New Microsoft Ad Campaign Targets Mac Prices

[Balin64]

All Right... Last Post

It's about the OS.

I repeat: it's the OS.

Add to that customer service, technical support... minor conveniences that cost money and resources to the company providing them.

You need to pay for that: you always do, no matter how dead-set you are against it. It is not a "tax" it is a reality. People, you get what you pay for.

If you need a high-performing machine for games, folding, protein research, what have you, please: build your own, be happy with it.

If you email ocassionally and read a few websites, buy a cheap Dell, and be happy with it.

If your computer is an extension of your creativity, and you demand that it always just work despite its innards, you already own a Mac.

If you are slamming Apple for being "over-priced" and not having the latest cutting edge hardware, you need to get over it, or work harder so you can purchase the under-powered machine you secretly covet.

This ad is actually kind of depressing: "the banks and the last eight years of poor governance have really screwed all of you! Now bend over, buy Windows and good job, you little peon you."

 

[techfreak85]

wow. this thread exploded. I'm gone for a few hours and there's 1000+ posts. crazy.

 

[awmazz]

Why is Microsoft spending a lot of money advertising hardware? Hardware they don't even make?

Hardware with Vista pre-installed. I guess if you can't sell Vista by itself...

 

[gcmexico]

So? What if she wants a 17" notebook because she's a student who wants the biggest screen possible in her dorm, but still some sort of portability for when she travels home in summer?

There are plenty of reasons why people would buy these machines.

Microsoft are advertising to consumers - they do not care about gigabit ethernet or Wireless N. They don't care about screen viewing angles. They don't care about shared graphics memory either.

Now we're on that, doesn't Apple sell a computer with a smaller screen, lower resolution, poor viewing angles, shared graphics memory and rubbish battery? Yeah. And it costs nearly double what this girl paid for her computer.

**
which Apple laptop are you referring to?

 

[pismodude2]

wow. this thread exploded. I'm gone for a few hours and there's 1000+ posts. crazy.

Aaaand that makes 1000+1.

 

[skaertus]

The graphics card barely matters for most day to day work. Unless you're doing CAD or 3D work, it shouldn't matter at all.

I use Windows at my job, and I need to do some pretty heavy lifting on that machine; tons of apps open all the time. So I've got a hefty CPU and a good bit of RAM. The graphics card is a 6200 IGP (yeah, those are from 4 or 5 years ago). Doesn't make a bit of difference since what I do isn't graphics intensive. For the record, I run Windows 7, with Aero Glass (I don't mind running a beta on my production machine since I can fall back to my laptop if needed).

If the integrated graphics is frustrating you outside of games, I'd like to know what it is you do on your machine.

The integrated graphics card is indeed very frustrating. I bought an external 22" 1680x1050 monitor, and the system is considerably slower with the dual screen. PowerPoint is very, very, very slow on the 22" screen. High quality videos also do not run as smooth as they should. A dedicated graphics card would do a lot of difference to me.

And you're still paying for more than just a spec sheet with big numbers. Of course it's going to cost more.

Well, that's just not a spec sheet with big numbers. Macs are considerably more expensive, and there's no objective criteria to justify that. Users may prefer MacOS, but others may prefer Windows. MacOS is not so technically superior to Windows to justify the price premium.

 

[Stratus Fear]

I'll play this game of simplify the situation and car analogies:

Macs and pcs are both hyundais - one has a rolls royce angel on the bonnet, the other is debadged.

Nice try. Here's one to get the ball rolling. Most (if not all) OEMs don't offer the kind of ease and integration Apple has between its product lines, Macs included. You might parallel this to some random luxury feature on a car. Anyone else want to throw one out there?

If they're both Hyundais, most PCs are like an Accent, and the Mac is more like a Genesis.

 

[skaertus]

Add to that customer service, technical support... minor conveniences that cost money and resources to the company providing them.

You need to pay for that: you always do, no matter how dead-set you are against it. It is not a "tax" it is a reality. People, you get what you pay for.

You get what you pay for. But it's not a simple math. Apple indeed has big margins. It charges proportionally more than what it delivers.

 

[pismodude2]

The integrated graphics card is indeed very frustrating. I bought an external 22" 1680x1050 monitor, and the system is considerably slower with the dual screen. PowerPoint is very, very, very slow on the 22" screen. High quality videos also do not run as smooth as they should. A dedicated graphics card would do a lot of difference to me.

Edit: NM... Apple computers rock. Get a Mac.

Anywho, PP is always slow, no matter what OS, computer, or location you are at. I still use it, but it could use a major recoding/update of some kind.

P.S. My old integrated black MacBook runs Guild Wars just fine in Leopard, and that's a fairly graphics intensive game. As long as your RAM (preferably 1-2GB each slot) is the same size, most games run great.

 

[bug67]

Competition is a good thing. Maybe this will cause apple to rethink its pricing strategies. I know my next laptop is likely to be not from Apple. Apple doesn't make anything close to what I want in a notebook anymore. Bang for buck has a lot to do with my purchasing decision. Apple doesn't pack near as much bang as it could.

 

[Stratus Fear]

The integrated graphics card is indeed very frustrating. I bought an external 22" 1680x1050 monitor, and the system is considerably slower with the dual screen. PowerPoint is very, very, very slow on the 22" screen. High quality videos also do not run as smooth as they should. A dedicated graphics card would do a lot of difference to me.

That's not surprising, but that's not a typical situation for most people.

Well, that's just not a spec sheet with big numbers. Macs are considerably more expensive, and there's no objective criteria to justify that. Users may prefer MacOS, but others may prefer Windows. MacOS is not so technically superior to Windows to justify the price premium.

Again, there's more to it than the internal hardware and the OS. Who cares if it's objective criteria or not? Some people like the maintenance plans BMWs usually come with and some like the customer service, support, and retail experience that Macs come with. It doesn't need to be objective criteria to make the whole package worth more money. If anyone doesn't care about those types of things and are still buying a Mac and complaining about the price, it might be better for them to do more research into other options.

 

[Eidorian]

Apple doesn't sell integrated graphics computers any more, do they (is the MacBook Air)?

Anything with the 9400M G has integrated graphics.

P.S. My old integrated black MacBook runs Guild Wars just fine in Leopard, and that's a fairly graphics intensive game. As long as you RAM (preferably 1-2GB each) is the same size, most games run great.

Korean games cater to the lowest common denominator of the GeForce 2/Radeon. When I say Radeon I mean the ORIGINAL Radeon.

I for one hope it force Apple to drop their prices or at least have people to reconsider their Mac purchase.

 

[Stratus Fear]

You get what you pay for. But it's not a simple math. Apple indeed has big margins. It charges proportionally more than what it delivers.

How is this not subjective?

 

[pismodude2]

...doesn't Apple sell a computer with a smaller screen, lower resolution, poor viewing angles, shared graphics memory and rubbish battery? Yeah. And it costs nearly double what this girl paid for her computer.

Ha! Not so much. Fail! There are no bad viewing angles, and my battery (granted, it's over a year old) lasts for four+ hours.

 

[gkarris]

You get what you pay for. But it's not a simple math. Apple indeed has big margins. It charges proportionally more than what it delivers.

Yes, but think of this.

This lady I know bought a "$699" computer from Best Buy (like Lauren in the ad?).

By the time she added:

Anti-Virus
Optimization Software
Photo Software
Extended Warranty from Best Buy
Geek Squad Setup and Optimization
Some other program thing the salesman convinced her to buy..

I think it all ended up being $1000...

 

[skaertus]

Apple doesn't sell integrated graphics computers any more, their computers rock. Get a Mac.

Yes, they do. The 9400M is an integrated card.

Competition is a good thing. Maybe this will cause apple to rethink its pricing strategies. I know my next laptop is likely to be not from Apple. Apple doesn't make anything close to what I want in a notebook anymore. Bang for buck has a lot to do with my purchasing decision. Apple doesn't pack near as much bang as it could.

Me too. I am quite disappointed by Apple's latest hardware updates. I don't see any big increase of power. I see things such as multi-touch trackpad or backlit keyboard, but these don't really matter to me. I like MacOS better than Windows. But there's a limit. I prefer a Core i7 with a GTX 295 running Windows than a Core 2 Duo with a 9400M running MacOS...

 

[skaertus]

Yes, but think of this.

This lady I know bought a "$699" computer from Best Buy (like Lauren in the ad?).

By the time she added:

Anti-Virus
Optimization Software
Photo Software
Extended Warranty from Best Buy
Geek Squad Setup and Optimization
Some other program thing the salesman convinced her to buy..

I think it all ended up being $1000...

Perhaps not. The anti-virus would cost US$ 50 at best. She could get optimization and photo software for free if she wanted... there are lots of good freeware alternatives for Windows. Extended Warranty also exists with Apple products. And etc. At the end of the day, the PC is still cheaper. If I buy a PC for US$ 699.90, it will cost only US$ 699.90. Perhaps I add Microsoft Office, but I would also add it if I bought a Mac.

 

[Stratus Fear]

Me too. I am quite disappointed by Apple's latest hardware updates. I don't see any big increase of power. I see things such as multi-touch trackpad or backlit keyboard, but these don't really matter to me. I like MacOS better than Windows. But there's a limit. I prefer a Core i7 with a GTX 295 running Windows than a Core 2 Duo with a 9400M running MacOS...

Well then Apple doesn't really have an offering for you. You're outside of their market segment. That's why they have competition in other parts of the market. And I don't really mean this directed specifically at you. Lots of people complain about "Apple doesn't offer what I want" and all they really want is Mac OS in a cheap computer. Apple isn't going to do that. You have options. Figure out what's best and buy it, even if it has Windows. No company has an obligation to absolutely please everyone.

 

[AidenShaw]

I have not yet seen a PC laptop older than 5 years that can run the most recent Windows OS...

I'm doing most of my Windows 7 testing on a laptop that's 34 months old (the 3 year warranty is going to run out soon). (It's a Merom, so still reasonable.)

But, frankly, who gives a damn. A 5 year old system is so far behind the performance curve that one shouldn't care. If it runs what your doing with the old OS - great, keep it and be happy. If, after 5 years, it can't handle the latest OS - then put it to pasture.

..., but my iBook is still chugging away, and our Pismo (running Tiger) is almost a decade old now.

You're not running Snow Leopard on the Pismo - what a piece of junk. You should sue Apple.

 

[bplein]

All of the PC guys say "i can build my own for less". Well, I've been rebuilding broken macbooks for my family and friends now, and it's a cheap way to get into the mac world.

I bought our first mac for my oldest daughter from Apple. My next two macbooks (wife, other daughter) were built up from broken macbooks (donor laptops). They are both ~awesome~ blackbooks. I've revived two more and sold them at a profit, for the price of only $500 each. My friends get a great price on a Mac, I get a small profit that I roll into the next project.

I've got two more I am going to revive. They are the remnants of the donor laptops used previously, so their cost to me now is zero (I made profits on them already). So for about $350 I will revive a 2.1GHz white book, and for about $400 I will revive a 2.2GHz Santa Rosa Blackbook. It's good to find a shop that can swap logic boards when you don't have another donor at hand.

Macs are expensive? Not if you are a hobbyist who can learn a little and is good with a screwdriver and can read ifixit.com. Oh, and be willing to scan craigslist and ebay for deals.

 

[skaertus]

That's not surprising, but that's not a typical situation for most people.

Yes. Unfortunately, I happen to be the geek-kind of guy who wants to squeeze every drop of performance out of the computer... for most consumers, an integrated graphics card would be enough, but I'm picky.

Again, there's more to it than the internal hardware and the OS. Who cares if it's objective criteria or not? Some people like the maintenance plans BMWs usually come with and some like the customer service, support, and retail experience that Macs come with. It doesn't need to be objective criteria to make the whole package worth more money. If anyone doesn't care about those types of things and are still buying a Mac and complaining about the price, it might be better for them to do more research into other options.

Yes, it's not objective. If you use objective standards, than a Mac is indeed more expensive without delivering much extra.

How is this not subjective?

I'm not saying it's not subjective.

 

[pismodude2]

You're not running Snow Leopard on the Pismo - what a piece of junk. You should sue Apple.

I thought that nobody (except beta testers) were running Snow Leopard yet?

 

[FieryFurnace]

I just saw the ad for the first time.
Must say I like it - one of the best ads Microsoft ever made.

 

[Bitmap Frog]

Yes, they do. The 9400M is an integrated card.



Me too. I am quite disappointed by Apple's latest hardware updates. I don't see any big increase of power. I see things such as multi-touch trackpad or backlit keyboard, but these don't really matter to me. I like MacOS better than Windows. But there's a limit. I prefer a Core i7 with a GTX 295 running Windows than a Core 2 Duo with a 9400M running MacOS...

Same boat here. MacOS is really nice but the Apple tax got out of hand.

 

[ZeroAtTheBone]

Good, I love Macs but Apple needs to work on delivering better pricing.

Macs are great. My MacBook runs circles around any computer I've used with Vista. The OS is great and the hardware is beautiful. For these reasons, I'm prepared to pay a premium for a Mac.

However, Apple does need to work on their value equation. In general computers are no long multi-thousand dollar purchases and the current mac pricing is a little out of touch. I was really disappointed when the new aluminum MacBook came out to see it start at $1299. I know the hardware and the case are fantastic, and I do lust after the new design, but I don't buy that Apple had to keep the classic white MacBook around to meet the $999 price point (which let's face it, they should have been at for some time). Had they released the aluminum model at $999 sales would have been through the roof.

My suggested Mac pricepoints:
TBA Mac Netbook: $799
MacBook (aluminum): $999 (with the upgrade model at $1299 and not $1599, dump the classic white model)
MacBook Air: $1399
MacBook Pro 15": $1699 (with the upgrade model at $2099)
MacBook Pro 17": $2399

iMac 20": $999
iMac 24": $1299
Mac Mini: $499/$599

Apple 24" Cinema Display: $599 (the current $899 is RIDICULOUS! One can only imagine the margin). Even $599 is a bit much...