Microsoft Plays The Too-Expensive Lie. Again.

[Vincent Ferrari]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/cultofmac/bFow/~3/TMeDNyhq2WM/9830' target='_blank'>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/cult...MeDNyhq2WM/9830</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"A series of Microsoft ads are aimed at budget consumers worried about price tags, further perpetuating the pricey Mac myth. Associated Press reports the ads were shot by recruited unwitting subjects by posing as a market research firm studying laptop purchasing decisions. It picked 10 people who answered a call for volunteers on Craigslist and other websites and sent them out with a camera crew and budgets ranging from $US700 to $US 2,000. If they found a computer that fit their criteria, they could keep it. In the first 60-second ad, a red-haired recent college grad named Lauren is on the hunt for a speedy laptop with a 17-inch screen and a &ldquo;comfortable&rdquo; keyboard, all for less than $1000. She strides into an Apple store; then, the scene jumps to her walking out empty-handed, telling the camera that the only laptop in her price range has a 13-inch screen. Back in the car, she sighs and says, &ldquo;I&rsquo;m just not cool enough to be a Mac person.&rdquo;"</em></p><p><em> <object classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" width="560" height="340" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0"><param name="src" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/EIS6G-HvnkU" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="340" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/EIS6G-HvnkU"></embed></object></em></p><p>It isn't that you're not "cool enough," Lauren.&nbsp; It's that you're not smart enough.</p><p>Just because two laptops have 17 inch screens doesn't make them comparable.</p><p><MORE /><img src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/600/at/auto/1238156434.usr18053.jpg" style="border: 1px solid #d2d2bb;" /></p><p>The laptop above in all its Bronze / Chrome glory is <a href="http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=9166635&amp;type=product&amp;id=1218041148373" target="_blank">the piece of crap she decided on</a>.&nbsp; Doesn't the AMD Turion just scream speed?&nbsp; I think it does.&nbsp; Doesn't that flat laptop style keyboard just seem so totally different than all the flat laptop keyboards out there?&nbsp; But hey; disregard the fact that it's a total piece of cheap garbage.&nbsp; After all.&nbsp; It's so much cheaper than teh Max0rs!&nbsp; WIN!!!!</p><p>But, like most direct comparisons, Microsoft relies on price.&nbsp; After all, if I just want a car with a V6 engine and 17" tires, it doesn't matter what the car is, right?&nbsp; I can get any car with a V6 and 17" tires and it's the same thing!&nbsp; There's no difference whatsoever between a 2009 Chevrolet Impala and a 2009 Chevrolet Malibu, right?</p><p>Let's look at the shortcomings of this appropriately colored chrome turd (and for comparison purposes, I'll compare it to the MacBook Pro 17", not the MacBook 13" which, aside from the screen size, still slays the hell out of this thing).</p><p>It has an AMD mobile processor, a line of processors not known anywhere for their speed; on the MacBook Pro, you get an Intel Core 2 Duo 2.66.&nbsp; The two aren't even comparable.&nbsp; You're getting ATI's mobile Radeon on the HP, but on Apple's MBP you're getting an nVidia 9400 <strong>and</strong> an nVidia 9600; a switch you can make to save yourself some serious battery life.&nbsp; And while HP's bronze turd offers up to 8 gigs of RAM, the MacBook Pro's ram is siginificantly faster, and there's a much bigger L2 cache onboard.</p><p>The MacBook Pro's "comfy" keyboard is illuminated, meaning those late nights when you're sitting on the couch crying over Grey's Anatomy could be accompanied by some posting to your Blogger blog about how Dr. McDreamy just said something so sweet and your keyboard would be more visible.&nbsp; I'd say that counts as comfy.</p><p>The MacBook Pro also comes with an LED backlit screen and a battery that people who own one will tell you gets five to eight hours out of.&nbsp; So not only is it faster, almost half the thickness, and almost a pound and a half lighter, it'll last you longer on a charge and it's a much higher resolution than the 1440 x 900 on the HP (a resolution comparable to my 15" MBP).</p><p>Oh yeah, and just to round things out, the HP lacks 802.11n, AV inputs, or Gigabit Ethernet.&nbsp; Nice.</p><p><MORE />But what if something goes wrong with it?</p><p><img src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/600/at/auto/1238157949.usr18053.jpeg" style="border: 1px solid #d2d2bb;" /></p><p><em>Figure 2: The image above is that of the power cable to the motherboard of a Wintel machine. Notice the clean cut?&nbsp; Geek Squad's handy work according to Dave Baker who also shared pictures of the severed IDE cable and broken off power connector from the IDE drive inside the case.&nbsp; Is this representative of Geek Squad?&nbsp; <a href="http://www.kevitivity.com/geeksquad.html" target="_blank">You decide</a>.</em></p><p>Well, you can get Apple Care if you want an extended warranty.&nbsp; For a MacBook Pro, 3 years of Apple Care is $349.&nbsp; For the Bronze Bomber, it's $149 for 2 years of Geek Squad support.&nbsp; That's right folks; the Geek Squad.&nbsp; I won't even go into the fearmongering of how AIG is backing that warranty.&nbsp; Just imagine yourself having computer difficulties and having a choice of dealing with the techs on the other end of the Apple Care number or going into Best Buy (which is where they filmed this commercial) and having the Geek Squad look at it.&nbsp; <a href="http://consumerist.com/search/geek squad/?refId=10" target="_blank">Here's some fun research</a> on the kind of folks that work at Geek Squad.&nbsp; Frankly, I wouldn't be terribly comfortable with them touching my computer.</p><p>Let's face reality here for a second.&nbsp; Comparing Apple computers to Windows computers based on stupid things like price or screen size is often a wasted endeavor.&nbsp; Do people shop strictly on price?&nbsp; Sure they do, but in reality most of those are the same people who think the blue E on the desktop is the Internet and Yahoo! is their ISP because it's their homepage.&nbsp; When you compare a 17" MacBook Pro to the cheapo deluxe bargain-basement HP model, sure the HP comes out on top in terms of price, but what are you going to do with it once you buy it?</p><p>Not everyone can afford to drop the $2700 on a MacBook Pro that I'm talking about.&nbsp; I understand that.&nbsp; But comparing computers on price alone is just like comparing cars on price alone.&nbsp; Just because they're both laptops doesn't mean you're getting a comparable piece of equipment.</p><p>Oh yeah, and one more thing.&nbsp; Can we stop pretending that Lauren is just some average chick pulled off the street for a random experiment?&nbsp; <a href="http://blog.seattlepi.com/microsoft/archives/165113.asp" target="_blank">She's a member of SAG.</a></p><p>Yeah.&nbsp; Real random.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

[Ilium Software]

In this day and age, for the typical non-gamer user, I'd say you probably can compare the computers on price alone. Here is the list of things most users are doing with their laptops.

- Surfing the internet
- Checking email
- Watching DVDs at the airport
- Maybe using MS Office
- Playing Facebook games
- Using red eye remover on their digital pics

Considering I was able to buy a $300 Acer laptop that runs Vista (hog that it is) with no delays or slow downs, I'd argue that we truly ARE in an era where price is the difference. All the extra horsepower you get from the Mac is pretty much wasted on your typical consumer. Not to mention the fact that a larger percentage of users are already familiar with Windows - learning a new OS isn't as easy as one might think - no matter HOW well designed Mac is.

And yes, you get a much nicer piece of hardware overall, but there is a reason why economy cars sell well and Jaguars are a luxury market.

So in the long run, I think Apple really does have something to worry about with these new ads. MS is finally pointing out the obvious in an economy where every dollar counts:

"If you can do everything you need to for $300 - why would you spend $1000?"

DISCLAIMER: Again, I'm not arguing against the quality of Apple or their products - I'm suggesting that the point MS is making is a valid one.

[Vincent Ferrari]

DISCLAIMER: Again, I'm not arguing against the quality of Apple or their products - I'm suggesting that the point MS is making is a valid one.

Is it really?

So by your standards, a Hyundai is a better value than a Bentley because it's cheaper.

My point is that you can't compare a luxury brand / item to a run-of-the-mill pedestrian item and say "Look how overpriced the more expensive item is." Of course it is. You also get a hell of a lot more.

I've noticed we rarely see this kind of articles / posts / ads about Sony VAIO computers which are so ridiculously overpriced they're almost in the range of usury.

There's no doubt that Windows PCs can be had for significantly less than Macs; Windows PCs are mass-produced commodity items sold in every big box store in the world, but it would've been nice to see them at least compare similarly spec'ed machines or compete in the real world, not the fake disparate comparison world they created.

And yes, I know it's advertising, but this is not the first time MS has played fast and loose with the facts, and it's definitely not the first time this stupid argument has come up. It's just odd to see Microsoft adopting it for their own, now.

"If you can do everything you need to for $300 - why would you spend $1000?"

Hey, I can do everything I need to do on a $400 phone, so why buy a computer at all, right? Computers are a waste of money. Phones FTW!

[crimsonsky]

I kind of have to agree with Ilium on this one, at least for the average computer user. I have been using Macs for going on 4 years now and am way more than satisfied, but at times I think of getting a cheap PC just because...

Ultimately though, for me what makes the whole Mac experience so wonderful and why I keep buying Macs (I'm on my 4th mini in as many years) is OS X and Mac software. The Mac vs. PC ads did a lot to emphasize the difference between OS X and Vista. I absolutely LOVE OS X. I have never had to deal with all the vagaries of software problems under OS X that I did with WIndows from Win 3.1 to Vista. OS X is a large part of why Macs "just work". And OS X is why I never buy that cheap PC - because I'd have to deal with Windows and I'd just rather not. And the programs I use on OS X are better to me than their equivalents in Windows. As far as I'm concerned, the user experience of OS X is superior to any other OS experience I've ever had (and I've run the gamut from Amiga OS to OS/2 to various *nix systems as well as almost all flavours of Windows), and that is what makes me more than willing to pay the premium for Macs. And although I've never used any flavour of Hackintosh, I suspect the experience on such a machine is not quite the same as using OS X on Apple hardware.

[crimsonsky]

And yes, I know it's advertising, but this is not the first time MS has played fast and loose with the facts, and it's definitely not the first time this stupid argument has come up. It's just odd to see Microsoft adopting it for their own, now.

And Apple didn't with their Mac vs. PC ads? Of course they did (although with much better and funnier ads than anything MS has come out with). I take ALL advertising with a box of salt - but like I said, at least the Apple ads were funny. (My all time favourite is the Pep Rally one - I still bust a gut every time I view it).

This one with Lauren is at least a cut above what MS usually produces. But let's face it - if you're committed to PCs then Apple's ads aren't going to sway you nor vice-versa.

[Vincent Ferrari]

And Apple didn't with their Mac vs. PC ads? Of course they did (although with much better and funnier ads than anything MS has come out with). I take ALL advertising with a box of salt - but like I said, at least the Apple ads were funny. (My all time favourite is the Pep Rally one - I still bust a gut every time I view it).

This one with Lauren is at least a cut above what MS usually produces. But let's face it - if you're committed to PCs then Apple's ads are going to sway you and vice-versa.

For two years we've heard nothing but fist pumping outrage at the Get a Mac ads, not for their truthiness, but for their unbelievable audacity in attacking Microsoft. Now, yet again, MS is ripping into Apple (a company with significantly smaller market share; says something about where their priorities are, doesn't it?) by selling HP computers and NOT their own OS.

If that's the sign of a company that has it's crap together, then I'll eat my hat.

And yeah I know; I'm not the target demo for this ad, but who is then?

[ptyork]

So by your standards, a Hyundai is a better value than a Bentley because it's cheaper.[\QUOTE]

Really, it is more like a Hyundai Genesis vs. a Mercedes S class (deliberately not compared to the E class since they would be too similar). Both are pretty darned nice and do everything you need (and pretty well). No doubt the Mercedes is nicer in almost every way. Your budget may even allow for the Mercedes if you stretch it. But perhaps you'd rather travel to Europe for two weeks every summer for the life of the car rather than spend the extra 60+% for a car that you really won't appreciate on a day-to-day basis.

[QUOTE]My point is that you can't compare a luxury brand / item to a run-of-the-mill pedestrian item and say "Look how overpriced the more expensive item is." Of course it is. You also get a hell of a lot more.

Yes, YOU get a lot more. Most don't because they won't use or appreciate it.

This is an old and tired debate. MS even acknowledges (even if a bit tongue-in-cheek) that Apple is cooler (and thus presumably better). They are just reminding folks that there are cheap computers to be had that will "do the deed" for the average consumer.

That said, I don't really think that the ad is necessary. Real-life sales figures are showing that average consumers realize all of this without the reminder.

[Vincent Ferrari]

That said, I don't really think that the ad is necessary. Real-life sales figures are showing that average consumers realize all of this without the reminder.

I actually agree with that to an extent, which is why I pointed it out in my last post. Why in God's name is MS so damn scared of Apple?

And if they aren't, why keep going after a company who, by all estimation, isn't even making a dent in your business?

It's just odd.

[ptyork]

And yeah I know; I'm not the target demo for this ad, but who is then?

Yup, it's certainly not the Rush Limbaugh of the Apple blogosphere, that's for sure. ;)

[Vincent Ferrari]

Yup, it's certainly not the Rush Limbaugh of the Apple blogosphere, that's for sure. ;)

That's gonna leave a mark. :p

[crimsonsky]

I actually agree with that to an extent, which is why I pointed it out in my last post. Why in God's name is MS so damn scared of Apple?

And if they aren't, why keep going after a company who, by all estimation, isn't even making a dent in your business?

It's just odd.

Uh, you have noticed that Steve Ballmer is not quite sane, right? Seriously, every time I see or hear him, I get this feeling that his grip on reality is a bit tenuous.

Because I've wondered the same thing myself. But this is the same company that's been paranoid about Linux!

[ptyork]

I actually agree with that to an extent, which is why I pointed it out in my last post. Why in God's name is MS so damn scared of Apple?

I don't really think they are directly going after Apple, but they needed a comparison to make the point that PC's are a "good value." I don't really think this will eat into any of the Apple real market. True BMW buyers are likely to stay BMW buyers, even if Ford points out that the Fusion is a heck of a good car at a relatively low price point. A bad economy will hurt both Ford and BMW. An ad like that may convince an "I-got-it-because-I-could-but-really-don't-give-a-hoot" BMW driver who would have stuck it out a few more years with their 3 year-old bimmer to take the plunge and buy something new. It just reminds them that there are alternatives that may be affordable NOW and that they aren't all that terrible.

Honestly, if you think about it, they are acknowledging Apple's superiority. Take it as flattery.

[Vincent Ferrari]

I don't really think they are directly going after Apple, but they needed a comparison to make the point that PC's are a "good value."

Is it, though? I mean, it's a good price, but price != value, and some would argue that any low-end laptop is a bad idea to begin with no matter who makes it and what OS it runs. I don't know; it just seems like MS is intentionally muddying the waters here when it comes to the price / value proposition. I guess if you're uninformed enough to shop for anything solely based on price, you get what you deserve. :rolleyes:

[crimsonsky]

What's kind of funny is that I am probably NOT in Apple's demographic. 57 year old who has been working in IT for almost 25 years with MS products and whose living depends on using MS products. But I always wanted a Mac and WAS put off by price. It wasn't until the Mac mini came out that I made the move and have been hooked ever since. And as I've said previously, it wasn't the machine so much that won me over as the OS. It helped that my son is an avid Mac fan who bought his first Mac 2 years before I bought mine and who "evangelised" me, but the fact that I could buy a Mac for $500 (the price of the original G4 mini) got me in the door.

Believe me, for someone who hasn't experienced OS X, price can really be an issue. That's why I think the Mini is the greatest Mac ever made - not because it's such a great computer (although it is), but because the entry price point is low enough to get in the door and then get hooked. I stay with the mini because it's cheap enough for me to pay cash for and offers all the power I need in a machine. (Of course, after buying a 24-inch Cinema Display, it probably would have made more sense to just buy a 24-inch iMac in the first place!).

Most folks don't even know what the difference is between a Mac and a PC - they just look at the dollar signs.

[doogald]

Is it really?

So by your standards, a Hyundai is a better value than a Bentley because it's cheaper.

Hyundai actually makes pretty good, reliable cars. They probably are a better value, actually.

If somebody is giving me $1000 to buy a computer, and I will not buy one any other way, I'm personally buying a MacBook. (I don't want a 17" screen but, even if I did, I'd just do without. And, as you point out, that's a pretty pathetic notebook anyway.)

But I imagine that there are a number if people who use Windows now, maybe tempted by a Mac, who are thinking it might be better to save a few hundred dollars now rather than pay more.

That's the demo that Microsoft has been losing in market share to Apple over the last few years. This will not convince a Mac user (like me) to switch (back) to Windows. But it may stop bleeding market share. So I think that it might end up a pretty effective message right now, in this economy.

Here's where Microsoft should start worrying, though: they are being squeezed into the middle of the premium hunting, "cool" Mac buying crowd and the money saving, Netbook crowd. I think when Windows 7 adds its licensing fee to Netbooks the makers may just start going to go with license-free Linux rather than Windows. Microsoft may find themselves fighting to hold on to market share on both the high end (there will always be people who can afford premium brands) and on the low end (where people, who seek the best value possible, may be willing to switch to Linux Netbooks). I guess we'll see. (It would be unbelievably interesting if Apple wrote an iTunes client for Linux Netbooks, actually. That might be the one thing keeping ordinary, no-technical people from switching to Linux.)

[doogald]

PCMag has a story about this today (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2344017,00.asp) and I think that they nail it (emphasis mine):

The online version of the ad has a direct link to the model in question; it's a HP Pavilion dv7-1245dx. It comes with an AMD Turion X2 RM-72 processor, 4GB of memory, 320GB hard drive, ATI Radeon HD 3200 integrated graphics, DVD burner, and the all-important 17-inch WXGA+ (1,440 x 900) screen. I wanted to check this system out so I asked PCMag's laptop lead analyst, Cisco Cheng, if we have a HP Pavilion dv7 on the shelf somewhere. He said "DV7? That's an old laptop."

What is Microsoft getting at?

If Microsoft's point is to stick it to Apple and claim that there's only one Mac laptop for under $1,000 and it's got a small 13-inch screen, they're absolutely correct. You can't walk out of an Apple Store with (any) laptop for under $1,000 after tax. Certainly you can't walk out of an Apple Store with a 17-inch laptop for under $1,000. Apple's 17-inch MacBook Pro is a professional product for people like pro photographers and videographers and is marketed and priced as such.

So should the Mac faithful get in a tizzy over this imagined slight? Nope. Apple's strategy has never been about taking a majority of market share over Windows. It's been about increasing profit margins ever since the second coming of Steve, when they cleaned out all the "cheap" Macs they were selling at Sears. At the prices Apple charges for Macs (and iPods, and iPhones), Apple is making a healthy profit margin on every product they sell (and they still sell a lot). Apple's control over its ecosystem, innovation, and design are its hallmarks, not its cheap prices.

[Sven Johannsen]

My point is that you can't compare a luxury brand / item to a run-of-the-mill pedestrian item and say "Look how overpriced the more expensive item is." Of course it is. You also get a hell of a lot more.
Oh..., I wasn't aware that Macs were luxury items. Probably should put a tax on them. I always thought Mac users were elitist snobs, but in reality it appears that it is just that elitist snobs are who buy Macs, and Rolexes and Louis Vitton handbags ;) Just kiddin'

I find it interesting how people argue value. If you want to expose the great value of the Mac, why not just get Billie Mays to shout, "a $5,000 VALUE". That's what sets it isn't it?

There is a lot involved in value, but IMHO, a good deal needs to be, does it do what I need it to do. If I need to dig a hole in the backyard, I can get a $20 shovel at Home Depot, or I could commission a team of artisans to make me a gold plated one with a hand turned hickory handle from old growth New England forests. Bet the latter costs more, and bet it really has no more 'value' to me. Might to someone else, though.

PCs are of course more complex than shovels. I mean Personal Computer, which includes Windows based. Linux, Apple and whatever else is out there. The value proposition has a lot of parts; size, weight, performance, reliability, stamina (longevity), and of course, cost, among others. While there are clearly aspects of any value proposition that Apple comes out ahead on, there are others that Windows based machines come out on top. Cost tends to favor Windows, even though the Mac OS is free. Yea it is, it comes free on every Mac. Windows PC makers have to license Windows from MS and add that to the price.

So, I submit that value is in the eyes of the beholder, and this young lady, member of SAG that she is, valued actually getting the 17" screen, at a price she could afford, more than not getting a clearly superior 17" MAC.

Just the humble ramblings of a disenfranchised Apple II User Group President

[emuelle1]

I wouldn't take this personally. We all know that Macs are a "better value", but not all consumers are really thinking about that kind of value. Microsoft and it's ad agency know that. They're playing to consumer's fears about prices. Consumers will buy that which has the lowest price tag.

As to the "I'm not cool enough to own a Mac", really, I don't understand the uproar. It's a mindless comment that people throw out all the time without thinking about it. The ad agency, if they didn't prompt her, were not above using it. If anything else, rather than being offended, ya'll should take on a superior air and be glad she's not a Mac user.

Look at the prices. My laptop died. About the same time, my old G3 600Mhz iBook died as well, so I can't even fall back on that for surfing and email. The base model MacBook is $999.99. Throw in tax and AppleCare and now we're over $1250. I know the thing will last 4 years or more in most cases. On the other end, the Acer Aspire One is at Wal-Mart for $298. Throw in a 2 year warranty and it's still under $400. Sure, getting 2 years out of it would be a stretch, but sometimes you have to look at the price end, which is pretty much what my wife is doing. Even if I could prove that by spending the money on the MacBook, I wouldn't need a new laptop for 10 years, that doesn't balance out the family budget and keep us on track to our goals. If I get a laptop, it's probably coming from Wal-Mart and it'll be obsolete in the next 2 years, if it lasts that long.

Sometimes that's the way that is. I'll agree with you that the Macs are probably a better value with a better TCO, but that doesn't put them any closer to my ability to fit one in the family budget yet.

Or I'm too cool to own one...

If they feature me on that program, I would promise not to diss Apple. Actually, I'd be a putz and set my budget at $3000 and make them buy me a MacBook Pro. Anybody know how to get me on that marketing study?

[Phronetix]

I think this ad, and its response, point out a few things:

1. Microsoft sees Apple as the real deal, in terms of competition.

2. Microsoft is targeting young people who know nothing about computers, and who cannot and will not be bothered to care, by focusing on price as the main factor. This is exactly what they need to do. I expect we will see altogether different strategies in upcoming ads, targeting other demographics.

3. It's awkward to see Microsoft advertising on behalf of the many manufacturers who run the Windows OS. I mean, why choose HP? What about Dell, or Asus, Toshiba etc..? And also on behalf of Best Buy, who sells so many different laptops.

4. As a Mac person, I cannot even imagine how difficult it would be to navigate through purchasing a PC laptop right now. There are way too many on the market, sold by way too many stores, and online. Checking for specifications, and reviews, and viewing them in store, versus taking a chance by buying on line. I think there was a shot in the video that shows Lauren spinning around, presumably edited in to imply this 'wonderful' amount of options she has.

I know that many in the PC world would say, "Yes! This is choice!!" And that is why the PC world is better. Actually, I disagree so strongly I have a visceral reaction to the very idea that this level of choice is superior. It is not better. It is CONFUSING. Unnecessary confusion over comparison shopping is one of the key reasons that finally sends PC shoppers into an Apple store, from my personal experience.

5. In the end, we have to remember she was given $1000 to spend by a marketing company that would have only allowed her $800 had she stated a 13 inch screen was acceptable.

6. Microsoft is positioning itself as not cool. Ouch. Talk about a self-imposed dress down. I could write the next Get a Mac ad right this instant.

[Yukster]

Quite honestly, I am not sure why some people are getting all upset over the ad... Apple has been attacking Windows over the last few year, presenting their side of the story with all these Mac vs. PC ads. Almost all of the Windows users I talked to has taken it in good humor.

Now that Microsoft is hitting back, I see all these Mac fanboys start throwing fits and cry.

IF Macs are truly better than PCs, then don't worry, the product will speak for itself. If a lot of it was just Apple marketing, then I would be worried.

A few weeks ago, I did by my first Mac, the new Mac Mini, and I have been pleasantly surprised. I can see the value in the product, and it was a very nicely executed computer. But reading this thread, it just reinforces my beliefs, that I don't hate Macs, just arrogant Mac users.

P.S.: Member of the abandoned Apple II user community...

[Sven Johannsen]

...We all know that Macs are a "better value"....Really? Who are 'we'? Mac users? I would guess that a poll of Mac users would discover that they believed MACs were a better value. I wouldn't dispute their belief, but I wouldn't hold it up as universal. I don't think Mac's have greater value intrinsically. I may think they are a better device in some respects, but that isn't the whole of value.

[Vincent Ferrari]

Quite honestly, I am not sure why some people are getting all upset over the ad... Apple has been attacking Windows over the last few year, presenting their side of the story with all these Mac vs. PC ads. Almost all of the Windows users I talked to has taken it in good humor.

Now that Microsoft is hitting back, I see all these Mac fanboys start throwing fits and cry.

Ahhh yes, the old "fanboy" moniker.

You Windows folks never get tired of that one.

[Ilium Software]

My point is that you can't compare a luxury brand / item to a run-of-the-mill pedestrian item and say "Look how overpriced the more expensive item is." Of course it is. You also get a hell of a lot more.

Except when the Apple "luxury item" started the discussion by comparing THEIR product to Windows PCs as a whole.

So by your standard, it is perfectly acceptable for Apple to compare luxury to low cost, but not OK to go the other direction?

Again, MS didn't reject anything Mac has been saying - they just pointed out that "Yep, for 2 to 3 times as much, you can have everything Apple promises and be cool while you are at it - of course most of us don't have that kind of money so here is a great alternative."

I've noticed we rarely see this kind of articles / posts / ads about Sony VAIO computers which are so ridiculously overpriced they're almost in the range of usury.

If you group "Windows" machines as a whole, the Windows market offers a range. If the ONLY Windows computers were overpriced VAIOs, yeah, that's a point. Also, VAIO never put themselves head to head against other Windows machines in their ads - Apple DID do this.

There's no doubt that Windows PCs can be had for significantly less than Macs; Windows PCs are mass-produced commodity items sold in every big box store in the world, but it would've been nice to see them at least compare similarly spec'ed machines or compete in the real world, not the fake disparate comparison world they created.

But they aren't comparing specs - they are comparing what the user wants to get done. If the user wants X,Y,Z then it is perfectly acceptable to compare two products that accomplish X,Y, and Z and then see which one is more affordable. Does an Apple REALLY surf the web better than a Windows machine? Is your email that much better on an Apple? Do movies look significantly better? If not, then the comparison remains valid. If you want to do X,Y, and Z you can do it as well and cheaper on a PC, then that's a fair thing to point out to folks.

And yes, I know it's advertising, but this is not the first time MS has played fast and loose with the facts, and it's definitely not the first time this stupid argument has come up. It's just odd to see Microsoft adopting it for their own, now.

I'm curious about which facts they are playing fast and loose with.

Look, I agree with you that Apple makes great machines, but we're talking about Joe user - not technophiles. For Joe User, with a limited income (which is most people) and limited needs, a Windows machine is a great choice and it is worthwhile for MS to point this out to folks - especially with the saturation of the mass market with the Apple message.

I just don't see why you're so angry at MS for doing this. If Apple doesn't like it, release a $300 laptop and undermine the argument! I'd buy one today if they did.

[jgrnt1]

Vincent,

Regardless of your personal feelings, blind MS bashing is rather unbecoming a Thoughts website editor. MS and Apple people can debate the merits of both platforms all day long, but you're writing from an emotional standpoint, not simply debating facts.

I will say I like Macs, but will never own one, since I love building my own PCs. It's a long-standing hobby of mine. I have a company provided laptop, so I won't purchase one myself. Otherwise, I might get a Macbook, because price is not a concern for me. However, if you look at HP's website, you can get an HP laptop comparable on specs to a $2800 17" Macbook Pro for $1300 -- 2.53GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, 320GB 7200rpm hard drive, 18.4" screen, 512MB Nvidia 9600M graphics, 802.11N wireless, Blue-ray, webcam. Slightly slower processor, faster hard drive, bigger screen and Blue-ray for less than half the price.

I'm not going to debate whether the Macbook Pro is worth the extra money. For many people it is, and if I was buying a laptop, it might be for me, too. That said, the blind evangelism, combined with MS bashing just because you're an Apple supporter, isn't journalism. It's just trashy blogging.

[Jon Childs]

I was recently in the market for a laptop and I really wanted to buy a macbook so I could fool around with developing some iphone apps. After doing some research I simply couldn't justify the cost. The $999 (on special) dell XPS at bestbuy seemed to have the same specs (slightly slower CPU plus a slightly bigger screen and a Bluray drive) as the $2500 15" Macbook. At that differential and the way computer prices come down I could probably buy at least 3 windows laptops over the next 6 years, and the 999 one 4 years from now is going to be way better than the macbook of today. I was definitely willing to pay a premium, but at 250% of the price it was just too much. I will probably end up buying a mini when I get some free time to try out the iphone SDK, the mini seems like a much better "value" than any of the macbooks to me. 1500 extra bucks for the extras just seemed way out of line. I really wish it was cheaper because a dual boot (I need windows for work) Macbook sounded really good.

[Jason Dunn]

There's no doubt that Windows PCs can be had for significantly less than Macs; Windows PCs are mass-produced commodity items sold in every big box store in the world, but it would've been nice to see them at least compare similarly spec'ed machines or compete in the real world, not the fake disparate comparison world they created.

I'm not going to say all that much here (OK, looks like I did anyway), because I know it will be a losing battle with you ;) but I'll point something out here: it's every bit as valid to compare two products on price as it is to compare them on features, because for some, features are more important than price, and for others, price is more important than features - as long as the basic features are there, many consumers don't care about the rest.

For example, Ashley and I have been crib shopping lately. We've seen cribs for $249 and we've seen cribs for $1500. 95% of features that the $1500 crib offers are the same as the $249 crib. The $1500 crib simply looks nicer doing it, and is made of better materials, so would presumably last longer, etc. For some, the nicer looks are worth it. For us, they are not - we're looking for a crib that will hold our child, keep him/her safe, and make it easy for us to get him/her in and out. The longevity of the crib is essentially irrelevant to us - we're not looking for a family heirloom, we're looking for a tool that will do the job, and when that tool is done, we'll sell it and move on. It's perfectly valid for us to shop with price as the most important factor, just as it's perfectly valid for someone else to demand pure oak and accept nothing less, regardless of price.

Looking at your car comparison example, you sarcastically ask this:

"After all, if I just want a car with a V6 engine and 17" tires, it doesn't matter what the car is, right? I can get any car with a V6 and 17" tires and it's the same thing! There's no difference whatsoever between a 2009 Chevrolet Impala and a 2009 Chevrolet Malibu, right?"

For many consumers, there is no difference, at least not any that matter to them. That's the reason why some people will buy a used car for $1000 and others will drop $50,000 on a car, yet both serve the same basic purpose of getting the person from point "A" to point "B".

The flaw in Apple's game, if you want to call it a flaw, is that they highly segment their market into buckets that they feel make sense. In Apple's world, the only people who should need a 17 inch screen are professional content creators, and those people are willing to pay $2700 to get that size of screen.
In the Windows world, there are people who want a 17 inch screen because it might be their only computer, not hooked up to a monitor, and they just want a big screen to work on. That's perfectly valid. Apple doesn't have a product to sell to those people, so if someone has that need, they can't buy an Apple product - and that's all this commercial was really saying.

The explosive rise of netbooks has taught the industry one very important lesson: most people can get by on much less computer horsepower than the industry has been telling them they needed for years. Yes, people like you and I want the super fast processors and the huge hard drives because we're content creators, but many people out there simply consume content - and you don't need much horsepower to consume content.

As an aside, Apple doesn't have an answer to the netbook question because it's the antithesis of their own products: "just enough" engineering, low product price points, something that appeals to the lowest-common denominator. Something that's both form and function, but just-right-form and just-barely-function.

But that's OK, because Apple's game has NEVER been about mass-market success with their computers. Steve Jobs doesn't want to own 90% of the market, he wants to own the "best" 10% there is - the most profitable, the people who appreciate the aesthetics that the Mac has to offer.

[Jason Dunn]

Now, yet again, MS is ripping into Apple (a company with significantly smaller market share; says something about where their priorities are, doesn't it?)

You know full well the tremendous damage those Apple ads did to the perception of Vista over the years - hiding behind Apple's small market share isn't relavent here. Most people didn't switch to OS X, they stuck with crappy old computers running XP rather than get a new PC running Vista - and few if any could explain why. Advertising works. Pumping the same message - "Vista sucks" - into the minds of the American Idol-watching public, over and over, has a big impact on public opinion.

...by selling HP computers and NOT their own OS.

When's the last time Apple did an ad for only OS X? I don't think I've ever seen one. Apple is a hardware+software company, and they use that to their advantage because consumers understand hardware more than they understand software - if Apple advertised only the SOFTWARE on the iPhone and didn't show a hand holding the product, it would have been more abstract and harder for the general consumer to grasp. By showing hardware and software together, Apple presents a complete package - and that's what people understand.

So knocking Microsoft for doing the same thing seems pretty silly to me. :)

[Jason Dunn]

I absolutely LOVE OS X. I have never had to deal with all the vagaries of software problems under OS X that I did with WIndows from Win 3.1 to Vista. OS X is a large part of why Macs "just work". And OS X is why I never buy that cheap PC - because I'd have to deal with Windows and I'd just rather not.

That's a perfectly valid reason - it's like some people who, once they purchase a vehicle with all-wheel drive, they simply never want to go back to a two-wheel drive system. The four-wheel drive "check box" becomes the #1 thing they look for, and it's more important than paying the lowest price for the car. Other people could care less about all-wheel drive and price is more important to them. Neither is "wrong".

[Vincent Ferrari]

Vincent,

Regardless of your personal feelings, blind MS bashing is rather unbecoming a Thoughts website editor. MS and Apple people can debate the merits of both platforms all day long, but you're writing from an emotional standpoint, not simply debating facts.

Wait, I'm supposed to respond to a rah rah "YAY US! WE'RE NOT THE COOL KIDS, BUT WE'RE STILL OKAY" piece of contrived tripe with some hipster actress that's designed to appeal to every single stupid stereotype (see the "I guess I'm not cool enough to own a Mac" remark) Windows jerks have been slinging at us while calling us fanboys and kool aid drinkers for years with pure journalism and impartiality?

Screw that.

For three years I've heard nothing but whining from Windows "enthusiasts" (because God forbid we call them fanboys) about how "mean" the Apple "Get a Mac" ads are. You know, the ones that say the out of box experience is better (it is; not for nothing but even Jason would admit that), the included software is better (it is; unless you think Quicken Trial Edition is awesome) and how Macs don't get the same virus and spyware infections that Windows do (or any for that matter).

For three years I've heard how horrible Apple is for those ads and they run one stupid piece with a bunch of loaded BS, I respond, and I'm being told to shut my mouth?

I don't get why Apple people are supposed to be impartial, lest we immediately be labelled fanboys, but when Windows people show the same zealotry, they're called "enthusiasts" and even rewarded by Microsoft for their evangelism as "MVP's." If there was any better example, take a look at how Daniel Eran Dilger is written about as opposed to how Paul Thurrott is written about. Both of them are as blind as blind zealots can be, and yet one is called a "journalist" and the other is regularly chastised for being a "fanboy."

I'm not a journalist, nor was I put on here to be one, pretend to be one, or appear to be one. When Microsoft lets loose some BS, I call them out on it (this crap ad, the not changing backgrounds in Windows 7 Starter, and so on). When Apple lets loose some BS I call their butts on the carpet for it also (see my continuing rants against their video DRM and their iTunes approval process for iPhone apps if you want proof; in fact on my first weekend here I wrote a gigantic piece about Apple being in bed with Hollywood and how hypocritical that is). That's the way I am. I call out BS.

If you see that as trashy, my apologies.

Just don't expect it to change.

[Vincent Ferrari]

When's the last time Apple did an ad for only OS X? I don't think I've ever seen one. Apple is a hardware+software company, and they use that to their advantage because consumers understand hardware more than they understand software - if Apple advertised only the SOFTWARE on the iPhone and didn't show a hand holding the product, it would have been more abstract and harder for the general consumer to grasp. By showing hardware and software together, Apple presents a complete package - and that's what people understand.

So knocking Microsoft for doing the same thing seems pretty silly to me. :)

Not when Apple makes both parts (the hardware and the software).

I noticed the distinct absence of the word Vista anywhere in the ad. That's the part they make. That, my friend, is pretty silly.

[Jason Dunn]

Honestly, if you think about it, they are acknowledging Apple's superiority. Take it as flattery.

In what way is pointing out that Apple has only one 17" laptop product, a 300% more expensive product, flattery?

[Vincent Ferrari]

That's a perfectly valid reason - it's like some people who, once they purchase a vehicle with all-wheel drive, they simply never want to go back to a two-wheel drive system. The four-wheel drive "check box" becomes the #1 thing they look for, and it's more important than paying the lowest price for the car. Other people could care less about all-wheel drive and price is more important to them. Neither is "wrong".

You're right, they're not wrong. But in the MS "Life without walls" campaign, the equivalent would be:

I want an AWD vehicle for under $30,000 and it has to seat 8. I walk into a BMW dealer and walk right out and say "I'm not cool enough to be a BMW owner," then go to a used car lot and buy a 12 year old Grand Cherokee Laredo. Seeing as it's cheaper, I just did well. The problem is I compared it to a market that BMW isn't in; that being the sub $30,000 SUV / Crossover market.

Doesn't make someone buying the Laredo wrong, but it makes me wonder if they have a damn brain in their head, and if someone told me this story, I'd laugh in their face. We all know Apple doesn't compete in the market of $700 copper colored underpowered machines. And yes, they are good values for some people who can't afford more.

But to create the impression that a comparable Apple laptop is $2700 and this one is $700 is what's so damn ridiculous about this ad. Notice, she didn't come out of the Apple Store and say "Well, it was more powerful and a much nicer machine, but it was way more than I wanted to spend." She came out, said they only had one machine that fit her budget, another that fit her specs, and that she wasn't cool enough to be a Mac person.

The clear impression they were trying to create is that they were comparable machines and Apple's was $2000 more. Only the blindest of the blind wouldn't see that in this ad.

[Jason Dunn]

2. Microsoft is targeting young people who know nothing about computers, and who cannot and will not be bothered to care, by focusing on price as the main factor...As a Mac person, I cannot even imagine how difficult it would be to navigate through purchasing a PC laptop right now. There are way too many on the market, sold by way too many stores, and online. Checking for specifications, and reviews, and viewing them in store, versus taking a chance by buying on line.

Well, here's the thing: the vast majority of people in the world today do not check specifications, read reviews, or try to look at every possible option out there. What Lauren did, scripted or not, is what most people do: go to a big-box retail store, wander through a few aisles, narrow down the choices based on a few factors (usually price), and pick the one they like the best. Our Best Buy stores here sell Macs, so if this were filmed in Canada the Macbook Pro would have been part of the buying process but eliminated quickly due to the price point.

You and I don't shop that way, but we're not normal. :D

[Jason Dunn]

Not when Apple makes both parts (the hardware and the software).

So you're saying that because Microsoft doesn't make PC hardware, they're "allowed" to only advertise their software? Says who? Apple's advantage in the market is that they make the hardware and software, and can bring significant advantages to the table in terms of ease of use, stability, and out of box experience. That's the Apple advantage, and I'd never begrudge them the ability to trumpet those advantages (and they do).

The Microsoft advantage is in working with a wide variety of OEMs, a diverse PC landscape, and that means there are many companies out there competing for the consumer dollar creating an array of hardware in all shapes and sizes, at all price points. That's the Microsoft advantage. Why would you begrudge them the ability to promote that fact?

I noticed the distinct absence of the word Vista anywhere in the ad. That's the part they make. That, my friend, is pretty silly.

No argument from me there - Microsoft is avoiding it, no doubt. Vista is, largely because of the Apple attack ads, a dirty word in the eyes of the general public. Perception is reality. Avoiding the tainted word is not silly, it's smart. Yes, it's a victory for Apple that they managed to make that a poison word - a victory that Steve Jobs no doubt delights in.

I have Vista installed on every computer I own (other than netbooks), and it's an awesome operating system for my needs - I don't think Microsoft has anything to apologize for today (I acknowledge the first six months were rough). But the reality of Vista is overruled by public perception of Vista, and so here we are. Windows 7 can't come soon enough in the eyes of Microsoft (and mine too - 7 rocks!).

[Jason Dunn]

Regardless of your personal feelings, blind MS bashing is rather unbecoming a Thoughts website editor. MS and Apple people can debate the merits of both platforms all day long, but you're writing from an emotional standpoint, not simply debating facts.

I'll step in here and express the fact that Vincent was purposefully chosen for his passion for all things Apple. If you look back a few years on Pocket PC Thoughts, at the height of the Palm/Pocket PC wars, you'll doubtless find me "Palm bashing" more than a few times. :D

Although I may strongly disagree with Vincent on this particular topic, he expressed his opinions and explained his reasons why. We might not all agree on the same things, but if someone explains why they think something, it comes down to a difference of opinion - and community forums are great places when a diversity of opinion flows...as long as it's all expressed respectfully.

"Blind MS bashing" are the YouTube comments that say "Windoz Suxs!" on my videos. I don't see Vincent doing that here. ;)

[Jason Dunn]

But to create the impression that a comparable Apple laptop is $2700 and this one is $700 is what's so damn ridiculous about this ad. Notice, she didn't come out of the Apple Store and say "Well, it was more powerful and a much nicer machine, but it was way more than I wanted to spend."

A fair point - I agree 100%. The Macbook Pro has some great technology in it and is no doubt worth the price to the people that buy it.

But as I said elsewhere in this thread, the reality we all have to face as uber-geeks is that most people don't shop on specs - ESPECIALLY not most women. Yes the GPU on the Macbook Pro kicks the crap out of the GPU on the HP, but if Joe Consumer's criteria is "Can it play YouTube videos?", well, that Macbook Pro could have 8-way SLI and it wouldn't matter. The thunderous rise of netbooks is 100% proof of this fact - although I do find it amusing that some netbooks can't play YouTube HD videos. :D

The clear impression they were trying to create is that they were comparable machines and Apple's was $2000 more. Only the blindest of the blind wouldn't see that in this ad.

Sure, that's one point in the ad - but I don't think it's the most powerful point. I think the "cool" comment is being blown way out of proportion - it's not like there was 30 seconds devoted to deconstructing her Apple store experience, she went in, went out, and made one comment - and off she went. The Apple ads were flat-out 30 seconds of Microsoft bitch-slapping. What's in this ad is a claws-extended swipe, nothing more. Methinks thou dost protest too much. :D

I mean, hell, they could have had her going into a Sony store and coming out saying the same thing (I think all 17" Sony laptops are well north of $1000). The real point of this ad is having lots of choice - the real strength of the Windows platform.

[Janak Parekh]

No argument from me there - Microsoft is avoiding it, no doubt. Vista is, largely because of the Apple attack ads, a dirty word in the eyes of the general public. Perception is reality. Avoiding the tainted word is not silly, it's smart. Yes, it's a victory for Apple that they managed to make that a poison word - a victory that Steve Jobs no doubt delights in. Well, it's a sign "Vista is bad" won the perception game. Sure, Microsoft didn't counter Apple's marketing effectively; that's a testament to how inconsistent Microsoft's marketing skills are (and I use that generously; by-and-large Microsoft is absolutely terrible at advertising to the general public). But blaming this on Apple is way too simplistic. It didn't help that most major periodicals and magazines gave Vista a negative review on release. Heck, I tried Vista via MSDN shortly after it came out and found it slow. It's been much better post-SP1, but Microsoft hasn't effectively communicated this.

I'm not convinced it's smart, personally. Microsoft is buying into the perception that Vista sucks by not countering it. ;) Why doesn't Microsoft, for example, make more ads that show something that's much easier to do in Vista? I've seen one or two on TV and they were great. Problem is, they're not sticking to that campaign and expanding it consistently. I think that would be better bang for their buck than these ads (and even moreso compared to the Seinfeld ads).

--janak

[Phronetix]

Hmmm, just reading through the responses, there is one common theme that I wonder if anyone has picked up on besides me.

It's CIVIL.

Mac versus PC debate. Civil discussion/debate. Polite (mostly).

When did we all become so darn grown-up about this?

;-)

[Jason Dunn]

But blaming this on Apple is way too simplistic. It didn't help that most major periodicals and magazines gave Vista a negative review on release.

Agreed - but Joe Consumer doesn't read blogs, periodicals, or computer magazines. The opinions of geeks are shaped by these things, but Joe Sixpack watching American Idol - he's the one getting his opinion from the Apple ads. I won't argue that Vista had a very rocky start - mostly around driver issues - but the heart of the Apple ads weren't around driver issues.

I'm not convinced it's smart, personally. Microsoft is buying into the perception that Vista sucks by not countering it. Why doesn't Microsoft, for example, make more ads that show something that's much easier to do in Vista?

If they were to do that a year ago, yeah, great - but now? There's no point. Vista is a dirty word, and Windows 7 is the future. If and when Apple starts to attack Windows 7, I suspect (and hope) that Microsoft will respond. But it's VERY tricky (read: almost impossible) to directly respond to attack ads, especially when you're the bigger company. Everything looks like an attack on the little guy - I doubt you'll ever see Microsoft attack Apple with the same approach that Apple attacked Microsoft. It's also not part of their company culture to do snarky ads.

[Jason Dunn]

Hmmm, just reading through the responses, there is one common theme that I wonder if anyone has picked up on besides me. It's CIVIL.

I know - isn't it nice? :)

[Janak Parekh]

Agreed - but Joe Consumer doesn't read blogs, periodicals, or computer magazines. The opinions of geeks are shaped by these things, but Joe Sixpack watching American Idol - he's the one getting his opinion from the Apple ads. I won't argue that Vista had a very rocky start - mostly around driver issues - but the heart of the Apple ads weren't around driver issues. Actually, a number of Apple's Vista ads talked specifically about driver issues, but that's probably not worth discussing anyway.

I dislike the Joe Sixpack term thanks to the last election, but since you brought it up: doesn't the average person not install an OS anyway? They buy a new computer. So, they'd get Vista that way. The few average people who upgrade OSes get help from their semi-techie friends, the types that read NYT or PC Magazine or whatever, and those are the folks who are going to tell the average consumer not to upgrade, etc.

I guess I'm trying to say that I think Microsoft had more space to work in than they thought. <shrug>

There's no point. Vista is a dirty word, and Windows 7 is the future. If and when Apple starts to attack Windows 7, I suspect (and hope) that Microsoft will respond. But it's VERY tricky (read: almost impossible) to directly respond to attack ads, especially when you're the bigger company. Perhaps, but you can still talk about its positive aspects. Microsoft did an eminently poor job of that about Vista.

It's also not part of their company culture to do snarky ads. I think part of the problem is that Microsoft hasn't established a dominant culture. The one saving grace of "I'm a PC" is that they are trying to establish one. Everything else in the past kind of diluted it.

--janak

[doogald]

Funny.

Joy of Tech (http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyarchives/1227.html)

[Sven Johannsen]

I mean, hell, they could have had her going into a Sony store and coming out saying the same thing (I think all 17" Sony laptops are well north of $1000). The real point of this ad is having lots of choice - the real strength of the Windows platform.

Well as a matter of fact... FW Series, 16.4" widescreen display, 6.7 lbs., Starting at $839.99. Yea starts at, but that is still well south of $2500. I guess we don't have to argue about the build quality of Sony. Any one that has had one understands. I've have three, one purchased in 2001, which still works as well as when I bought it. Use it regularly. Don't see why MS would have Lauren walk into a SonyStyle store and complain about the price though, that would just tick off Sony, and they might start licensing OSX..:rolleyes: Oh silly me, they can't. (BTW, you ever been to a SonyStyle store? These things aren't in WalMart parking lots. I'm not sure Lauren is cool enough to even go in one ;) I mean the local one is in a mall that has valet parking.)

Wait, she could have gone into the Linux store. Oh, darn it anyway, there aren't really any of those either.

Guess they were kind of stuck comparing what they have to offer, with the only other readily available alternative, that for some reason has been recently comparing itself to 'I'm A PC' (aka, the dork).

Personally I like the new ads with the little kids that can do cool things on a PC, better than the Lauren ad. I do think it is better that MS sell the capabilities of the software that they sell, not sell hardware for HP, or Gateway, or whoever. But hey, I'm not a marketing guy for a company that has the vast majority of the market.

Actually kind of fun to see MAC on the defensive, though he insists there is no reason to be, since he is clearly superior. Expose the dirty little secret and foul is cried. You can have the integration, the stability, the ecosystem, as long as you get a form that Apple wants you to have, at a price Apple wants you to pay. If that doesn't meet your needs, well then, you don't understand value. Probably just as well Lauren picked a Windows PC, she probably would have devalued the MAC mystique, since she is just one of those peasants that has no clue, and only chooses based on cost.:D

[Phronetix]

Thanks, Sven. I apparently spoke too soon.
[/shrugs]

[Janak Parekh]

I guess we don't have to argue about the build quality of Sony. Any one that has had one understands. I've have three, one purchased in 2001, which still works as well as when I bought it. I, on the other hand, bought two laptops from Sony in the last 10 years, and both of them needed some form of repair. I personally generally avoid Sony laptops now, although damn if their netbook isn't very, very cute, and my PS3 runs like a champ. <shrug>

(BTW, you ever been to a SonyStyle store? These things aren't in WalMart parking lots. I'm not sure Lauren is cool enough to even go in one ;) I mean the local one is in a mall that has valet parking.) Aren't you making Vincent's point here? Calling Apple "too cool" only devalues oneself. (Oh, and the Sony Style store in NY, just like the Apple Store in NY, attracts a broad audience of people, not just stereotypically cool ones.)

Guess they were kind of stuck comparing what they have to offer, with the only other readily available alternative, that for some reason has been recently comparing itself to 'I'm A PC' (aka, the dork). If you come up with an appropriate set of constraints, of course the PC will always come out as the only possibility. The counterargument being made here is that those constraints are counterproductive and overlooking the key arguments.

Personally I like the new ads with the little kids that can do cool things on a PC, better than the Lauren ad. Agreed, and that was my point in a few posts ago. "Finally! A MS ad that talks about the product itself!"

But hey, I'm not a marketing guy for a company that has the vast majority of the market. I think you're already better than MS's marketing agencies. ;) Years of seeing Windows Mobile terribly marketed really exposed me to how incompetent MS is at PR.

Actually kind of fun to see MAC on the defensive, though he insists there is no reason to be, since he is clearly superior. Expose the dirty little secret and foul is cried. You can have the integration, the stability, the ecosystem, as long as you get a form that Apple wants you to have, at a price Apple wants you to pay. If that doesn't meet your needs, well then, you don't understand value. Okay, now you lost me. I didn't see this point being made anywhere.

--janak

[mv]

MS has a good point. If i want a 17 inch laptop, just to surf the web, and i really need this big screen because i can´t read on a smaller one, this HP is a better buy than the $999 macbook.

Sure, you can´t compare a V6 mercedes to a V6 Kia. But what if what i need is a V6, and i dont really care about the luxury items? I´m glad i can use a 13 inch, so i can buy a macbook. But people needing bigger screens on a regular laptop may not need to pay $2,700 for the super macbook 17.

[Jason Dunn]

...doesn't the average person not install an OS anyway? They buy a new computer. So, they'd get Vista that way.

Correct. But I'm thinking of the people, and I have two in mind in particular, who wanted to keep limping along with their ancient computers because they didn't want to get a new computer with Vista on it - solely because they "heard it was bad". Those are the people who were heavily influenced by the Apple ads.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying that Vista was a shining jewel right from day one and Apple was solely responsible for what people thought about Vista. Vista had a rough start and deserved some of the heckling it got. But Apple's ads were deadly effective in spreading FUD - more so than anything else I've ever seen.<shrug>
</shrug>

[Jason Dunn]

Well as a matter of fact... FW Series, 16.4" widescreen display, 6.7 lbs., Starting at $839.99. Yea starts at, but that is still well south of $2500.

OK, I stand corrected. I knew I should have done some research before saying that - but I'd already spend 60+ minutes in this thread. :D

I guess we don't have to argue about the build quality of Sony. Any one that has had one understands. I've have three, one purchased in 2001, which still works as well as when I bought it. Use it regularly.

Sony definitely has great build quality, but I've had fairly negative experiences with every one I've encountered (as in, worked on, I've never bought one) - usually related to the seemingly endless amount of software junk they put on their computers. And it's not "crapware" in the traditional sense - it's all sorts of custom Sony software to "enhance" the experience but it ends up being pretty confusing.

I guess it's like anything else: some people love a brand, some people hate a brand, and neither can figure out why the other doesn't "understand". :)

[Jason Dunn]

Thanks, Sven. I apparently spoke too soon.
[/shrugs]

Oh, come now, let's not be so sensitive! :) Sven wasn't disparaging any person that I could see, he's simply being critical of Apple. We can all be critical of companies and products - that's fair game in my book. What else would we talk about if we didn't? :D

[Jason Dunn]

But people needing bigger screens on a regular laptop may not need to pay $2,700 for the super macbook 17.

If Apple wasn't so dead-set on their myopic and artificial "customer buckets" (where every customer fits into a certain bucket), they'd release a 17" Macbook for $1199 and steal some more market share from the Windows camp. Or release a mini-tower Mac that has the guts of the iMac but doesn't have the screen - perfect for someone who wants more performance/expandability than the Mac Mini delivers but doesn't need/want a monitor to go along with it. Hell, *I* might buy one of those!

There are lots of ways that an expanded product line would benefit Apple, but they just won't go there...

[Janak Parekh]

There are lots of ways that an expanded product line would benefit Apple, but they just won't go there... Considering how well Apple's done as of late, I'm not sure our opinions on this are necessarily correct. ;)

--janak

[Sven Johannsen]

Considering how well Apple's done as of late, I'm not sure our opinions on this are necessarily correct. ;)

--janak
I gotta agree here. I much rather have companies understanding their strengths and working with those. If that means having a limited market target, so be it. No reason to step out of your core competencies just for market share. If you are making a good living, making a good product, more power to you.

Well, maybe that isn't an agreement, as a related comment.