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.

22 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 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.

    3. 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
    4. 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.
  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!

  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 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...
  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. 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 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
    4. 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. 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. :)

  9. 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
  10. 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.

  11. 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."
  12. 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.

  13. 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.