Time for an audit of Microsoft's 'Apple Tax'

Microsoft puts forth a 'tax return' showing the cost difference between a Windows PC or Mac purchase. However, CNET News' Ina Fried suggests auditors take a close look at the itemized deductions.

(Credit: Microsoft)

Microsoft is back touting the "Apple Tax" that it says Mac buyers are paying, this time filling out a fake tax return listing all of what it claims are the extra costs of opting for Windows' leading rival. But I'd argue that this time Microsoft is in danger of being audited.

The document, posted on Microsoft's Windows Blog on Thursday, compares the cost of a PC and Mac purchase, making the case that buyers can save more than $3,000 in buying two Windows PCs as opposed to two Macs. The "tax return" is based on a Microsoft-paid-for white paper (PDF) from technology analyst Roger Kay.

While I don't take issue with Microsoft's basic point that Macs can be more expensive, the assumptions in the white paper and the blog strike me as suspect.

Kay looks at the five-year cost of buying the two machines and making a series of upgrades along the way, as well as buying certain software and services.

The paper assumes we are talking about Windows switchers who already have two licenses to Quicken and Microsoft Office, so Kay adds $70 and $149 for the Mac side and assumes zero cost on the PC side. Even if that were true, that makes the assumption that users would not want to upgrade their software.

But Kay makes a different assessment when it comes to Apple's iLife, which is included in the cost of a new Mac. In his five-year cost analysis, Kay adds a $99 upgrade of iLife in year three, something that is optional, rather than mandatory.

On the services side, Kay adds a three-year warranty to the PC and AppleCare on the Mac side. AppleCare is somewhat more than Dell's warranty. Fair enough.

Then, Kay also includes Apple's one-on-one, in-store consulting service, for which there is no PC parallel. One could even argue that the PC buyer should have to add in a cost for the Geek Squad service that removes crapware from a Windows machine.

The analysis also includes Apple's definitely pricey, but also totally optional MobileMe service. Although Microsoft has its free Windows Live services on the Windows side, cost-conscious Mac users can also use a variety of free services from Google, Yahoo, or even Microsoft itself.

I talked to Roger Kay about the analysis he did, which was commissioned by Microsoft. Kay said he had already shaved from his analysis some of the costs that were presented to him by Microsoft.

"If there's a couple more in there, I wouldn't be surprised," he said, referring to my quibbles. "If I found another $500 (in savings) it wouldn't change things much."

On the hardware side, Microsoft has its clearest case of being cheaper, but again, Kay and Microsoft overplay their hand. For a desktop on the Mac side, Kay goes with Apple's professional Mac Pro desktop. Now, to be fair, there aren't a lot of Mac models to choose from, but the far less costly iMac is really the company's only consumer desktop line.

"You could have chosen another machine," Kay said. But with PCs, he said, you get to shop around. "That particular piece of the economics seems to hold up pretty well."

Microsoft first started touting this idea of an Apple Tax in an interview last October. I'd argue, as I have, that the tax exists, but it is one that the average buyer knowingly pays for what they perceive as the differences between the PC and Mac experiences. In any case, the economic differences, while large, aren't as big as Kay and Microsoft make them out to be in this study.

[wshwe]

Microsoft Windows and Office aren't cheap or free either.

[Renegade Knight]

Ironic that part of the Apple Tax is actually Office Tax.

[merlefisher]

They should have added Microsoft exchange in there to be the equivalent of Apple's MobileMe Service.

And pc users have to upgrade software like Quicken and Microsoft office too. So software wise, when the prices are compared, you save more buying Apple iwork and quicken than MS Office and quicken.

PC users also have to purchase backup software to run on their computer, while Mac users can use the built in Time Machine to backup to their external harddrive.

Also PC users have to remember that unless they are tech savy (most aren't) they are going to have to pay some tech support guy to come out and setup their wireless router securely and also remove all the bloatware that came installed on their pc.

They also have to consider that idealy, their pc's will need to be reformatted ever 2 years at least to keep them running up to speed. Thats more tech support expense that Mac users don't have...

I'm sorry Microsoft, your math is screwed on this one.

[wolivere]

But they are bundled with the listed systems.

[DrtyDogg]

merlefisher: Are you serious? Comparing Exchange to mobile me. . .

Backup is included in Vista

Reformat every two years. What are you doing wrong with your PC?

[solitare_pax]

Don't you have to pay for MS Office on most cheap PC machines (along with every other piece of vital demo software) after the 30 day trial period is up anyway?

They forgot the PC Penalty in the figures - an endless subscription to anti-virus software, and hours of lost productivity tweaking the PC to get it working right if you're an average user.

And why a Mac Pro as a desktop option? A Mac Mini maxed out costs about $1,000-$1,200 - by the time it's obsolete in 5-6 years, it will be time to get a new machine anyways.

But then, Microsofts numbers wouldn't add up, would they?

Perhaps they should get Mr. Madoff on their payroll.

[cthielen]

@DrtyDogg actually yea, let's compare Exchange to MobileMe and keep the context the same as Microsoft's ads: a personal home computer. Exchange Server standard is $800, which is about 8 years of MobileMe server, and requires you know how to install and maintain Exchange, and is assuming you won't upgrade Exchange.

Exchange does, of course, have many more features than MobileMe, but as a consumer with maybe a small family home network, e-mail, calendar, address book, and bookmark synchronization is all I need. Exchange is overkill, even for some small businesses yet alone a household, and requires you set up a server exposed to the Internet (if you want the live sync with your mobile at least).

MobileMe vs. Windows Live might be a better comparison.

[obvio-capitao]

I'm surprised that some people still pay attention to Microsoft's "white papers".

Those documents are simply another kind of marketing material, with no scientific value.

Please, just ignore it.

[DrtyDogg]

FYI this is a print AD not a white paper

[Firehazel]

yeah, but you can find just about any freeware to do something properly, sometimes even to a better extent than the First Party stuff.
@merlefisher: reformat? what the french toast are you talking about?
anyway, Apple has to come a bit more of a way to match the amount of support Windows has.

[sanenazok]

I don't understand what I can do with Mobileme that can't be done with Google (e-mail, calendar, contacts) or Windows Live services, both of which are free. It's part of the tax-paying for things that should be free.

[kts2oo1]

I'm sorry, the fact that I can walk in to any Apple Store in the country and have someone diagnose a problem with my computer and even fix it (sometimes for free, sometimes not, depending on the problem and whether or not you have Apple Care) is virtually priceless. Having the capability to have an expert look at your computer and then look you in the eye to tell you what's going on is something that's worth the "Apple Tax".

I understand where Microsoft is coming from, but I agree with you Ina: I'm more than willing to pay the extra money for the piece of mind I have. I'm a switcher. I used to be a PC-only household. Now I have three macs and one linux machine. And honestly, I'm happier for it.

[ferricoxide]

You've GOT to be joking. Apple's service is freaking WORTHLESS if you actually need something fixed and fixed quickly. I've owned both Dell and Apple systems over the years. Both have had hardware failures.

Experience with Dell warranty support:
* Call Dell's service number
* Give them my service tag/serial number so they can reference my warranty
* For one incident, the part was overnighted to me and on my door by 10AM the next day. I had it unboxed and into my new system within the half hour of receipt
* For the other incident, a tech was dispatched TO MY HOUSE the next afternoon to diagnose and fix the issues

Experience with Apple support:
* Call Apple's support number
* Do the whole service tag/serial number cross reference
* Do some on the phone troubleshooting, that included placing my installation media in the CDROM
* Get told, "you have to take it to the local Apple store, but there's no available appointments for the next three days. You could go in and wait for an opening, though."
* Drive down to the local Apple store, wait nearly two hours to see a "Genius" who, essentially, repeats everything I did on the phone with Apple's support line
* "Genius" checks in my MBP for further diagnostics and repair - estimated time to repair and return: no estimate given
* Somehow luck into getting it fixed and returned by CoB the next day
* Discover that the "Geniuses" have lost my installation media and am told I need to call Apple care and order a new one
* Call Apple care and order a new one
* Call Apple care, monthly, for the next four months before they finally ship me one

Yeah: Apple's service is the superior product...

[baconstang]

Fe2O3, Considering your rather unusual experience, I can understand your feelings. But I must say your experience is diametrically opposed to those everyone I know has exprienced.

[Dalkorian]

So you're happier with Dell shipping you the parts the next day and expecting you to fix your own machine than you are with Apple managing to fix it for you and return it the next day. Way to show your lack of bias, dude.

[Renegade Knight]

Lucky you living so close to the umbilical cord. A lot of us have to make do outside the "Genius Zone"

[stm24]

@ Dalkorian, I guess you miss the part he said Dell sent a tech to his house! The part he had ship was probably something he knew how to do. For what ferricoxide didn't know how to do, they sent a tech to him instead of him going to sit all day in a Apple store. Learn to read there dude.

[cthielen]

@ferricoxide, I guess we've had different experiences. I owned both a Dell and Apple laptop that had a hard drive fail within a year, so here's two very similar support experiences. I called Dell and was told they'd have to install the drive. They shipped me a box within two days, I shipped it to them, and got the laptop back with a total downtime of about 6 days.

I called Apple but was told I could get faster service going into an Apple Store. I went to my local Apple Store, gave it to them, and within an hour of hanging around the mall it was in, I was called back with a new hard drive, OS installed and updated, iLife and iWork put back on, and synced back my important (then named) .Mac files.

Now, I also work in IT, and we have some Dell Gold Support licenses, and yea, if a server hard drive fails, within two hours there's a new one here, in my office with optional installation help, but that also costs thousands of dollars (at least they're not my dollars!).

[Dalkorian]

@stm24: I can read just fine and even comprehend what I have read. He had 2 problems with his Dell and one with his Mac. The first Dell problem resulted in a part being sent to his home, the second problem resulted in a dispatched tech. The Mac problem was solved in one day, yet that somehow isn't good enough.

I guess Apple should have sent him the part and wished him luck like Dell did.

Next time you want to criticize someone else's reading skills, make sure your reading COMPREHENSION skills are up to par.

[johnrf]

See the ratings of service as analyzed by consumer reports.
Our latest survey on computer tech support, conducted by the Consumer Reports National Research Center and drawn from our readers' personal experiences with 10,000 desktop and laptop computers, finds that Apple owners have much to smile about. Apple's tech support was able to solve Mac problems more than 80 percent of the time, according to those surveyed who used Apple's support.

[sunjohn]

Del'w warranty support is enough for me : i know how to replace any component in a PC. But i know that my parents (and most of my friends) can't and won't even try, so for them, Apple is MUCH better.
My Dell 24" monitor had huge troubles so i called Dell. It was replaced very fast (thanks to UPS), but the "new" one was not perfect at all ()... and showed 9000 hours of use in the advanced panel. Of course, all parts haven't been used 9000 hours befor i get it, but i'm certain that none was brand new, that was pretty obvious... not so great.

[The_happy_switcher]

Where's the breakdown of the Window's maintenance annoyance tax? WHere's the breakdown of the lost man hours and productivity when owning a windows' machine? How MUCH is that tax??

[kmomrik]

Mostly the cost of THAT tax is covered by the cost of the basic high school education of the user of the machine and a few common "cents"... seriously, how pretentious do you have to be to really believe either side of this argument? If a person willing to pay extra for the Mac... GREAT! Buy it and shut up. If I'm not willing to pay for it because I'm fully capable of use a PC without having all of the problems that all the 'switchers' seem to have... also GREAT! Let me alone to use the machine that I choose to use. Maybe Apple should put out a similar ad with testimony from all the people that 'used to use Windows until I saw the light and came to where the grass is greener'... they could all talk about the theoretical thousands of dollars they saved by spending thousands more upfront. Hmmm... spend an extra thousand now or over the next 3 years until I buy a new machine. It is a matter of preference and economics.

[The_happy_switcher]

98 percent of PC users are not as big a nerd as you so they are not able to spend all their time tweaking windows so they can stay ahead of the latest malware that's going to destroy their machine.

[Mark_Anderson]

So it's just as well that 99% of Windows users don't have to, eh AppleRocks? :)

[Inconnux]

lol I would reverse that number 99% of Windows users need someone to help them with their systems at least once in the lifetime of their PC. If I charged the people I know for every time I had to fix their PC I would be bloody rich... but then again that's what keeps 99% of the IT industry busy.

[Renegade Knight]

So far as I can tell having used both, about the same.

[flickrz]

"98 percent of PC users are not as big a nerd as you so they are not able to spend all their time tweaking windows so they can stay ahead of the latest malware that's going to destroy their machine."
@AppleRocks1963:
You are kidding right? People don't have to be tech savy to know how to update anti-virus. If my parents can use a PC than it is the simplest device. My parents in no way are tech savy and knows only to use Excel, Word, yahoo messenger, IE/Firefox and upload photos from Digital camera has been using the XP for over last 3 years without any issues. No reformatting, no virus, nothing. I was surprised in Jan when I used their 17' laptop. It still is as snappy as it was in the beginning (I know it because I gifted it to them). And, total cost so far is only the purchase price i.e. $899 + MS Office 2003 license that we already had.

[cthielen]

@kmomrik I work in IT for higher education and support over a hundred Windows XP machines on a Windows 2003 Server domain. I get a lot of "extra" support requests: people bringing in their laptops from home, or loaner laptops we give them that aren't locked down. Most of these people are professors and a lot of them have PhDs, but still they end up with "crapware" on their Windows XP box. It has nothing to do with a high school education -- many people simply aren't interested in computers enough to learn what a "service" is or realize there's unnecessary startup items being installed when they throw on the latest "easy-to-use" DVD burning software, etc.

These support requests are typically about slow computers (anti-virus/malware/adware takes care of the real problems and they know to back up their stuff), which on Windows, comes down 99% of the time to three things: hard disk fragmentation, excessive and unnecessary service installation (installed by Roxio, Microsoft, Adobe, even Apple), and low disk space.

Whenever I can, I have them get Macs instead.

Mac OS X's filesystem spaces out files to statistically reduce fragmentation, and reorders fragments on-the-fly to avoid ever having to run defragmentation software. Regarding service installation, OS X typically does support a similar mechanism, but I've only really seen it so far from the "big" companies, like Adobe. If OS X was ever used as much as Windows, I expect we'd see similar slowdown. Hopefully Apple (and hopefully Microsoft soon) will address this issue by giving background processes very, very low priority in the process scheduler, or maybe even doing away with those background processes (TSRs we called them in the DOS days) in favor of "hooks", so they can simply be notified when something occurs that a background process would typically care about (Roxio background service, e.g. waits for a disc to be inserted, something the OS can simply detect and launch a program _instead_ of wasting RAM having a separate, non-vendor program sitting, waiting around). And disk space is always a problem, both Windows and OS X have warnings against that, but what can you do?

[Firehazel]

@kmorik
true. it's nice to know people know when to butt out.
it's not like someone will come up with the perfect computer, because both Apple and Microsoft are flawed.

[MafiaPenguin]

Ok, you know what? I'm sick of these types of comments. Nothing's perfect, people.
Apples can break (or get eaten) and PCs can break. Either way you'll wind up with a computer. How do I know? You're using one right now. My Dell (Inspiron 630m) hasn't had a single problem in the 4 years I've had it. Windows XP and 1 GB of RAM, and a 1.83 GHz processor. A Mac that's the same age has about the same for a couple hundred more $$. They come with iLife which alone almost makes it worth it for me.
At school we have those 4 year old iMacs (but we got them in January). Not a single problem. On my Dell, not a single problem. However, on my brother's Dell (Inspiron 1525, about 1.5 yrs old) the fan is making funny noises and the previous HDD is dead. At school we used to (before January 2009) use 2002 eMacs. One of them has a dead HDD.
See? Nothing is perfect.
In an unrelated tech incident, Netgear hubs have stupid power cords. It fell out of the socket halfway so noone noticed it except for the fact that 1/2 the computers had no internet.

[ckh1272]

HAHA!! I cannot even begin to describe the many holes in this ad!! Check back later, and I will state exactly what those holes are!! So many to choose from! Have fun for now flamers!!

[ckh1272]

1.-Oddly, HP doesn't carry that model any longer!! Look it up.
2.-Since Apple does not have a Blu-ray option, I checked OWC (it's like Tiger Direct for Macs, for those who don't know). It has an LG $114.99
<A HREF=" http://eshop.macsales.com/item/LG/GGCH20L/"></A>

More to come!!

[iptofar]

Apples last longer. You have to buy two PCs for everymac and the PCs they chose are c$%p.

-I just upgraded to 4 gig of ram on my 2.8 GHz imac for $50??

-The real funny part is there is no antivirus/internet protection in the yearly costs.

I have to say that M$ must have chosen the mentally challenged for their advertising. The nos. above really don't make any sense for the average user. Finally, does anyone at M$ realize that a life without walls is also a life without WINDOWS!

[rapier1]

How do Macs necessarily last longer? If you buy quality hardware then you get quality hardware - Mac and PC integrators are buying from the same source after all. Personally, I've seen about the same life span, in terms of hardware, between my Macs and PCs.

[monkeyfun14]

AV's are free can you upgrade the processor on that MAC?

You think PC buyers can't just buy ram for just as cheap?

[gofalcons]

ram costs the same on a pc....im in the cpu repair industry, i see people using 10-15 year old pcs every day, like a mac is any diff....do you think apple makes those parts....lol...lol. unless its an e machine, they all pretty much use the same parts, all apple makes is the box to hold it all....quality...what a joke...show me an old working mac, ill show you 10 older working pcs. [CNET editors' note: Prohibited content deleted.]

[llungster]

interesting claim. I've had more PCs than Macs but on a percentage basis, I've had less PC failures than Mac failures. And when a PC fails (or when I want to upgrade, replace parts of it) I can easily get parts. When a Mac fails, good luck getting parts and service on the old stuff.

No doubt that PCs have their taxes too. it's apples and oranges.

[iptofar]

gofalcons has no life and runs around flaming people. Guess what, most people on the forum fix computers. I didn't say costs were equal, if you care to look, they have it as 200 when it's 50 because they are playing games to bring the mac up to 4 gigs.

My experience is the PCs is they get dementia in about two years. Buying low end pcs virtually guarantees it. I'm not a complete expert but i have more experience than most. We have many g4 733's still in operation. All the pcs we have are newer and need to be replaced/have been replaced.

In the business world we don't mod our computers, we buy new ones. Repair parts cost on macs usually preclude repair. It's better to buy new. In about 200 computer years of operation, i've seen 3 mac power supplies go and god knows how many hard drives. One very old mac laptop screen went bad but it got abused. Virtually all the pcs have eventually become unusable in that they cost more to fix than buy new.

[ckurowic]

@gofalcons: because you can suddenly repair a CENTRAL PROCESSING UNIT? Yeah go tell it to someone that is as gullible as a PC user running Vista..oh wait. You know what? I don't give a **** if 90% of the world uses Windows. 90% of people are stupid anyway.

[ckurowic]

@iptofar: Totally agree, what idiot really believes first of all that Macs and PC's use the same hardware? That really puts a huge hole in their argument and shows how little they really know. So, they are saying that PC's give you MORE choices yet they claim that Apple (who doesn't give you much choice) is the same hardware?? Umm, where is the logic here PC zealots? Please, do tell.
[CNET editor's note: Offensive comment deleted.]

[DrtyDogg]

@churowic: really you should stop now because you just look silly.

[cthielen]

@rapier1, you have a good point: it all comes down to quality hardware. I think it's still fair to say that Macs last longer as Apple doesn't have a low-end to their computing spectrum. There is no Mac with 256 MB RAM, a poor-quality plastic enclosure and Celeron M processors.

It's true a lot of people don't want to pay good money for a good computer, even they shop around maybe they will find a nice deal on a PC, but you also have to put up with everything that comes with buying something cheap. We have 10 year old Macs in one area of my department, simply because they still work and the non-technical people using them don't care about computers. Our oldest PC is about 5-6 years old, and that's only because the budget doesn't allow for them to be replaced quite yet, but because they're still working fine. :/

[targen]

I am a Mac user, a Windows user and a Linux user. I use them all. I am a techie.

How much does a computer cost, well it all depends why you are buying it and and what computer you are buying. Whether the computer has the Apple brand, or someone else's then a high end computer is expensive no matter where you go. Is the high end computer worth it? Well, only you can answer that with your budget and needs. A Mercedes might not be worth more than Honda Prius, but some people there is value there. Maybe the Mercedes should be cheaper, but while they have a market they aren't going to adjust their prices - computers are no different.

Each platform has its advantages and each has its set of 'taxes', its just that they are different. If you don't feel the taxes on a particular platform are worth it, then move on to what you like and don't complain.

Is Apple expensive? Yes, if your budget is a $300 machine, no if you are looking at something equivalent on a non-Apple brand - build-it-from-scratch is not equivalent.

[slickuser]

People (ordinary users not geeks) who buy Windows based PCs pay Crap Tax (hidden costs)

[hashref]

From a system admin's and developer perspective its a career security tax.

[rnaoncfixd]

@hashref

Awesome. I lol'd.

[dimkaragiannis]

yeah its pretty funny how they came up with that. Maybe they should have added the cost of Norton antivirus and other malware and crapware remover software that you ABSOLUTELY need on a PC.

Anyway all these apple tax, MS tax, etc. are lame

[monkeyfun14]

You don't need a paid solution..

[gofalcons]

again, another mac fan who knows nothing about pcs, antivirus is free now, this is cnet...hello, the download section...try reading, and anyone who would get norton is an not doing their research

[greho]

Yes, please do check your antivirus facts, as I did. Look up VB100 scores, and make your purchasing decisions based on those. Certainly not based on some magazine article. (with apologies to cnet)

I chose ESET NOD32, which is better than Norton, better than most of the others, and way better than AVG Free or other freeware options. I wouldn't install free AV software, frankly. AVG Free missed a great deal of test material that both NOD32 and Norton caught. You do, in fact, get what you pay for.

NOD32 is what I use on Windows 7 beta (64-bit), on my Boot Camp partition, on my MacBook Pro, by the way. And on the 27 other Windows PCs I administer.

On the Mac side, I still don't see the need for AV software. And I come from a paranoid PC background.

[iptofar]

free: you get what you pay for. Good luck with that.

[Dalkorian]

You get what you pay for - but if that was true, why do we need AV software of M$'s crapware OS so badly? Fact the facts, AV software is basically trying to cover the holes designed into the OS by M$'s lazy idiotic programmers who couldn't define security if the dictionary was opened to that page right in front of them.

[Lerianis3]

Once again with the BS about 'MAcs don't need antivirus!" Yeah, they don't.... right NOW, because they are an 'also-ran' operating system. Once they get anything above 10-15% of the market.... you will see an EXPLOSION of malware for it, because Microsoft has for the past 10 years been hardening their operating system, and Vista got it dang near perfecto.

[pithenumber]

@iptofar
then explain why Ubuntu is awesome
or why open office is a decent alternative to MS Office
or why all the browsers are actually any good

[Shunnabunich]

@Lerianis3: The "Classic" Mac operating systems (i.e. v9 and under) were plagued with viruses ? a tiny fraction of Windows' deluge, mind you ? yet they had far, far less market share than OS X has. Your argument fails to hold up. Could it possibly be that not everyone is as lazy and/or immobilized by committees as Microsoft's OS developers?

[pentest]

"and Vista got it dang near perfecto."


That is the most hilarious( and incorrect) statement I have read in a while.

[Careakith]

I'm pretty sure the phrase Apple Tax is much older then that.

[the Otter]

I?ve already posted this like 50 times around the ?Net, but I have my Power Mac G5 because even my Dell-loving boss couldn?t find fault with the $2,200 savings vs. a comparable Dell. Again, that?s two thousand, two hundred dollars LESS for a Mac than a comparable Dell, and that?s even *after* bringing the software to parity.

All puns aside, apples to apples, people.

[gofalcons]

whatever, i just built a 2.8 quad core with 4 gigs of ram and a 512 card and a 500 gig hd for 699, beat that apple fanboys, you'll never win the price wars, and by the way, i can go to dell and apples site and show you 9-10 times the dell is cheaper, you may have found one instance, but thats rare......

[hashref]

I just built a i7 920 oc'd to 3.63 gHz, 6gigs 1800 ram, 3way SLI board, 850w psu, and put it all in a rather nice Antec case for under $1000. I'm pretty sure I have a better value here than offered by Apple, whether I boot into Ubuntu or XP (64 bit versions)

[BearAteMe]

I'll bet money neither of the other responders to this comment legally paid for the OS in the cost assessments.
Claiming to be saving money but not bothering to include the 200-300 dollar cost of a new Windows OS non-upgrade, non-OEM. Which in your case neither would be legal.

[Dalkorian]

Will someone please arrest gofalcons for prostitution already? This is disgusting! I don't want to see street walkers around the neighborhood!

[Renegade Knight]

I'd say you are smoking crack but I've seen some of the Dell price glitches on their site. They can and do overcharge for certain systems. Yet one model over (and sometimes a better model to boot) you can find the same horsepower for a far better price.

Clearly your boss didn't know this or he could have found you a nice Dell for less than your Mac.

[pentest]

@gofalcons:

You obviously skimped on important items such as the case and power supply. Buying cheap parts doesn't make you special.

[AininPW]

@gofalcons

"whatever, i just built a 2.8 quad core with 4 gigs of ram and a 512 card and a 500 gig hd for 699, beat that apple fanboys, you'll never win the price wars, and by the way, i can go to dell and apples site and show you 9-10 times the dell is cheaper......" CHEAPER, wait till you get your first virus!

I don't give a sh|t about your hardware.. as far as I'm concern if its running Windoze, I ain't touching it!! MS is the worst piece of crap on the planet. I think hardcore Windoze fans should open up their bloody eyes and understand that MS only have itself to blame for Apple's success. I migrated over to Apple 9 years ago and have met countless other people who made the move to Apple for the same reason: Macs just work!! MS is soo much of a hassle! I used to build my own PC but it wasnt worth the trouble anymore after VISTA and Dell's nightmare customer service.

Being a PC hobbyist myself, I have no argument when it comes to PC's. My only problem is that almost every PC out there is running cr@pware from Windoze, and its giving PCs a bad name. I'm glad i made the move to Mac. I run a 3d visualization company, we have 15 Mac pros in the office and i cant remember the last time we have any problems with any of them. I may have to quit building PCs but its a small payoff. I value my time, data and quality of work, its the kind of 'TAX' worth paying and something MS WILL NEVER UNDERSTAND!

[pithenumber]

@pentest
if he has no reason to have an expensive case, why should he buy one?

[ckh1272]

I apologize for the link BOO BOO. Just copy and paste the link. Sorry.

[theschmitt]

And how about the depreciation value - I traded in my 4 1/2 year old $999 G4 iBook and got $250 towards a new MacBook. Show me a PC that still has any value after 4+ years.

[monkeyfun14]

Mine does.

[gofalcons]

lol, its just like a car lot, go trade your car in for an s.u.v or a car, the markup in suv's is much more than a car, so youll get more trade in if your going for the car, the dealer is making more money off you....get it....lol.

[aquaadverse]

It's hilarious how you brag about the resale value but don't realize that overpaying on the initial purchase and giving Apple an interest free loan for 4.5 years is hardly showing fiscal smarts. Not real sure that a small selection and a single source jacking up the price is so nifty keen. The rest of us get to keep our cash, have the latest tech and enjoy our options.

By the way, I'm typing this on a C2D, 17" laptop that came with a gig of RAM and a 80 gig HD that I bought in 2004 for $799. I slapped another gig of RAM, upgraded the SATA drive to 200 Gig and even ran OSX86 10.5 on it with the vanilla kernel that updated off Apples website. I'm running Ubuntu on it now, but XP and 7 work fine.

Why is the concept that Microsoft doesn't build computers so difficult for some Mac enthusiasts? Find me another instance where multiple companies fighting for my business is a bad thing?

You might be fine with single sourcing, but It's a bit of a wonder when almost any other product needs competition to benefit consumers.

I guess the iMacs are all-in-ones for your benefit, and not to keep people from buying them instead of Mac Pros. God knows how difficult it is to find LCD monitors.


Macs are the OPEC of the computer world.

[mouseclick]

aquaadverse - AMEN!!!

[maj60]

"Find me another instance where multiple companies fighting for my business is a bad thing?"

Boeing and Airbus

[Dalkorian]

LOL maj60, good comeback. :-D

[Renegade Knight]

Thinkpads.

Man, that was easy.

[xcal78]

""Find me another instance where multiple companies fighting for my business is a bad thing?"

Boeing and Airbus"

There's nothing bad about this. Keep the humor up it's great!

[infinitely]

Yeah really, add 50 dollars or so a year of McAfee or Norton antivirus

[monkeyfun14]

Who said you need a paid solution?

[gofalcons]

you would pay for norton...lol, you better go mac then, no pc in their right mind would pay for norton.....lol, this is cnet, look at the free download sections...lol.

[Renegade Knight]

Yeah, they charge that for both Windows and Mac.

[Leiderdorp]

Why is Microsoft even advertising the benefits of HP, Dell, ?PC?? Being one of the many switchers (PC to Mac), I couldn't be happier!

[getwired]

The AAPL tax is a flat tax. The MSFT tax is amortized the second Tuesday of every month.

[tzx4]

Goliath sure seems to be very frightened by David these days.

[rnaoncfixd]

Why not? David's slinging these impossibly thin stones that are in abundance EVERYWHERE.

[Renegade Knight]

Fair point. They are jumping at everything even Linux.

[xcal78]

Stupid analogy all things considered. It wouldn't matter who was Goliath if you knew someone or something that small had a 100% change of killing you. Please do keep up the great work on that humor.

[jypeterson]

My 2001 iBook G3 parts recently sold on eBay for $300+, nine years later. Considering it originally cost $1,000 and lasted through last year, I'm sure that isn't seen much in the HP/Dell world.

Microsoft is stretching this cost thing a little too thin, and its going to come back and bite them if they're not careful. People know that PC's are largely commoditized and don't hold much value. The manufacturing companies have for years been struggling with low profit margins and flooded market channels (too many differing models to choose from from many manufacturers = customer confusion).

Here's what gets me is that now Microsoft is saying, "Hey, PC's are cheap. We're not cool enough or sexy enough to be Apple, but lets all buy crappy hardware with crappy software!"

How do the PC manufacturers feel about this? I'm sure they feel marginalized. Microsoft does have a history of eventually turning on their partners and competing with them.

[stm24]

Did you know you can go to eBay and buy a laptop with windows on it for $300 also! So all that tells you people not thinking when they can go pay $300 to $400 for a new book but buy your used stuff!

[ghostfear]

PC owner should not argue with Apple owner about the cost. Some people are not logical, they buy Mac not to save money, that is never the point, they want to be different. Let Apple take advantage of them.

[applusr]

Isn't buying a cheap computer, allowing them to take advantage you as well?

[DKrudop]

Looking at initial cost only is the fool's way to go. In the long run a Mac is more stable, will live much longer, and give you much more trouble-free service, period. I don't understand this comparison, anyhow......no one asks BMW to lower their prices. You want a Kia, buy a Kia and don't complain. You want a BMW, you gotta pay for a BMW.

While I agree that looking at only the short term cost is not the best evaluation, how can you say Macs are longer lasting and more stable? I?ve seen a PC go for over 8 years with no problems, just as I?ve seen Macs go for that long. On the flip side I?ve had PCs that go dead in months, and saw the same thing happen to a friend?s Mac book. The problem with the whole ?longer lasting? argument is, as pointed out before, all the hardware comes from the same manufacturers. So how would Mac?s hardware be ?better??
As for stable and trouble free, again, I?ve been running some PC?s hard for years and not had any problems ( even had a Vista machine going for about 1+ year) so that argument is mostly moot. It all depends on the user. You don?t update your system, watch what you download, and what you do you?re going to get burned on any OS. Now I?m not saying that Macs aren?t a little better in this area, but that doesn?t make PC?s any worse.

[trewbux]

"Now I'm not saying that Macs aren't a little better in this area, but that doesn't make PC?s any worse."
Isn't that a contradiction in terms?
"even had a Vista machine going for about 1+ year"
And the fact that this is something you are bragging about speaks volumes...

[RideMan]

About the whole "longer lasting" thing...

It isn't about the actual service life of the hardware. If that were the case, then no machine, Mac or Windows, could come close to my trusty Apple IIgs, which ran completely trouble free for 20 years, then I simply had to get it off my desk. It's more about the *useful* life of the machine, and that can be a very subjective touchy-feely kind of thing. I bought my desktop Mac (1 GHz dual G4) and then bought my laptop Mac (1.33 GHz G4 12" PowerBook) a year later. Five years down the line, my laptop is feeling distinctly sluggish and "long in the tooth" and is begging for a replacement (Apple: Where's the firewire port on the MacBook?) while the older, slower desktop machine seems to be just fine. And while both machines are four CPU generations behind Apple's current hardware, both can run Apple's latest OS and most of their software in relative comfort. In fact, running Leopard on a 5-year-old Mac isn't a problem at all, while running Vista on a Windows box that was moderately high-end five years ago can be an exercise in frustration. To me, it's that issue of day-to-day usefulness that is a better gauge of longevity than mechanical durability.

[Renegade Knight]

Yup. Want a BMW pay for a BMW. Want a reliable car? Get a much lesser priced Toyota. Why does this analogy work for Mac? I'm lost.

[ppgreat]

Lies, damn lies, and statistics.

Anyone can churn numbers to support their own point of view. The thing I find interesting is that MS feels it needs to go after Apple so hard. That to me speaks volumes.

[Maccess]

MS would be better off marketing Windows to Mac Owners and Linux users to run as an alternative OS rather than dissing hardware that can also run its products.

[Renegade Knight]

So if I follow you the Mac vs. PC commercial speaks volumes about Apple and spoke it long before MicroSoft noticed?

[canisreevus]

First of all, the Mac Pro is a professional grade desktop that is way more than probably 95% of people will ever need. Using that as a comparison to some HP is like comparing a European sports car to a Pinto. Apple doesn't offer a mid-level desktop tower for comparison. The best comparison probably would have been with 2 Apple laptops vs 2 PC laptops.

Additionally, counting office software for the Macs and not the PCs is ridiculous (not to mention Apple's office suite is cheaper or the free OpenOffice). MobileMe is completely unnecessary, and there are free equivalents. Not to mention that anyone in their right mind would buy it for $69/year from Amazon. I haven't upgraded iLife since I bought my computer in 2006, and I don't see much of a need to. I didn't buy AppleCare and have had no issues. I'm not saying I recommend it, but the One-to-One addon listed is probably unnecessary. Also, why did he purposely choose more expensive peripherals only to jack up the price for the Apple computer? The fact that he even mentions DDR2 ram upgrades when DDR3 ram is standard on all Macs is just icing on the cake. These comparisons are always so overblown.

I used a PC until 2006 and have used a Mac since. I love my Mac and don't see myself going back to a PC. However, I'm not going to advise someone to buy a Mac if all they use is Windows software. IMO, Windows is simply playing off many computer purchasers lack of technological knowledge (or is it the less "technically savvy"?).

Side note: Quicken for Mac sucks.

[baconstang]

HEY! I liked my Pinto.... but I luv my Macs.

[Renegade Knight]

I think you are exactly bass ackwards. Mac played off the lack of technical knowledge of their users. They actually pandered to the less savvy and sold them on being different enough to be sophisticated.

You have a good point on the HP. A W or T series Thinkpad would be a better comparison to a pro.

[DrtyDogg]

Even in the last generation Macs, Apple charged crazy high prices for RAM upgrads.

[johnqh]

All vendors charge crazy high prices for RAM upgrades, even Dell.

Get it from Crucial. What's the big deal?

[yreguy]

@DrtyDogg

I just bought RAM for my MacBook- $20 for 2 gigs. I installed it in about 5 minutes and turned the computer on. install done, no problem. I can't imagine who in their right mind would spend $200!!!!!!! That's totally crazy!

[sanjayb]

"Side note: Quicken for Mac sucks."

This is one of the reasons why I keep Vista running on my Mac Book Pro. I am a heavy duty Quicken user.