Comments on: Microsoft's 'Apple Tax' faces another audit

This time it is Business Week taking issue with Microsoft's math. But while Redmond may be wrong in the numbers, it's finally picked the right area to focus its attack.

[ServerMonkey+FarmBoy]

For all the fan boys on both sides, chill. Apple has ALWAYS been a "flare" topic on both sides. Some people love it, some people hate it.

Personally, I would use nothing else but an Apple. My reasons are my own, and they are opinions, not facts. Everyone on this board has horror stories from one side or the other, and some of us even have both.

Who am I and why does my opinion matter? I'm a Network Administrator for a K-12 education organization. My opinion doesn't matter, it is just that, my opinion.

Do I think Apples are a bit overpriced for what they provide? Yeah, they could come down a little, but with their limited market share, its a matter of survival.

Do I buy them anyway? In limited quantity, and only in areas where they will actually serve better than a PC equivalent. These areas include video and sound editing, podcast creation and distribution, and a whole host of things that are just easier on a Mac, and require no, or very little extra software. A lot of these "other areas" are specific to education facilities.

If you use them and love them, quit giving Apple users a bad name by spouting supposed facts like some fanatic crusader. They are not your life blood, and if they are you need to back up and take a breath.

If you hate them, I don't blame you for how you treat most apple users. Like anyone who thinks they have a point to prove, they can be obnoxious. Don't flame them too hard.

Most importantly Mac's are not gaming machines... Macs are not programming machines... they are geared for a very specific niche of people. If you are not in that niche, you likely won't enjoy using one. If you are, then you will. If you don't think that Mac's have their pluses (however limited) over Microsoft then you need to get your head out of the sand and do some research. If you think that Apple is the ultimate answer, you need to get your head out of the sand and do some research.

/clears the air

Now lets all play nice!

[kcotham]

I disagree on your statement that Macintosh computers are niche machines. That little piece of misinformation is very old, dating back to the early 90's or before. People that don't actively hate all things Apple have been taught that Macintoshes are only good for the creative fields and nothing more. The Macintosh is and always has been, very versatile. True that you won't find the latest first person shooter coming out on Macintosh first. But to judge a computer on the number of games available for it is a very narrow view.

Anything that a Windows machine can do, a Macintosh can do, and usually with less headaches (personal experience and independent studies). It's untrue that Macintoshes are difficult to program with. Ever hear of XCode? How many Windows machines come with a complete development kit, free? You can develop for Mac OS X, iPhone, Java, C, etc.

I've used all the versions of Windows from 3.11 to Vista and I wouldn't have traded any of them for their contemporary in Mac OS. I do applaud you for your attempt at persuading Windows fanatics to get their "head out of the sand and do some research". But I've done my research and I haven't found a single thing that a Windows machine can do that a Macintosh can't. There is always an equivalent. And to say otherwise is a falsehood.

[pithenumber]

@farmboy
1 Apple is good for more than "creative" things
2 yeah, their hw is overpriced, who says you really need to buy their hardware, Hackintosh all the way if you like Mac OS [Ubuntu is better, but its not for everyone even though user friendliness has made a huge jump from the early days of Linux]
3 don't complain to all Apple fanboys, some of them are actually making decent arguments

@kcotham
you didn't use 7? really, try it, I'm a mainly Linux person except for gaming but 7 got me back onboard the Windows train

if you think there is always an equivalent
this list only applies for Apple Macs, not hackintoshes
1 head to http://www.velocitymicro.com/ and browse some gaming Pc's
2 what if I need powerful servers, I would look in the opposite direction of the xserve. The xserve has only 24gb of RAM and only 8cores/16threads, its basically and workstation in rack form
3 does Apple have a cheap tower? no!
4 is CPUZ for Mac OS? oh right, the hardware options are so limited and overclocking is much harder than that of the average PC, you guys don't really need it
5 can I have 32 cores in Mac OS, uhhh No
6 how about crossfire and SLI
7 hypertransport, the tech that makes opty's so much better than C2 Xeons in servers, not found in Macs
8 I can build my own Windows box without violating the EULA, can I say that with Mac OS?
9 triple core processors, much better than dual core
10 trackpoints, the awesomest laptop input device ever. Macs don't have them

[kcotham]

@pithenumber
I'm experimenting with Windows 7 beta right now. I didn't list it because it isn't a full release yet. I'm not a gamer per se, and I doubt that anything that Microsoft could develop that would be any better than Mac OS X. But if they happen to pull a miracle and do just that, I'll give it a try.

1. I'm not interested in "gaming", it's a very very, low priority for me.
2. The XServe is just as good, or better than most "servers". And is in that form factor to go in large arrays, in racks. And 8 cores is a lot of processing power, per machine, by any definition. The term "server" is very loose. You can have a Mac SE running as a server or a 386 for crying out loud.
3. No, they don't have a "cheap tower", their all-in-one, the iMac and the little Mac mini fill that slot, just not in mini-tower format.
4. When overclocking, you introduce the chance for overheating, damaging the chip, and introducing errors, etc. Most people will never, ever do this. You're assuming that most people like to tinker as you evidently do. There isn't anything wrong with tinkering, but the overwhelming majority of people have never even seen the inside of their computer, and what's more, they don't care to.
5. Ever hear of X-San? It is very easy, and very cost effective to build very large distributed computing clusters with Macintoshes. (Way more than 32 cores!) Once again, this is something that almost no one will ever do (have a 32 core machine or a X San cluster).
6. I'm not familiar with crossfire or SLI, so I can't comment on them, and neither would most people.
7. Actually, hyperthreading (this what you are referring to?) is a feature in the Xeon chips used in Mac Pros
8. Most people never even see the inside of their computers, let alone build their own.
9. And quad-core is even better, your point is what? Mac Pros are available with two quad-core processors.
10. You are definitely in the minority if you prefer (or even like the "trackpoint"). There's a reason they aren't in many lap tops. I personally hate them and find them very difficult to use quickly an accurately.

Over all, and I've noticed this about a lot of Windows fans, you seem to fault the Macintosh and Apple for not allowing, or not offering things, that the overwhelming majority of people will: never use, don't know what it is, and don't care about. That isn't to say that your needs aren't important, but they are clearly a very slim minority. Then, this will be a case in which you would be better off with a home-built/Frankenstein computer. You're a tinkerer. Macintoshes (and most computers) are meant to be ordered and used as-is. It's the same as when someone buys a car and just wants it to work, to get them where they need to go and never have to take anything apart. Then there are people that like to buy old junkers and overhaul them and make them the best drag-racer, best in the corners, or whatever. That is the sort of person you probably are. Then the "works-ever-time", "does-what you-want-right-out-of-the-box" computer is not for you. You'd just crack it open and start tinkering with it anyway.

Computers aren't hobby-centric machines anymore. Heck, they're practically a commodity. They are appliances for most people. And most people don't want to tinker and jury rig their appliances, unless they are Tim Allen and want it to have "more power!" So, you haven't even been arguing the same argument and neither have a lot of people here. You have totally different expectations and a totally different vantage point than the majority of computer users.

[kcotham]

@pitheumber
by the way, I haven't been terribly impressed with Windows 7. It's mainly just a trimming up of Vista. It's not very different at all. Microsoft is hindered by being tied down to the past. They eventually made a break with their MS-DOS code (shaky separation). They need to start from scratch, yet maintain some degree of backwards compatibility. That's the drawback of having such a huge user base.

Apple on the other hand has not only changed code base, but also changed processors, with very little problems. One can not only run Mac OS "Classic" apps on a Mac OS X machine, but programs written for a different type of processor. For example, on a PowerPC G4 equipped Macintosh, running Mac OS X, you could run a program meant for a Macintosh equipped with a Motorola 68xxx and a pre-Mac OS X version of Mac OS. Then, when they switched to Intel processors, you can still run PowerPC code, completely transparently. You'd never know you were doing this unless you actually looked at the running processes in Activity Monitor.

[monkeyfun14]

I love sitting here reading watching you fanboys get pissed off little do you know CNET does these articles for hits cause it makes them more money.

[sythara]

Yep!

I love these articles as well

[Angmarr]

Oh common admit it you 2

Dont tell me you don't get a kick out of these arguments ... I know I do. And quite frankly I wouldn't call myself a MS fanboy, BUT I do hate Apple fanboys... so there are 2 types of fanboys here, and fanboy haters!

[bowlie1]

What confuses me about Microsoft's ads is who their target audience is.

It can't be Mac Fanatics, well they are fanatics and wouldn't change for all the tea in Boston Harbour.
It cant' be dissatisfied Mac users, well they will likely switch to a PC the next time around.
It can't be dissatisfied PC users, well they are lost to Microsoft
It can't be PC Fanatics, well they are fanatics and wouldn't change for all the oil in the Alberta tar sands
This leaves middle of the road Mac and PC users who have some issues with their machines, but are mostly satisfied with what they got. If/when they upgrade their machines they will likely stick with what they've go. (or if they are smart they will buy a machine that does both Mac and Windows)

Great entertainment value though, not the ads themselves but the comments on forums like this.

[sythara]

If a commercial will actyalyl sway you from one side to another (no matter what really) then you're weak minded and should just go back to watching american idol.

For the rest of us, we'll make a desision based on personal research and not how entertaining a commercial is.

[PixelGuy]

Am I the only one that thinks this is dumb? After all, now that Macs run on Intel chips, every Mac customer is a potential Windows customer as well. So, by Microsoft poo-poo-ing Apple, and by extension, their users, they are ticking off the last untapped swath of people who could be turned in to Windows customers. Maybe not by running Windows full time, but either in Boot Camp or in a VM. Still, for Microsoft, a Windows license is a Windows license, no matter how it is run.

It just seems like a really stupid move to insult a large user base that is really the last potential untapped customer base you have.

If I were Microsoft, I would refrain from attacking Apple, and instead run ads that show how you can run Windows on a Mac, and all the possibilities it opens up. Instead, Microsoft cedes that discussion, and gives Apple a platform for future ads.

[monkeyfun14]

Same goes for PC users 90% of us attacking our purchases doesn't make want a Mac anymore..

[sythara]

You can run OSX on a non apple system too.

[kcotham]

@monkeyfun14
No one has attacked you or any other Windows user. I and most people on here have only tried to correct your (and other Windows disciples) fallacies.

@sythara
Yes, if you want to violate the EULA and put up with a crippled Mac OS X.

[pithenumber]

@kcotham
if you hackintosh right, Mac OS isn't crippled
some parts just don't like Mac OS, some parts work fine

[PixelGuy]

And to comment on ServerMonkey's assertion that Macs aren't programming machines. You are dead wrong. Macs are the ultimate programming machines.

Consider this: What hardware platform allows you to all three major desktop OSes - Windows, Mac, Linux, and develop for any *NIX platform/language, any web server programming language, any Windows programming language, and the iPhone?

Only one - a Macintosh.

[sythara]

A computer running Linux?

[pithenumber]

@sythara
agreed

[kcotham]

@sythara, pithenumber
"A computer running Linux?" minus Mac OS X.

[jscott418]

The fact that Microsoft realizes most PC buyer's consider price before what fruit symbol is on it should start telling Apple to start offering cheaper products. Not everyone needs the faster CPU or best Graphics. In fact Apple computers lack some features even cheaper PC's offer. Such 5 in 1 card reader and more USB ports and even simpler more common Video outputs. No, Apple thought everyone would become a Apple fan and that simply never happened. Steve Jobs has always directed the company towards supplying computers which cater to more affluent customers who do not care about price or discounts and just want something pretty with the best hardware. Unfortunately not many more feel that way and price has become king. As we all know any computer will take you to the same internet. It will run your office suite and play a few games. It all depends on how much do you want to pay? Apparently Apple and Steve Jobs have missed the boat and need to rethink marketing to the rest of us without a rich daddy or a big paycheck.

[monkeyfun14]

Another main problem is their hardware is also far from the best.

[kcotham]

@jscott481, monkeyfun14

Do a comparison between a MacBook Pro and all the other manufacturers and compare those prices. I want the Wintel machine to use the same exact model chip, same bus speed, same memory speed, etc. You will undoubtedly find that the Macintosh will be within a couple of hundred dollars, possibly less in some cases. That's a hardware only comparison.

I am not rich, I have owned 4 Macintoshes over the last 11 years. I was a student for most of that time. I bought all my own equipment, with my own money, that I saved. Give the "rich daddy" schtick a rest will you?!

[JunkSiu]

Personally, I do agree the 'Apple Package' (software + hardware) is way more expensive than a MS package. However, when MS, as many other big companies also, add too much 'marketing touch' to a simple excel sheet, it just make the whole picture ugly.

[Seaspray0]

And that's what it will come down to. Does it do what you want? How about, does it do what you need? That depends on the individual, not what microsoft or apple say. We are individuals and each of us has a different set of rules when it comes to a computer doing what we want or need. And I make that distinction between want and need a serious one. I want $1,000,000,000,000. I don't need $1,000,000,000,000. That's up to each of us to decide... what we want, what we need. That's not a decision you should leave to anyone else but yourself.

And now for something completely different... a bunch of posts by strangers who will attempt to tell YOU what YOU WANT (like they have a clue, they've never met you). DON'T LISTEN! Make up your own mind.

[sythara]

"And now for something completely different... a bunch of posts by strangers who will attempt to tell YOU what YOU WANT (like they have a clue, they've never met you). DON'T LISTEN! Make up your own mind. "

Thats pretty much what a commercial is.

[ekracinski]

For the life of me I can't understand why anyone in the world cares what computer platform I have chosen. I also can't understand why I care which platform someone else has chosen.

I use Macs and PCs daily. They both have their pros and cons. Pick one. Use it. Enjoy.

Nothing to see here people. Move along...

[sythara]

pick one? Why not all?

[johnwbishop]

Microsoft has resisted the 'cost' dialogue for so long, for a very simple reason: it's going to hurt them in the long run.

For example, one could ask: What's the cost of Open Office? Or the cost of a Linux OS? How about the cost of using Google services?

[Angmarr]

that doesn't show anything about apple!?

how many people can actually use Linux.

Gotta agree with Google services tho!

[monkeyfun14]

But nothing touches MS Office I mean nothing and Linux has no average user usability at all....

[sythara]

"how many people can actually use Linux"

dude you obviously haven't used Ubuntu. I am considering on putting it on my mother's computer because its so simple and it "just works". Oh and she owns a $499 Wal-Mart special computer.

[monkeyfun14]

Ubuntu just works until you need to install something without the install manager

[kcotham]

@monkeyfun14
"nothing touches MS Office"? Try Open Office or Neo Office. Besides, the overwhelming majority of people out there will never use more than a minority of Office's features. Office is a behemoth designed to do everything for everyone. There are plenty of other, less expensive office suites out there that will do just fine for most of the population.

"Linux has no average user usability at all"? I will say that it is not for the computer illiterate, but it has made leaps and bounds in "usability". GNOME and KDE have gotten much, much better. And they are definitely very usable, more usable than Vista or XP. And Linux has a nice little quirk. It's feels very snappy, quick, on older, less impressive hardware than Windows. Plus it's stable, very, very stable.

About your remark on installing software on Ubuntu. For one thing, you will almost never have to use anything but the installer. The list of packages for Ubuntu is very impressive and most of what you'll ever need is already included. Now, I will say that installing via command line takes a little know-how, but it isn't rocket science.

[Angmarr]

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=8

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=9&qpcustom=Mac

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=9&qpcustom=Linux

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=11&qpcustom=Windows+Vista

[PixelGuy]

Obviously, you haven't tried Ubuntu Linux. If your computer needs consist of surfing the web, email, and using office type apps, Ubuntu will do the job admirably for just about everyone. And you don't pay the Microsoft tax either. Or the Anti-virus tax.

[kcotham]

Unfortunately, you do still pay the Micro$oft tax. Because one almost always has to pay for Windows on a new computer. There are very few vendors that don't pre-install Windows and even less that will pre-install Ubuntu. It's called a 'monopoly' and Microsoft has one.

I recommend using anti-virus software on any computer, regardless of the OS.

[liven2]

cary1

Hmm I call BS on this as I assume you have never used a macbook. How can a solid aluminum unibody mac be built cheaper than you plastic Lenovo? OSX dumbed down? Pleas give me some specifics on what your struggle was that you wanted to do that you could not do? AGAIN... I am calling you on this and I think you are full of it....

[d3vildog69]

OSx is good, but imac, and macbooks are way underpowered as to what it could do...

Windows... Dece for what most people need and slowly but surely getting the hang of what an OS should be (Windows 7 or XP sp3)

Linux.. Good cause its free.. anything free often has a price but when those bills come in... linux didnt hurt my wallet...

In the end you use what you want. They all have their pros and their cons. My biggest deal with apple is the HW... Windows.. is well... windows..

[slapppy]

First of all, ask the University of Utah. They paid the ultimate Microsoft Tax!!!

[kcotham]

What's the story?

[bojennett]

Ina, you said that judging from all the comments on this issue, it shows that Microsoft has at least found out where, to paraphrase, to poke at Apple. I guess I don't see this. If a leading politician comes out, with an ad campaign of millions of dollars behind him/her, and says the world is flat, did they really figure the right issue to poke at when thousands of people come back at them and show where they were wrong? Of course not. And if said politician is called a bungling moron for saying such things, does that prove that the politician really has stated some secret truth because the "opposite side" has taken to name calling? Again, of course not.

I've stated it before on this forum, but I will say it again... Either (a) there is no way the Apple tax could be $800+ per year vs. a PC and be gaining market share (yes, I am aware is dropped 0.3 percentage points the last quarter, after doubling over the last 4 years - a data point does not signify a trend folks), or (b) Macs *really do* cost that much more, but they are gaining market share because Microsoft's offering is beyond terrible. Clearly, the cost difference is not $800 per year (or Microsoft is in even worse shape than we all realize).

The $800 year over year cost adder shows Microsoft can't do math, and it also insults the intelligence of Mac owners who think the machines are very nice, and haven't noticed this cost difference. The whole name calling thing that has been going on over this isn't new either - it has been occurring in the Mac/PC wars since before there even was a Mac (i.e. Apple //e vs IBM PC 8088). So let's please not read too much into this when folks are yelling back and forth "you suck!" and "no, you suck!". Every Mac vs. PC discussion eventually breaks down into this, no matter how inane the issue is.

[monkeyfun14]

It works because it has you people jumping around trying to justify why Mac is so much more expensive.

You say it includes iLife okay it adds $80 in value according to Apples pricing.

[bojennett]

monkeyfun14... did you read my post? Or are you responding to something else but it got caught here, because I didn't mention anything about iLife.

Assuming you are responding to me, if the "it" that is working is Microsoft's latest ads, please re-read my post, because i don't think you understood it. Let me make the point with fewer big words: Person A: "The sky is green". Person B: "No, it's blue, what are you, stupid?" Person A - "a ha! I got you, you called me a name and questioned my statement! You must be a blue fanboi!" How, exactly, has person A "won" the argument again? Because person B disagreed with them? Because person B pointed out that person A is, in fact, saying something stupid?

I am not defending Apple and their marketing, I am not slamming Microsoft just because I like to. I have serious, and I think factually interesting, reasons that Microsoft's data for touting the "Apple tax: can't stand up to any form of scrutiny... the data is either bogus or Microsoft is really in dire straights if they have slowly been losing market share to something that costs that much more per year to operate.

As I had mentioned before, I am not a Mac fanboi. What I am, though, is somebody who can do basic math, who hates when people try to be scientific, (Kay's report), and fails so miserably. It's laziness, and I can't stand that kind of laziness.

I think Ina has been trying to write articles about this supposed Apple tax in a fairly reasoned way. I wish she would spend less time, though, on the itemX vs. itemY argument and focus on the big picture, because the big picture doesn't make any sense ($800 per year cost difference is just silly). What I hope I'm doing is giving a reasoned critique of the article, as opposed to "we rule/you suck" arguments that Mac/PC arguments invariably devolve into.

Frankly, I could care less who loves what platform more. To each their own.

[t8]

Why anyone even bothers to argue for Microsoft is beyond me.

[kcotham]

If you figure it out, let me know. It makes about as much sense as rooting for AIG! :-)

[shellcodes_coder]

Just wanna say Windows 7 will rule!!

You obviously haven't used a Mac lately.

[blinkdt]

Ina, I like your writing, I like your objectivity, I appreciate your occassional insights. Keep up the good work.

[seth586]

You know, Apple has been running dirty ads for several years now. This shouldn't be a suprise to anyone.

...if you don't like the ads, go ahead Apple slaves, blog about it over a cup of starbucks and your latest quasi-gay sweater, I'm finally getting a good laugh at home drinking my own coffee.