Microsoft Remains on Offensive with 'Apple Tax' Report and Latest Laptop Ad

[mosx]

Wow "mosx"-- you sure do spend a lot of time spamming this thread about the xbox 360-- maybe you should head over to xbox360rumors, or to one of Paul Thurott's many microsoft windows fanboy sites-- they seem more attuned to your touching Microsoft enthusiasm.

As far at the thread topic goes, this is the second MS commercial in a row when the "lucky winner" gets an incredibly thick and heavy 16" "laptop" that hardly meets the definition of the term. That thing is a "tabletop," just like the first actress "lucky winner" who got a 17"er with 30 minutes of battery life.

Finally, I hope that kid gets a set of good headphones so he won't have to listen to his mother's annoying voice.

more FUD. HP's battery life is very good and always hits what HP claims it will. I know from experience.

It's funny how you knock on the size of the systems bought in these ads. Sounds like jealousy to me. Upset that you bought a system that costs twice as much but can't do half as much?

Actually, the only way to get 1080p out of the 360 was with the VGA cable, which is not included and sets you back another $50.

And the HDMI included on the current 360 generations does NOT pass high-res audio (it's 1.2, not 1.3).

Funny, everything I read says it DOES pass audio.

Not that "high res" audio matters. Game audio is always 16/44.1.

The VGA cable for the Xbox360 is NOT $50. You can find an adapter for as low as $5 using froogle

Edit: I'll reply to the nonsense fanboy post a couple of posts above this one later. Gotta go now

 

[RichardI]

The real difference between a good PC (like the Sony) and a Mac is the fact that the OS is written by Apple. It's as simple as that. It really boggles the mind that MS can't figure that out. PC's will never be as good as Macs - period. So, if you want a PC you can go for the one supplier scenario, or you can go with cheaper, much less reliable PC's. Of course, they don't mention how much more 'maintenance' a PC requires. Antivirus updates for example. Removal of all the bloatware that comes on every PC as another example. The hours retuning after every major update or video drivers, etc., etc.
Having said that, Apple does overcharge for their hardware. There's no disputing that. It has been proven over and over, that there is an 'Apple tax'. So it comes down, as it always does to preference. I prefer an iMac. Simply the best PC in the world by a long shot, and I've owned and built PC's all my life. The Mac experience is the best experience.

Rich

 

[wardev]

XD lol

I can't belive that Microsoft failed to mention that Mac has a game "deficiency." tsk tsk
I think that is Mac's only weakness. Yet it can easily be solved with Virtual PC. But the general population probobly won't want to spend the money to buy another Windows copy or learn how to use it.

 

[dohardthings]

To mosx

You say that you are here to provide a balance I am here to tell you this. I own a pc I don't even own a mac at this time. yet my next computer will be a mac why? because after all of the hassle that my compaq has given me, and the hassle that a dell has given a friend. And after sneeking in a couple of hours on a friends mac I want the mac experience. when I buy a mac I am not buying the ability to render images in photoshop 6.9 sec faster than anything else in the product class (though i will say that i will save that time booting etc. etc.) I am not buying framerates on a game frankly i don't care whether the computer can do 300 or 60 fps in call of duty. and even if the mac was more as you would like to believe I have probably spent more time cleaning off my pc than that cost would be (20 hrs. * 10) is 200 on cleaning just there

 

[GGGUUUYYY]

These are great commercials. They hit Apple were it hurts.


Everyone should realize that this is good competition and will only push Apple (which have been slacking lately)

 

[Steve Works]

I think most have MISSED THE POINT!

These commercials are sooooo stupid! Think about it! Microsoft can't "one-up" Apple on the OS side... lets face it, their campaign on Mojave was a disaster. So what do they do? They start selling Vista based on price of hardware they don't even sell!

Say what you want... but at least on our overpriced Macs, I'm fairly confident my hardware is going to work for more than 2 years and I have the choice of running whatever OS I want. Besides that... it's pretty too! LOL!

You won! Thinking like that...Macs aren't even overpriced... ok a $1500 macbook will last me for at least 3 or 4 years. So with and HP.. a $600 one... every year I have to buy a new one... so it's what? $1800 ? God..i'm buying a macbook!

 

[Journojulz]

Ah Citroen - the true car for design worshippers.

It was no accident that in french 'DS' sounds like goddess!

And of course their company logo is itself a badge of engineering pride - the v-gears that made the titanic run so queitly the iceberg didn't have time to get out of the way.

 

[Steve Works]

I can't belive that Microsoft failed to mention that Mac has a game "deficiency." tsk tsk
I think that is Mac's only weakness. Yet it can easily be solved with Virtual PC. But the general population probobly won't want to spend the money to buy another Windows copy or learn how to use it.

Mac can't use that argument, because it depends on the product... iMac can solve it and Macbook Pro as wel... but the Macbook sucks at gaming... but do you know what? Who buys a 13" laptop to play games? Please... play at home with your PS3...

 

[ezekielrage_99]

Epic fail the stupid kid bought a VAIO... Do those things still have rootkit because I understand Windows is really for the anit-piracy thing? Wait a sec didn't M$ have to pay out $500M for a little copyright thing?

Epic fail also for the "entry cost" for the marketing campaign... Yes Apple does have a higher entry cost I will not dispute that ever, but what most people fail to consider is the TOC of a product. For Apple is generally cheaper.

Total Ownership Costs are completely forgotten by most consumers, generally I buy a MBP I get 3 maybe 4 years out of the unit then add the cost of adding RAM, Maintenance and maybe a new HDD it still works out much cheaper than an HP laptop that I have to repair/replace every 2 years.

A USD$2000 laptop that last for 3 years is still cheaper than a $1500 laptop that will only last for 12 months.

 

[Anuba]

The real difference between a good PC (like the Sony) and a Mac is the fact that the OS is written by Apple.

That's definitely an edge, though not nearly as much of an advantage as it could be. Considering the fact that they hand pick the hardware it runs on, and that it only has to work together with a microscopic fraction of all the hardware component combinations that Windows has to put up with, the hardware integration shouldn't just be better than on PCs, it should be perfect. And it's not. There have been many, many issues over the years that had to be fixed with firmware and software updates. It's a miracle that Windows runs at all, and it's borderline criminal that OS X isn't flawless.

 

[dohardthings]

MS cheated http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/04/09/microsoft_pays_for_inaccurate_apple_tax_study.html

 

[WeegieMac]

No matter how much he protests, no matter what retorts he throws your way, it is obvious that "mosx" is a Microsoft fanboy. What is even more embarrassing is that I've not used that term since my early 20's and I find it even more embarrassing when someone uses the term to catagorise others, yet fails to see that he himself is one and the same.

Oh, and for the record ... multi-quote posts get ignored or at best skimmed on a forum. In Advert 2's thread you multi-quoted for three quarters of a single page, which is just insane.

On the other hand, don't you have anything better to do?

To sum up the whole "Console War" debate, yes Sony have stripped features from the PlayStation 3 as time has come on, and yes Microsoft have added them to the Xbox 360, but the features added to the 360 simply took it in line with the original PS3 which launched. My point is that the system was rushed to market, a point which is obvious given the horrendous failure rate of the system. (If you try and sweep that under the carpet or deny it, you'll only hammer the final nail in your own coffin).

Sure the final revision of the Falcon chipset removed the bottom side RAM chips and moved them up top as to reduce heat build up and thus reduce motherboard warping which pops the GPU and/or CPU from the motherboard, but why was this R&D not done properly? The latest revision, Jasper, is filtering into stores slowly but surely.

Regarding the back-compat again, yes the titles available now are in excess of 400, but at launch it wasn't the case and Microsoft periodically added firmware updates to make games run and to enhance the performance of existing emulated games. One of these updates has not been done in a long, long time and when Major Nelson made the announcement via his Podcast, it was a relatively unpopular one.

Regarding Gears of War, the game has aged ... poorly. It still looks good, but it does not have the "wow" impact it had on launch, and Gears of War 2 merely replicates the first game's visuals with nothing but added draw distance and some grander outside landscapes.

Oh, and as for Microsoft and Epic saying this is only the beginning, or words to that effect? The Xbox 360 launched, in the UK, in December 2005 which means it's hurtling towards it's 4th birthday. While Microsoft cut the original Xbox's life short because manufacturing costs were outweighing profit, the Xbox 360 should enjoy another two years, maybe three, before a new system is launched. I'd hedge my bets on E3 2010 heralding the announcement of Microsoft's new console which, judging on how quickly they got the system from E3 to stores in 2005, could suggest a late 2010 or early 2011 launch.

So yes, it's "only the beginning" for Gears of War as a franchise, but it will continue it's growth on the next Xbox system in my opinion, because the current Xbox does not have enough grunt to carry the franchise forward and Gears 3 would be THE launch title to get the "Next" Next Generation off to a flier.

And if you don't think for one second that they're fooling around with test code for Gears 3 on next gen Xbox hardware at Epic, then more fool you. Epic, if anybody, will get hands on access to early Dev Kits simply because it was them alone who made the Xbox 360 what it is when they told Microsoft to double the memory on the system, costing Microsoft a hell of a lot of money.

I will be shocked if Gears 3 is on Xbox 360, but I won't be shocked that if it does come to 360, it looks the exact same as the previous game.

 

[southernpaws]

i enjoy how people come on here claiming they own a mac and pc as if it allows them to speak from a position of authority.

i also enjoy when people complain about how unibody macbooks "dent." as if the same amount of pressure applied to plastic wouldn't crack it. i'll take dents over cracks.

p.s. stop dropping your macbook.

 

[JayMan8081]

I would definitely say that Apple's "I'm a Mac" campaign hurt Microsoft, but so far I haven't really seen anything from MS that hits back just as hard. Maybe that's because I would favor Macs over PCs now though.

 

[Anuba]

Epic fail also for the "entry cost" for the marketing campaign... Yes Apple does have a higher entry cost I will not dispute that ever, but what most people fail to consider is the TOC of a product. For Apple is generally cheaper.

Perhaps so, but how does that justify Apple's markup? Why would they charge you in advance for a potential future cost saving that's outside their control? That money isn't really theirs to take, is it?

Some even argue that it's worth the premium because "it just works". What manner of bizarre reasoning is that? Assuming for the sake of argument that Windows PC's "don't work" (whatever that means), why would you pay extra because a Mac "works"? Isn't it supposed to work? I think it's safe to assume that all products are supposed to work as advertised. If they don't, well too bad for the manufacturer in question, but that doesn't somehow make "not working" the norm and "working" some kind of added bonus that justifies a markup.

 

[janstett]

Apple used to have a substantial edge in design; back when PCs were beige and plain while Macs were colorful and curvy, back when all PCs were black but Macs were white... but when I first saw the new silver/black MacBooks I thought hmmm... unibody is nice and all, but haven't I seen this many times before? As more and more PC manufacturers wake up and discover the importance of slick hardware design, the only difference will be OSX and while this is a sales point to some it won't be nearly enough to justify the Apple tax...

The problem with fashionable design is that it becomes laughable when it is outdated, which is usually fairly quickly. For example, look back at the designs when Steve Jobs returned -- the candy-colored iMacs and clamshell iBooks, for example. They look horrible today. While the aluminum look they've settled on for quite some time now is timeless.

While I do like the timeless look they've settled on (think of how the Thinkpad design ethic has consistantly defined their lineup since the early 1990s), I do think they are too conservative in tweaking it -- i.e. not being able to tell apart a G5 from a Mac Pro, etc.

 

[Journojulz]

Some even argue that it's worth the premium because "it just works". What manner of bizarre reasoning is that?.

"It just works BETTER"? That does it for me.

And as for the price markup - can anyone point to an iniquity on where this "extra money" is going

Is this "apple tax" being invested in future development - or creamed off by greedy board members and shareholders?

If the 'apple tax' is responsible for the awesome development of the revoutionary simplicity of the ipod, iphone etc - then this is surely a reason to smile as you pay it?

 

[Journojulz]

T the candy-colored iMacs and clamshell iBooks, for example. They look horrible today.

Speak for yourself - I still love my Tangerine and much as my white 'icebook'!

Fashions fade - style endures.

 

[janstett]

Funny, everything I read says it DOES pass audio.

Read deeper -- it doesn't pass HIGH RESOLUTION audio. Such as Dolby True HD on those HD-DVDs you bought, or if they ever come out with a Blu-Ray drive. Or with DTS DVDs you play on your 360. It doesn't even pass multichannel LPCM. Only stereo LPCM and DD. Microsoft cheapened out by going with HDMI 1.2 instead of 1.3. Microsoft missed the boat by ignoring HDMI when the 360 was designed, and then botched it by doing a half-assed job when they added HDMI 1.2 instead of 1.3. I remember Major Nelson doing backflips to explain why HDMI wasn't important, but the market quickly flung egg on their faces on that one.

Not that "high res" audio matters. Game audio is always 16/44.1.

Actually, one of the few areas Sony got right, their games can output multichannel high-res PCM. In the last generation, people said "high res" video didn't matter either. In fact, saying high res audio doesn't matter is like saying surround sound doesn't matter. But as we all learned in this generation of consoles, it DOES matter.

44.1/16 is CD audio. Dolby Digital is 48kHz and can be 24-bit, as can DTS. In fact, DTS can be 96/24. DD maxes out at 512kbps, DD Plus at 640kbps, DTS at 1.4 mbps. Then you get to the advanced Blu-Ray/HD-DVD/DVD-A stuff (Dolby True HD, DTS HD Master Audio, LPCM, MLP) that can be up to 192kHz stereo or 96kHz 5.1 and on the order of 4-5 mbps. The XBox 360 hardware leaves you completely out in the cold on that front.

With no multichannel analog output and no HDMI 1.3, the XBox 360 will forever be hamstrung with 1.4 mbps DTS over spdif as its best possible output. That was the knock on using a 360 with the HD-DVD drive versus a stand-alone player. Not that it matters anymore

The VGA cable for the Xbox360 is NOT $50. You can find an adapter for as low as $5 using froogle

Great, 4 years after launch. When the system launched, you had to pay $50 (it may have been $60) to MS for their hard to find VGA cable. Again the point being it didn't come in the box.

 

[Anuba]

While I do like the timeless look they've settled on (think of how the Thinkpad design ethic has consistantly defined their lineup since the early 1990s), I do think they are too conservative in tweaking it -- i.e. not being able to tell apart a G5 from a Mac Pro, etc.

It seems somehow as if all roads have led to the designs they have now, and that they'll be sticking with them. I don't think they've ever left any exterior design alone for more years than the Mini or the PM G5/Mac Pro. And the Mighty Mouse has been around forever, if you compare to the frantic rotation of mouse designs they had before. The new alu keyboards, I don't see those going anywhere other than maybe switching to black keys. Even timeless design will get old if it stays for many years.

 

[WeegieMac]

Read deeper -- it doesn't pass HIGH RESOLUTION audio. Such as Dolby True HD on those HD-DVDs you bought, or if they ever come out with a Blu-Ray drive. Or with DTS DVDs you play on your 360. It doesn't even pass multichannel LPCM. Only stereo LPCM and DD. Microsoft cheapened out by going with HDMI 1.2 instead of 1.3. Microsoft missed the boat by ignoring HDMI when the 360 was designed, and then botched it by doing a half-assed job when they added HDMI 1.2 instead of 1.3.

Actually, one of the few areas Sony got right, their games can output multichannel high-res PCM. In the last generation, people said "high res" video didn't matter either.

And FYI Dolby Digital is 48kHz and can be 24-bit, as can DTS. In fact, DTS can be 96/24. Then you get to the advanced Blu-Ray/HD-DVD/DVD-A stuff that can be up to 192kHz stereo or 96kHz 5.1.

Great points, especially regarding high definition audio ... anyone who claims it's not important hasn't heard it through a proper set-up.

Trust me "mosx", The Dark Knight in proper 1080p with HD audio is a must see.

 

[organerito]

This commercial hit Apple for its failure to acknowledge and incorporate new technologies like Blu Ray. In addition, games are a joke on the Mac.

Maybe it is going to take a bad economy and a great competitor to make the Mac into the great computer we know it could be.

Sure OS X blows away Windows. And the iLife 09 package is amazing. But Apple continually fails to adopt new technologies that could make people jump from the PC to Mac.

I could not live without my Mac, but I sure wish it had MANY of the capabilities available on the Windows/PC side.

Apple needs to truly upgrade its Macs this year. Except for the Mac Pro, the CPU upgrades have been a joke for the last few years. Still not adopting Quad Core for notebooks, or i7 for the iMac.

In addition, Apple needs to at least add Blu Ray as a BTO option on its notebooks. And would it hurt Apple to throw in a real dedicated graphics on its MB, MBA, and Mac mini. How much does 256 MB of RAM cost!

I pay a small fortune for every Mac I own... I feel the extra costs would be worth it if Apple kept up with technology. The problem is Apple is way behind in technology, but way ahead in design and innovation. If it could sell us updated technology, it would be worth the extra money... until then, the PC really does lead this battle.

Cannot watch a Blu Ray on a $4k Mac Pro. Funny thing is, I don't even care about Blu Ray, but as an Apple stockholder, I wish it was available for all of those that are buying PCs instead of Macs. Apple needs to boost the technology in all of its Macs this year. I want Apple to be innovative and yet current and relevant with its technology. A shiny glass trackpad is nice, but it cannot cost Apple more than a few cents to make. If I am paying $2499 for a notebook, I expect real upgraded performing hardware components capable of at least matching a $1500 Laptop. That is still $1000 of Apple tax. The problem is we are paying MORE than that...

Sad really, that Microsoft has an edge. With all of Apple's greatness, comes its failures as trying to save so much by not including current hardware, and yet selling every Mac for premium dollars.

I think this year Apple will see an end to the growth it had with Macs. It will blame it on the economy. However, the real reason is that Apple is losing its relevance to those that are not die hard Apple fans. Those that have to think about if they really want to compare a PC to a Mac are going to choose the PC. They can get a lot more power and capabilities for half the money.

Sad really. And I own three Macs right now, but I know PCs have the edge for MOST people. Only us Mac addicts are buying Macs with half the capabilities and power for double or triple the price.

When Windows 7 arrives, it is going to be even more difficult to make someone going mac. Apple will need to do something about it. W7 looks nice and works very well.

 

[Quocy]

if Vista is so good why they don't they focus their advertising on it, rather then doing Sony and HP a favor and advertise their laptops? to be honest i think this marketing campaign is a failure.

 

[Raptura]

these commercials are all coming in really quick, and they're just iterations of the same damn thing. They were all the same commercial only featuring the different people.

At the least with Apple ads it's the SAME people with different ideas behind the commercials.

 

[acurafan]

look at you folks - panties all in a bunch

i find the commercials kinda funny, but i gotta say that's a nice Sony laptop - my workplace has couple of them.