Microsoft pays for inaccurate "Apple Tax" study, issues 3rd TV ad - Page 3

That sounds a lot more like faulty hardware than a Windows problem (the wifi). I have to admit, I've never experience the slowness you're talking about on 5+ Vista machines, but then I build all of my computers to my own specification, so I do a good job of it

Apple are just not in the low end market and you know what I'm glad..

Being in the low end market will increase market share but won't increase their profit, it will only add to their support costs and therefore could reduce profits in the long term and reduce everyones overall mac experience as they try and reduce the support costs.

Most PC manufacturers have forgotten it's better to sell less for more than sell more for less..and they are paying for it.. economies or scale don't work when theres so many people making the same thing. It only works for the apple with iPod because they own the market.

I don't think that if apple did make a low end machine they could achieve an monopoly as the world it just too invested in windows. 10-20% is the sweet spot for Apple.

OS X seems to run more efficiently on the same hardware, so you get more speed from equivalent hardware vs. windows. Sometimes OSX gets even faster speed on slower hardware than Windows. That's worth some money. The simplicity and lack of problems is worth some money, and the design is definitely worth a bit. Is it worth what they're charging? I don't know, and since there's really no competition I can't say.

One thing is for sure, Apple does overcharge on some things, and if they could rein that in a little bit, I'd sure appreciate it and buy more stuff. Not exactly laptop or desktop related, but look what they're charging for this plug to usb iphone charging cube:

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB...mco=MjQzNTIxNw

It's $30 for an accessory that should cost maybe $6. This is the type of thing that, Mac evangelist I may be, I can't really justify to anyone. And it reduces switchers.

If they really wanted a fair and reasoned comparison, they would have asked him to write a report comparing the price differences of comparable PCs and Macs. But since they asked him to write it with the conclusion already pre-established, the report is entirely worthless.

People still fail to recognise the usefulness of a multi OS machine.

You hit the nail on the head there mate! Its no coincidence that rising Mac sales follow on from the enormous success of the iPod and more recently the iPhone. Some of my friends are iPod owners that have been converted to Macs solely because of their experience with the iPod!

As for the ads/report, they are completely ridiculous and biased toward MS and their partners. The addition of mac items that don't appear on the PC side is just stupid. So a Mac user has to buy office (and upgrade it) yet a PC user doesn't? Maybe he expects the PC user to illegally download it?

MS seems to be advertising themselves as the cheap alternative. The problem is that Apple offers a far superior product, which is why there's the so called "Apple Tax". Its like MS is a Hyundai and Apple is a Mercedes - the Hyundai is most likely a cheaper car, does most of what you want it to, but if you want the better quality (better engineering, more features, style, comfort etc) you go for the Mercedes! And of course that Mercedes costs a premium too just like Apple.

Since I first used my buddy's Mac Mini back in 2007 in order to record some music with Garage Band, I have been impressed with the quality of engineering put into such a small tool.

For this reason I went out to reach several Apple/Mac professionals in order to learn more about Apple desktops, laptops and servers in general, and how they could be used to replace Windows PCs in both personal/home and work/office environments.

I consistently encountered this situation: when challenged with technical performance questions, Apple/Mac representatives and consultants became quite defensive, impatient and were not able to produce consistent statistics/details for the performance of Mac Minis, iMacs and MacBook Pros.. They suggested I just go ahead and purchase the equipment and then figure it out on my own whether they would work for me.

The explanation I was able to obtain from them was that Macs work very well with whatever they were designed to work with in the first place, and using other applications/hardware was basically a hit or miss, depending on the third-party software or hardware vendor. I only found one gentleman - whom I understand used to work as a programmer for Apple and now has his own consulting business - who had the patience and was willing to answer all my questions and demonstrate the tool's capabilities and limitations.

What I got from these experiences is that Macs in general are affordable, great quality low to mid-level "workstations", with some built-in flexibility, are somewhat expandable, and seem to be low-maintenance.

After going through the aforementioned experience and because I have been involved with Windows PCs for many years, non-computer-professional people do come to me asking for recommendations on what to buy new or upgrade their existing computers to.

When they ask me "what about a Mac?", I tell them: "first I would like to ask you what are you planning on using your new computer for," and most of the time I get: "I want something fast for going online, chatting, web-browsing, watching online videos, keeping track of my pictures and videos, word processing and some basic games." I tell them that they cannot go wrong by purchasing a MacBook, a Mac Mini, or an iMac - with some minimum specs - according to their budget and ambition.

These people go running to check prices online or to the Apple Store, Micro Center or Best Buy, and some call me all excited from the store and tell me they found the Mac's I suggested, and they make the purchase right there and then, if they can afford it. Others tell me over the phone that the rep at the store showed them a "nicer looking"/"faster"/"bigger screen" Windows-based computer for about the same price they would pay for the Mac, which would accomplish at least the same as the Mac.

In the end, brand name tax or not, in my experience, most people I have come across just get the tool they can afford, can at least perform the minimum tasks they expect, and accomplish it in the most comfortable manner available within their budget.

Now, regarding my own ambition, I have my sights set on the first 17" MacBook Pro with Nehalem processor that becomes available. I will likely run Windows 7 as my primary OS in order to use all the pro software I already own for PC, which has been working fine for me these past couple of years on my not-so-solid Dell Latitude running Windows Vista. I like the expected quality and performance of the MacBook Pro's components, design, size, weight, features and feel. I only wish they had the option of a graphite case instead of the metal.

I just wanted to share this with everyone because the impression I get is that most posts generalize the situation in favor or against one or the other. I know it is human nature that each one of us wants to deliver the definitive opinion/answer to a problem/situation, but maybe we should each strive to stick to specific first-hand personal experience instances, which, to my thinking, can benefit those readers who need it most, so they can make up their own mind.

I believe we will all benefit positively from all of these marketing wars.

Not a sermon, just an idea.

Cheers!

no, silly mac biggot, some of us use and or support users of real apps, CAD packages, AfterEffects, hell, even 3dsmax

Since when was the majority ever part of Apple's Mac demographic?

Do you even know what "3D" means?

Life without walls is Life without restrictions or Life without boundaries. But then your just being an idiot.

The funny thing, as idiotic as the adverts are they have won on two points. Number one, everyone including every apple blog/forum is talking about them. I mean, its great viral marketing to keep discussing them. Now next time some mac users go shopping they may have point number two nagging at them.

Number two is the value of PCs. This Sony Vaio FW is a great laptop with ATI 3650 (comparable to the Nvidia 9600) is scable upto 2.9 Ghz and 8GB of Ram. Comes with an optional large 8 hours battery (5.5 hour default). Comes with 1920x1080 screen and Blu-ray. Hell a Blu-ray drive for a Mac will set you back like $400... the base on www.sonystyle.com which comes with free Blu-ray is only $839. Even if I go all the way upto 2.9 Ghz (the base is 2.0 Ghz) I am still only $1699. So the value is extremely clear if you are in the market for a 16" or 17" laptop. Is Mac OS X worth over $1000? Hell you could get a Mac Mini and still come out better...

So we as Apple users really should just ignore it... attacking it makes us look elitist and just further gives more free publicity.

Apple needs to decide if they want to continue to be a premium brand and how to market it. Or honestly I think they could come down in price.

on a related point..

Bought my macbook about 3 years ago for about 700 quid. Sold it on ebay for 400 quid. oh so it's cost me 100 quid a year, not bad..

Yep, and what about the time cost of recreating lost documents when Windows crashes and you lose everything? Have to deal with Windows at work, but I'm smart...got a mac at home and have never lost a document!!

Exactly! Because Macs never crash, and their hard drives never fail!!!11!

Taken for all in all . . . there is no comparison whatsoever between a Windows PC and a Mac running OS X in terms of stability.

Coming from the guy who thinks FCP is a 3D app...

PC's cheaper than Macs.

Whodathunkit.

Doesn't get me hot to buy a PC right now.

I will trudge through with the better user experience, the superiority of the iLife suite, and the ability to run Windows if I absolutely have to.

It will be tough but I can do it.

In the last table in Year 3 both machines get an ATI Radeon HD4870, why does the PC one cost $260 and the Apple one cost $350 ?

Microsoft's Apple Tax post is just pathetic.

This is all more MS spin of course...

I'd like to point out that there's more of a Microsoft tax than anything. If I want a PC with Linux installed on it, unless I get a specific Linux model (limiting my choices to less than what Apple offers), part of the purchase price of my computer goes directly to Microsoft even though I don't want to use Windows at all.

That's what I call a Microsoft tax.

I don't see how they can justify spending way more money on peripherals for the mac as an "Apple tax."

Finally, I really really don't understand why they are trying to market Windows based PCs as the cheaper option. Everyone knows that Windows PCs are cheaper than Macs, but more and more consumers are feeling like the extra cost of a Mac is justified because they are looking for a quality machine.

Microsoft really needs a new ad agency.

The funny thing is, Microsoft already has them as customers! They're afraid of losing them. Most people who do their homework and are willing to spend over $1000 on a computer, usually do in fact choose Macs. A study was done a while ago that found 60% of computers sold over $1000 are Macs.

Furthermore, most people don't want to lug around big-ass laptops. 12" - 13" sized screens are perfect for casual, consumer oriented computer use. These ads portray bigger screens as being better, but they make the entire computer bigger as well. Bigger mobile device does not equate to better unless there's a specific need for it. (In all these ads, Microsoft seems to push bigger screens... do you think they're also trying to keep people from buying netbooks as well?)

Another thing, doesn't Microsoft have mobile users to worry about? Why are they worried about Macs when they're getting clobbered by Apple, RIM, and Nokia (and soon Android) in the mobile space.

I have used both Mac and Windows machines for years - Macs only for my personal machines going back to the Mac SE with 9" grayscale screen on up through 17" MacBook Pro that I got used from Apple a couple years ago - IBM ThinkPads for my day job - running windows XP which so far is the best OS from Microsoft that I have used. I have used Parallels to run windows on my Mac when the Thinkpad was in for service (a number of times) and even though the Mac is about a year older than the PC - Parallels runs windows very nearly as fast as the ThinkPad.

My latest ThinkPad had to have the hard drive erased and re-imaged the day after I got it after I tried to load the device driver for the bluetooth PC card that came with my GPS unit.

For those who mention viruses - the last time I saw one on the Mac was about 15 or 20 years ago. On the PC side I have spent many hours cleaning systems which are so infected with so much malware that in one case after three days of running multiple software products multiple times - there was still one infectious item that spread the the rest of my network before I found the right tool for that particular problem.

All in all I am actually glad that there are so many PCs out there and that they have so many problems - this week alone I have five different PCs that need to be worked on - which makes me some extra money - which helps pay for things like upgrading the hard drive in my Mac or getting a new iPhone.


To the post about other people making you feel inferior when you visit the Apple store - I think you are looking at that the wrong way. I know people who start off feeling so inferior to begin with that when they are faced with anyone who is more confident or more knowledgeable than themselves they feel inferior - not because the other person tried to make them feel inferior - or even tried to portray themselves as superior - maybe I am not explaining that well - but sometimes your perception is more about you than the other person. If 100 people go into the Apple store and have exactly the same interaction with the staff there - and them had them each fill out a survey - do you think they would all answer every question on the survey exactly the same way?

I think people in the Apple community spend too much time thinking about Microsoft. Let's let Apple worry about the marketing strategy to beat MS. Why spend time comparing our products with the worst in the market?

I recently switched and am immensely happy with all my Apple products. So what's next? Instead of being satisfied that security is better than the most dangerously incompetent OS in existence, I wonder if my Mac could be as secure as an Oracle enterprise system. Could OSX start up as fast as Linux? Let's throw the Mac v PC chart in the trash where it belongs and get serious.

I'd like to see Apple do a report on how much time Windows users waste reinstalling and restarting then add that to the therapists bill for psychological damage caused by not being able to connect to anything.

As a designer, time really is money and I don't mind paying extra for a system that doesn't crash because I asked it where the calculator is.

It isn't. It was only a relevant example in terms of the horsepower required to run it.

Yes, yes, yes... Because Apple as a company and Macs sales are so doing freaken horrible. They're doomed unless they come down in price. How many times have we heard this? How many more are we going to have to suffer through?

They do not need to come down in price. People just need to resist buying that $700 piece of crap and save more. I'm sorry, but anyone who values their money and investments will look at more than just specs on a sheet. There's customer satisfaction, repair statistics, and customer support. Apple is one of the few companies that realizes that you're a customer for the life of the product, not just until you hand over the cash and walk out the door. The Apple Stores reflect that and that's nothing Microsoft will ever be able to offer Windows users, because they don't deal with end-users, they do business with OEMs.

lost all their senses.
Looking for laptop as a "gaming computer".
No, you can't find a single kid today being as silly, as MS's ad maker is.
Let youngsters write scenarios of your ads, MS, they know better. Buy them Minis in exchange....

Actually the reverse is more true. Windows shills bash Apple EVERY chance they get. What you see in the Apple community is a response to the bashings.

The only time I even think about Microsoft is when someone asks me for help on their Windows computer and how many loops you have to through to get something done.

Apple already has.

Apple is the brand name synonymous with "Premium." Apple will never command the kind of market share MS does, nor should it. As long as Apple keeps a lock on the premium end of the market and grabs new users entering it, all is well. Apple sells on margin, not volume.

I'm not sure what would constitute a "comfortable" market share position for Apple. Frankly, 10% seems just fine. Others say 15%, some even say 20%. Not that any of that matters. Apple remains the more desirable, more exclusive option. Low market share, high margins, and high profits, is pretty typical in this case.

The real blow to MS is Apple grabbing the premium end of the market. When your potential "upper crust" customers are choosing Macs, your own product ends up looking like the cheap econo option. When those with steady jobs (read: careers) and plenty of disposable income DON'T choose your product, you're not only losing a significant advertising vehicle, but you're also cultivating an image that people wouldn't want to associate with except under extenuating circumstances.

The horsepower needed to run FCP?

Like a MacBook?

I guess you don't know any other Mac users then...

Since you have 160 posts, you've clearly been to these forums before. But you clearly haven't bothered to read anyone else's comments. The elitist attitude oozes out of at least 50% of the posts. Heck, scroll up from where your post is and you can see it in others' comments.

Hmm...downgrading requires you to pay more..I wonder which company does that?

This is true. I bought a PowerMac once (with an education discount), and two years later I sold it on eBay for only $100 less than I paid for it. I'd call that a reasonable price to pay for two years of computer use.

Yes, EXACTLY! Those of you pointing out the flaws in this study, PLEASE STOP NOW!!! You are attracting attention, and you might cause more PC users to jump ship. We have enough converts as it is.

Set aside your frustration and sense of justice, and think about this logically for just a second. There is a huge population of people out there who either already prefer windows, or are on the fnece but deep down you know that they are much better suited as a windows user. Let's let them stay on the windows team. We don't need them. Apple is in the sweet spot right now.

For anyone who buys into this non-sensical study, let them choose windows, because it weeds out the undesirables. I don't want Apple to increase their marketshare much more than it is now, and I ESPECIALLY don't want them to dominate and put windows out of business. We need windows in order to keep Apple motivated to push in the opposite direction and continue to innovate and make great products. It keeps us sharp.

Apple is best when it is a small population of people who actually get it. Is there an Apple Tax? I don't believe so. I think the small difference in price goes to pay for a superior overall experience. A better OS, much better hardware, and most importantly, a brilliant merging of how hardware and software should work together. Could apple put out a $599 laptop to compete and bring down their mediaun product price? Of course they could, but it would be crap. I personally enjoy a company that refuses to purposely design market and sell crap products to people.

I don't mind paying a small premium for a much better OS, much better hardware, and a much better overall computer experience. It is completely worth it. However, I don't want everyone to be a mac user. Only those who really get it. I don't want Apple trying to enlist every Joe Sue and Mary who see and want a Mac just because of the pretty glowing apple logo that they saw on an episode of One Tree Hill. We don't want those people in our camp.

For you windows users...Don't Switch! PLEASE!

Why is MS spending all this money comparing hardware? Shouldn't they compare Vista/Windows 7 with OSX? They don't make computers. Apple makes both. Is HP, Dell, Asus, Lenovo, et al helping fund these ads? I'd like to see the OS comparison, including price and the ease of buying and using and features of one OS vs another that has 7 iterations. Maybe only 6 if you eliminate pure business and focus on pure home users. That would compare MS to Apple. Not these ads. Why isn't HP et al running their own ads? What's the cost of MS's OS vs. Apple's OS? What's the cost of OS upgrades?
As an earlier post said, it you want to go hardware and home built, why exclude Linux. Damn OS is free!! Why do the buyers in the ad's always seem to pick HP? Isn't Dell pissed, or Asus, Lenovo etc?

You just hit on something only it shouldn't be Porsche used in comparison with Ford... it should be BMW. Simple point is BMW at the base level is more expensive than a Ford with comparible performance. The only really big difference is the BMW is going to come with more features out of the box and arguably better quality. What it comes down to literally is.. are you shopping on a budget or shopping for a quality product. These are really two different things. If I am looking for a car that gets me around just as quick as the BMW but I can only afford to spend 25 grand then I can't even look at BMW regardless of what features are offered in the base model.

It's the same with PC vs Mac. You guys can argue Apples value all day long but bottom line is I have more options with PC and I can hop on newegg.com and build a decent machine for 300~400 dollars that can do everything I want. It might not have firewire or a special video port or anything else Apple thinks I need to have but I also save money on features I don't need. You guys are right Microsofts ads are skewed and overly exaggerated... if they truly wanted to reach the market they just need to talk about flexibility.

If Apple opened up their licensing to allow any hardware to use their OS Microsoft wouldn't have anything over them but until they do that Microsoft does offer a lot to those who don't have fat wallets or simply want choices.

good point, time to join you guys, dun promote more switchers without REAL reason!

I think this would actually have the opposite affect. The upside of Apple allowing their OS on any machine, would certainly be to allow people to buy very inexpensive hardware, and enjoy Mac OS X.

However, the downsides are huge. Number one is the philosophy that Macs work so well because the hardware and software were designed from day one to all work together. Going through the normal R&D process and thorough testing, Apple decides on specific hardware component combinations to avoid problems. Certain issues inevitably arise during R&D and testing, and then they make changes. Apple wouldn't be able to control this part of the process for other companies' hardware, and the exeprience would suffer for OS X users. If packard bell or Acer or Dell can slap OS X on any of their crappy laptops or desktops, suddenly you start seeing major driver incompatibility issues, cheap components used that don't work properly, and a major "bag of hurt" all the way around. That would ba a nightmare for Apple customer satisfaction, and for Apple Tech Support, not to mention their overall image a future success.

If Apple keeps it all in house, designing it all to work well together, they can control to a large degree how their products are perceived, and how successful they are, and their users win in this situation. That is one of the reasons I use Macs. I don't need Apple to lure a huge army of PC converts to justify my purchase.

I'll second that! Oh, those Windows users, they're the tough ones. They duke it out with their flakey computers and peripherals, all in the name [only] of saving a few bucks.