In a move that shouldn't surprise anyone, Microsoft has finally started to run an ad that's a direct attack against Apple. Previous marketing campaigns by Microsoft have always more or less ignored Apple, but the company's latest commercial is a direct attack on Apple in a place where it should hurt Apple the most: price.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2007-01-01
Too bad some people are determined to buy exclusively from one company.
I am a Mac owner because I am determined to make my life easier, by just buying a better OS, and the hardware is comes with (which is nice too).
Linux is fun, I love it. I install Linux OSes non-stop, but just to play. No distro 'just works' (at least on my hardware, which is all that matters to me), although Ubuntu is close.
Windows is a non-stop maintenance headache. I've finally rid my house of every Windows PC, and now I can relax.
I use my Mac when I just want to work, with no fun/tinkering and no problems.
Edited 2009-03-27 23:20 UTC
Member since:2005-07-06
100% agree with you - too bad someone immature thought it would be his duty to abuse the moderation system and repress another persons opinion.
I wish people took your approach and viewed the purchase of a computer as more than just purchasing hardware; you are purchasing a system which includes hardware and software. The experience one has is the sum of all the parts; not just the hardware, not just the software but the whole widget.
Too bad that so many here have a hardware fixation fetish where they focus all their criticisms on the hardware whilst ignoring that people purchase systems - not hardware.
Edited 2009-03-28 04:00 UTC
Member since:
2006-01-17
I think the perception of Macs being more expensive is mostly from the fact that if you limit yourself to any one particular hardware manufacturer, you have much less choice in what features* you get, and generally have to pay more for features you don't need in order to get the features you want.
(*features in this post includes things like quality and stuff, not just Ghz and ram)
Say you want a laptop with features X, Y, but not Z. If you don't limit your self to one company, it's easy to find one with those features at a reasonable price. But if you limit yourself to one particular brand, then it's possible that they will have one model with X, but not Y (or Z). The next higher up model will have X and Y, but also Z. So if you get the lower end one, you don't get all the features you want. If you get the higher end one you're paying more that you should for the features you actually care about.
In the ad she wanted a 17". The Mac she could afford didn't have this feature. The Mac that has this feature has a bunch of other crap she doesn't need and so was overpriced, compared to other computers that had just what she needed and no more.
The last time I was looking at a Mac there was a similar thing. The cheapest version had everything I wanted except a DVD burner. The next level up had the DVD burner, but also had a larger hard drive and more ram, which was useless to me. If I went for the more expensive option I would be paying hundreds of dollars more just to have the DVD burner. So, for what I wanted it was cheaper to get a non-Apple.
The same thing is likely to happen if you limit yourself to only buying Lenovo, or Sony or Fujitsu or even Dell. I was recently trying to decide between two Lenovos. One was under my budget but didn't have the features I wanted. The other had the features I wanted, plus many more, but was too expensive. I went with another brand that had the same features I wanted. No more, no less.
So while it may be true that a similarly spec-ed non-Mac is about the same price as a Mac, that's only relevant if the Mac has the exact features I want. If it has less features then it's not good enough. If it has more, then it costs too much for what I want.
Too bad some people are determined to buy exclusively from one company.