show you it.
  2. Meh. by CWRUisTakingMyMoney · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
    1. Re:Meh. by AioKits · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's just economics: things are worth only what people will pay for them.

      You're not just buying the thing being offered in many cases though. With advertising and PR you're also buying into the image that comes with it. iPods that make you part of the trendy crowd, shoes that make you a super basketball player or a car that attracts all the babes. Sure, it may be a good product but how many people would be willing to buy the equivalent product that has little or no image / cool factor attached to it?

      --
      "Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted." -Groucho Marx
    2. Re:Meh. by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Apple's problem isn't so much the "Apple tax," it's that they just don't have a very diverse product line for varied budgets (especially on the low end). When you buy a Dell, they will have something for you whatever your budget is. With Apple, the only thing they have under $1200 is the Mini (sans monitor). There is nothing wrong with that, mind you (a lot of companies specialize in higher-end PC's too). But it does create the perception that you're not getting much "bang for your buck" (since most of their stuff is well above the value "sweet spot" in the sub-$1000 range).

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    3. Re:Meh. by WankersRevenge · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I just switched over to mac this past December, and I will say that for the first time in a long time, I found myself buying smaller twenty dollar applications that have I needed in my work flow. So in some way, my cost of ownership has risen. That said, my laptop satisfaction is off the charts. Sure, I might have been able to get the same components in a cheaper configuration, but it's the little details that make me love this computer - the magnetic power cable - the backlit keyboard - some of the mouse pad gestures - even the OS experience is a nice one. So yes, I might have a higher TOS, but I'm actually happier (ie, spending money is not a bad thing)

      Now before you label me an Apple fan boy, let me also say that I absolutely loathe that company for a gazillion different reasons. I mean really, they do shit that MS wishes they could do in their wet dreams. If my computer purchases were ideologically based, I'd be using Linux. But being more pragmatic that ideological, I decided to go with Apple and as long as they stay on an x86 chip, I see no reason choosing any other.

    4. Re:Meh. by mdwh2 · · Score: 4, Informative

      but if Apple can command that price and have people pay it, what's wrong with that?

      I don't think anyone is claiming it's wrong in the sense of it being unethical!

      But if Microsoft want to point out they are lower cost that competitors, what's wrong with that?

      Just as Apple have every right to make their products expensive if they wish, people have a right to point this out when arguing about which computer is best. The issue is about what platform is best, not whether companies have a legal or ethical right to make their products expensive.

    5. Re:Meh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This may be why some people buy Apple products, but, has absolutely nothing to do w/ why I do. Apple laptops are VERY nice. The new MacBooks have a very nice, sharp, bright LED display, unibody aluminum case that is very well designed, etc. So, in terms of aesthetics, their laptops are the best. The display is top notch (in my opinion)....

      but 99% of the reason why I buy Apple is the OS. OS X is a very good alternative to both Windows and Linux. Specifically, it combines a UI on par with or better than Windows with the "Unix like" functionality offered by Linux. So, on my superior laptop, I can run an OS that gives me the same capabilities as Linux, but w/ a much better user interface.

      Really the question I have is why would anybody NOT buy a mac? What benefit do Windows or Linux offer (for a user/developer machine!!! (not server))?

    6. Re:Meh. by guruevi · · Score: 4, Informative

      There is also the Macbook White for 999 and the Macbook Alu for 1299. If you are really cheap, you can also go to their "Refurb" or "Clearance" page and you can get things other people sent back or the previous model for a very good price (and yes, they are tested and inspected so you don't get the crap somebody else destroyed). If you go to school or college or work for the government or an educational institution you usually get a discount too.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    7. Re:Meh. by digitig · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't like Apple's hardware lock-in, but my son just got a macbook and I have to admit that although the technical spec seems low for the price the build standard is incredibly good; it looks and feels as if it's actually going to last the course, whereas most of the notebooks I've ever had have failed because of the casing or connectors. So there's clearly something missing from Microsoft's analysis (surprise!), although they're right that that pitches it at the high-end market. Does anybody have hardware reliability comparisons for Macbooks and comparably priced Windows laptops?

      Some of the stuff in the report is more blatant nonsense, of course: "A re-buy of Office for Mac starts at $150" (whose fault is that?) -- so Office for the PC is free, is it? Or do they think that all Mac users will buy Office for Windows too, just to keep Microsoft happy?

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    8. Re:Meh. by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's just because MY cigarettes are less harmful to the environment than YOUR SUVs. And MY gun kills fewer people than the greaseballs YOU are sucking down.

      So, of course, SUVs and fast food are to be banned, cigarettes and guns are good.

      Since you (or someone else at least) will demand exactly the opposites, all four industries are doing ok. Welcome to hypocrit capitalism.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    9. Re:Meh. by AioKits · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Really the question I have is why would anybody NOT buy a mac? What benefit do Windows or Linux offer (for a user/developer machine!!! (not server))?

      Oh, this is gonna land me in karma hell... GAMES! I beta and sometimes alpha test some of the games. Not a whole lot of em mind you, but enough. I like games. I like to blow apart zombies, or relive wars I was never in, fly amazing air and space craft, or even send my mystical death cow (taruen deathknight), the necromouser (ratongan necromancer) or any other assorted character into battle. With a mac, I just don't have the range of games I look to play. Sure the mac gaming experience is expanding, but with overpriced graphics cards and a less than enticing selection.

      For me, a mac would not be worth it for that one factor alone. For everything not games, I have an HP laptop that runs Ubuntu.

      --
      "Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted." -Groucho Marx
    10. Re:Meh. by DrLang21 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm confused. Why would there be a problem with carrying a bitdriver and spare wiring around.

      --
      I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
    11. Re:Meh. by somersault · · Score: 4, Informative

      I felt the same about my MBP at first, but even with the underclocked-as-standard graphics card that comes with it, it gets incredibly noisy when running 3D games, and after a couple of hours it just locks up due to overheating. So they may be fine for light work, but some of the engineering is actually rather poor. I ended up reading a lot of horror stories about Mac assembly over the last few years, thermal paste being applied too liberally to the CPU etc, so perhaps the machine would run better if I cleaned it out and re-applied the thermal paste myself, but I don't want to have to do that when I've already paid over a thousand pounds for the machine.

      I switched to Ubuntu because it does everything that OSX did (Avant Window Manager), but it's free. The OSX UI is pretty nice, but Ubuntu is even better once you setup compiz correctly, and Avant Window Manager is a great replacement for the Dock.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    12. Re:Meh. by DrLang21 · · Score: 5, Informative

      With Apple's higher end laptops, I've tried to configure an equivalent system from Dell. The result is that high end systems cost a lot of money (Dell's was a couple hundred cheaper by the way). Also keep in mind that with Apple, if your shit's broke, they send you a box next day air, you put your laptop in and and ship it back next day air with the label they give you, and then you usually get it back within 3 days, no charge if you're still under warranty. That's pretty hardcore service compared to the on-site service I've had from Dell.

      --
      I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
    13. Re:Meh. by ducomputergeek · · Score: 4, Informative

      This used to be a huge problem, then Apple switched to Intel and you can load Windows via Bootcamp for gaming. I had friends get the 512MB video card option on their MBP's just so they could play the latest games.

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
    14. Re:Meh. by dzfoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >> 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 with the Windows PC you only get games; at least that was the only advantage you mentioned. With the Mac, you get a more polished experience in many other aspects of computing--plus the games by using BootCamp and Windows.

              -dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    15. Re:Meh. by AioKits · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because with the Windows PC you only get games; at least that was the only advantage you mentioned. With the Mac, you get a more polished experience in many other aspects of computing--plus the games by using BootCamp and Windows.

      -dZ.

      Polished how? You haven't explained to me anything I can't already do in my Windows Desktop or my Ubuntu Laptop. All you've done is throw a buzzword or two my way.

      --
      "Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted." -Groucho Marx
    16. Re:Meh. by babyrat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I was going to respond to this post indicating that it is not the same experience. The hardware itself, totally outside of specs is much nicer on a MBP than any HP. Then I was going relate my experiences of loading OSX on HP laptops (among others)...hunting for drivers, manually editing files to allow the latest hardware to be recognized bythe existing drivers, not using auto-updates because they screw up those drivers and cause kernel panics after reboots.

      and then a thought about this statement for a bit...

      That doesn't mean jack. I can find an HP laptop with the EXACT hardware specs of any Apple laptop,

      and decided that this statement in response to that comment would sum it up:

      No you cannot.

  3. Look at page 3 by peterdaly · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
    1. Re:Look at page 3 by Shrike82 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Imaging that. Charging more for a better product!

      That's not the point he's trying to make. He's pointing out that even if the products are better, not catering to a demographic that wants lower prices, and is probably willing to accept lower quality, means you allow competitors to gain a foothold.

      I'm still waiting for the IPod bubble to burst. Been waiting quite a while now...

      --
      You can advertise in this sig from as little as £99.99 a month!
    2. Re:Look at page 3 by hey! · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Competitive products haven't gained a foothold because iPods are priced effectively at zero.

      Of course they aren't actually priced at zero from the point of view of making a profit, but they are priced low enough that people don't bother to comparison shop, and from a competitive standpoint that's within spitting distance of zero. Apple doesn't have to watch their low-price flank, because they're occupying every price niche from $79 up to the maximum any sane person would want to spend on such a device. And in every price range, they're offering no-brainer values. Oh, you can probably get better devices for the price, but it's not worth the trouble to figure that out when you can buy an iPod. People have better things to do with their time than pouring over the specifications and features of portable media players. They just figure out how much they're willing to spend, walk over to the iPod display, and buy the next model up. Then they get on with their lives.

      Now if somebody came out with a device that inspired consumer lust, and priced it comparably to a similar iPod, then we'd see some market position turmoil and Apple would have to either tweak its products or its prices. But Zune wasn't the device to make them do it.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    3. Re:Look at page 3 by raddan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually, this is not true. We did this evaluation recently, and ended up going with Macs for our employees. It has had the added, unexpected, benefit that our employees who switched are stupidly happy now.

      Anyway, in the past, we've gone with WinXP machines for the reasons you mention. They're dirt cheap, the hardware is pretty reliable (you can get great deals from HP when buying in bulk, and their machines are a pleasure to work with), and the software... well, it functions anyway. Macs always came out more expensive, but not significantly so.

      The crucial thing that always tipped the scale in favor of MS was: legacy application support. We have a number of legacy apps-- some are more than 10 years old. XP mostly handled these apps OK. With Vista-- they simply do not work anymore. Unfortunately, they were written well before my time, so we do not have access to code, and the original developers have now moved on to other things. We're stuck with them until we replace them.

      So we're now faced with having to run them inside a virtualization environment until we can replace them. Heck, if we're going to do that... why stick with Windows?

      We looked at Linux, Vista, and the Mac. Linux seemed like a great option, and maybe in the future, it will be, but there were some dealbreakers, since it would require quite a bit more IT overhead to get going than, say, a Mac. Vista was disappointing, and frustrating to use, even for IT folk. Now, the Mac... it turned out to be quite easy to get going! We have it integrated into our AD. We've so far opted not to go with schema changes, but setting up Macs has been a breeze, and deploying them has been even easier than deploying Windows. No problems with SATA/IDE/driver problems-- the same disk image can be applied to ANY Intel Mac, and the image deployment tools come built-in! User templates can be set up just as easily as they can with Windows, and Macs can use our existing CIFS shares. SSO works!

      When we compared the price per machine (including software) between Windows and the Mac, the Windows machines were marginally cheaper (like $25 per machine)-- UNTIL we mentioned this to our Apple rep. She dropped the price for us, and we ended up with a package that was cheaper than the Windows machines.

      Add on the fact that administrating these machines is easy (no AV required!), we can do SSH and remote desktop out of the box, and for us, using Macs has been a clear winner.

      We'd go with Macs again, and this is despite the fact that I have previous ranted here about how Apple's enterprise support sucks. Their AppleCare program for consumer-level stuff is actually pretty good.

      For the record, all of my personal machines are Linux or OpenBSD. No Apple or Windows machines (not including my iPod).

  4. Pro-MS press?!?!? by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
    1. Re:Pro-MS press?!?!? by pohl · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can remember longer. In the pre-www days the trade rags had a heavy MS bias. Apple was contantly "beleaguered", and didn't become the darling until the iPod was a hit, really.

      --

      The "cue the foo posts in 3, 2, 1..." posts will commence with no subsequent foo posts in 3, 2, 1...

    2. Re:Pro-MS press?!?!? by iamhigh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The ipod and OSX were both released in 2001. I think there is a bit of causation there. OS9 sucked hard compared to W2k; even 10.0 was pretty terrible (buggy as hell). The press had just about every reason to hate Macs in the late 90's and through the release of 10.1 (also in 2001, but you got a freebie upgrade on that one, IIRC... again cuz 10.0 sucked).

      --
      No comprende? Let me type that a little slower for you...
    3. Re:Pro-MS press?!?!? by MarkvW · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nothing good should be said about MS? That's kind of nuts.

      MS has performed a TREMENDOUS service to MANY of those who like to use computers. Bill Gates' quest to dominate has much helped the x86 chipset to become a standard and has created a standardized operating system so that developers can reach more people more easily. Computers are really ubiquitous now largely because of Microsoft. This ubiquity has resulted in lower prices and more variety.

      Maybe MS has served its purpose and should soon become extinct. Time will tell. But dont' say that NOTHING good should be said about MS!

  5. Where's the "Vista Tax" Report? by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.
  6. The bashwagon by gcnaddict · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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/
  7. Meanwhile Linux users everywhere are scratching th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Meanwhile Linux users everywhere are scratching their heads..."

    trying to figure out how to install their word processor on the newest ubuntu distro

  8. How about those hidden linux taxes? by 2.7182 · · Score: 5, Funny

    You have to admit, they are really well hidden.

    1. Re:How about those hidden linux taxes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They are quickly revealed to you post install, if your time is worth anything that is.

    2. Re:How about those hidden linux taxes? by GNUbuntu · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm still compiling the system you insensitive clod!

    3. Re:How about those hidden linux taxes? by pentalive · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Several Linux distributions work just fine just as installed. They don't need anything beyond what you might have to do if you were installing windows fresh.

      We Linux users like to 'customize' but its not required.

      My time is worth $25 to $30 an hour, but I can adjust, download, customize and registry edit just as much on Windows as I can on Linux.

    4. Re:How about those hidden linux taxes? by corsec67 · · Score: 5, Informative

      The ease of installing software on many Linux distributions shouldn't be overrated.

      If I want to install OpenOffice, Gimp, Pidgin, Blender, Thunderbird, Emacs, VI, Akregator, GimageViewer, Gnome Terminal, etc. it is easy to do that in one command in linux, but doing that in Windows, even with all of the specified software packages being open source is much more time consuming.

      sudo apt-get install openoffice gimp pidgin blender mozilla-thunderbird emacs vi akregator gimageview gnome-terminal

      Is tons easier than going to 10 different websites, downloading at least 10 install packages, installing all of them, etc. And then there is keeping all of that up to date.

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
    5. Re:How about those hidden linux taxes? by Richy_T · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Hmm, given that there *is* a lot of open source software available for Windows, I'm surprised someone hasn't come up with something like apt-get for it (or maybe even ported apt).

      Unless anyone knows differently.

    6. Re:How about those hidden linux taxes? by TheOtherChimeraTwin · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yeah, but there does seem to be a linux tax. Look at Dell's Ubuntu notebook offerings:

      • XPS M1530n for $974
      • XPS M1330n for $849

      (I'm leaving out the Mini 9n because it is a netbook with a tiny keyboard.) The cheapest Windows XPS M1530 is $899, and the Windows M1330 is $749. More importantly, I can get a Inspiron 15 laptop for $399. Less than HALF the cost of the cheapest Ubuntu notebook. (Never mind the specs here, I'm just looking for a cheap box with a real keyboard.)

      Let's look at system76 instead. Their cheapest notebook is a Darter Ultra for $739.

      Excluding netbooks, if I want a cheap notebook right now, the least expensive option is to buy a Windows notebook and then install Linux!

    7. Re:How about those hidden linux taxes? by vux984 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    8. Re:How about those hidden linux taxes? by quisxt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

  9. Linux users by onion2k · · Score: 5, Funny

    Meanwhile Linux users everywhere are scratching their heads.

    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
  10. I can see the press now by David+Gerard · · Score: 5, Funny

    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
  11. Microsoft still doesn't get it by Lord+Grey · · Score: 4, Insightful
    From Roger Kay's blithering:

    And even if you're still willing to pay extra-- sometimes a lot extra -- for cool -- that diaphanous, ephemeral quality -- the coolness gap will largely evaporate this year when Windows 7 is introduced. Already Windows 7 is showing itself to be a far more worthy competitor for Mac OS X than Vista was. In beta now, speculation is that Windows 7 may release to market in early summer, perhaps soon enough to ship on machines by back-to-school season and certainly by holiday. At that point, the Apple premium will come into greater focus.

    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."

    --
    // Beyond Here Lie Dragons
  12. What gets me... by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:What gets me... by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Microsoft has not been quiet for ages. For the past decade, they have been making one false claim after another about using Linux -- always centered around the idea that there is some sort of hidden cost that will bite you later on if you use Linux. What makes this newsworthy is that Microsoft has changed their focus -- they are now more afraid of Apple than the Linux crowd (again).

      --
      Palm trees and 8
  13. Hidden Microsoft Taxes I Have Paid by Dystopian+Rebel · · Score: 4, Funny

    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.
    1. Re:Hidden Microsoft Taxes I Have Paid by BlitzTech · · Score: 4, Informative

      You forgot:

      Office 2007 -> Office 2003 Incompatibility Tax
      Reformat Every Six Months To Actually Clean The Registry Tax
      Call Microsoft Every Time You Have To Reformat Tax
      UAC Windows Popping Up All The Freaking Time Tax

      Just to name a few.

    2. Re:Hidden Microsoft Taxes I Have Paid by ben0207 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And the very real:
      Losing all your work because Windows Update restarted in the middle of the night and you'd forgotten to save and who the FUCK DECIDED TO MAKE THAT THE DEFAULT OPTION?! "YES, PLEASE COMPUTER, PLEASE RESTART WHENEVER YOU FUCKING FEEL LIKE IT HAVING DISPLAYED A POPUP DIALOG FOR 5 FUCKING MINUTES. AND PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT DIALOG MINIMISES ANY FULLSCREEN APPLICATIONS OR GAMES I'M CURRENTLY USING, THAT'S REALLY FUCKING GREAT" I DON'T MIND YOU DOWNLOADING UPDATES IN THE BACKGROUND, AND I'M SORT OF GLAD THAT YOU'RE SET TO UPDATE BY DEFAULT, BUT WHY, FUCKING WHY, DO YOU NEED TO RESTART EVERY TEN FUCKING SECONDS?.... ...tax.

      Sorry, got a bit carried away there (having left my computer on with a Photoshop document I'd spend 4 hours on without saving yesterday, only to find my computer now has a security patch for software I never use and a distinct lack of my work.)

      --
      cmd-q.co.uk - some sort of stupid fucking internet bullshit
  14. It's a computer... by koan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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."
  15. Re:Did I miss something? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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
  16. Re:What's weird about those Microsoft ads by The+Cisco+Kid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  17. absurd by confused+one · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.