SuperSite Blog

Truth hurts doesn't it Apple!  I would think Apple would have better judgement than allow that...it just reinforces to MS that the campaign if the most successful in their history of promoting Windows in recent history!  As a marketing professional, that call represents the most powerful, positive, market research confirmation money can't buy!

just wonderful how apple cares about the accuracy  of their own ads but do about Microsoft's.

my first post should be "just wonderful how apple does not care about the accuracy  of their own ads but do about Microsoft's." ugh

In a nutshell, Apple is crying "UNCLE".

If Steve Jobs had made a statement this outrageous during a WWDC keynote, half the internet would mobilize to debunk it. But since a Microsoft flack said it, it's taken at face value? Two truth-bending cutthroat competitors, but only one faces strict scrutiny? I just want to make sure I have the ground rules figured out here.

LOL, the lower shipping of mac's pretty much worldwide (apparently around 12% drop) must hurt.

This in sharp contrast to the only 3% drop of all brands combined. I guess in economic bad times, people choose a normal priced alternative.

We build custom computers. A lot of them. Workstations, notebooks in three sizes with numerous configuration options, gaming systems, media centric systems, compute clusters for rendering and CAD/engineering firms and servers. Each is sold as a turn-key service - where down to the pixel, the machines are personalized and set up for immediate use within designed and we assess, equally well managed business and personal networks. Down to hand dressing the edges on labels and the alignment of every fastener, we pay attention to quality.

We depend entirely upon delivering and sustaining the very best possible computing experience - so we totally get the lifestyle angle Apple executes on and I mention all the above simply to establish a base from which to offer my observations.

Apple does not produce a better product than is possible for less money on the PC platform running Windows. Apple does not support their computers as well as the marketing suggests.

The notion that Apple Macintosh computers are akin to high end cars is ridiculous. Their internal components are widely available and most often not as good as what many system builders use every day. The chassis may be considered to be better than some PC's but the chassis are delivered at a very high price relative to what is done with PC's.

Apple's advertising, though clever and often times funny, is not accurate.

Apple's OS X is not technically superior to Windows Vista, or Windows 7. It is not nearly as secure - though and depending upon how it is used, it may be safer to use for certain types of online users.

We have repaired quite a few Mac computers for family members from among our customers. We've done so when Apple would not unless a great deal of money had been spent. We've taken all but two models down to bare metal and fixed them. They appear to be fragile, they tend to run hot and in many ways, they are very poorly designed. In the context of thermal loss, I regard their designs as being naive at best.

I do respect Apple for what they try to do. I respect anyone who designs and builds anything - it is very hard to do and one has to "own" every issue. I do not appreciate the way Apple presents itself in the market. It isn't humble and it does not seem to me to focus on the user as the user really is - but rather how Apple seems to want the user to be.

The PC embraces all people - regardless of their interests and or technical ability. The PC is open and has served as an enabler for millions of people - even tiny business owners like myself - who in the context of the larger market matters not at all - but to those we serve, we matter a great deal each and every day. Apple does not seem to understand that at all - nor do they seem to respect that at all. Apple seems that it will never be able to serve the business market well, because it has no understanding of what it is to sit down and listen to another person's dreams and then commit to helping make them a reality.

Finally, it is dang sad when those that profess to be so "different" and "unique" exercise that uniqueness by acting like everyone else and insisting that all others should as well. The PC, as it has always been, is about the individual - individual freedom and right of choice as attended by personal responsibility for the outcome (good or bad). You know.... the way the country used to be...

robertsgay is gonna love this!

Assuming even part of what Kevin Turner said is true, that Apple called them, its for an obvious reason. In this Laptop Hunters video, they show a MacBook Pro at $1999:

www.youtube.com/watch

That product now costs $1699, a very significant 15% price reduction. This ad continuing to run would be the very definition of false advertising:

legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/False+Advertising

LOLOLOLOLOLOLO!!!! Paul you make my day!! LOLOLOLOL!!

In the mouth Pear... Ho Sorry I mean Apple.... Lololololololol

<thinking>: what kind of business these guys running??... lololololo

I'm all for making fun of apple, however I find this story hard to beleive.

murdocdv : you are Wrrooooongggg ..... Get your calculator and do calculate......

A macbook at $1999 or $1699 in front of a PC laptop at 699$ what is the big deal here????

What don't ou understand????? What do you want that is more simple than $1699 is  more of the twice the price of $699...

Pear user.... Ho sorry! I mean Apple user...  will always amusing me.... Dop!!

You can get a 13.3” Macbook for $1,199 from that retailer," he said. "Guess what? [From] that same retailer, you can get a PC with more RAM, a bigger hard drive, and almost a three-inch bigger screen for $649. This is...the Apple Tax."

Say what ?? If I am in the market for a 13" laptop I dont want a heavy ol 15.4" that defeats the purpase.  Nonetheless good MSFT spin!! hehe

Now MS need to make a new commercial dramatizing that phone call. the nail in the coffin.

too funny!

Sounds legit to me.

The thing I don't like about the Apple commercials is that they stretch the truth, and stretch it a lot.  Microsoft, on the other hand, seems to be portraying the truth.  I have not seen all of the 'laptop hunters', so I don't exactly know, but from what I've seen they been accurate.

I do have a question though, is Apple's legal department within their right to make MS stop the commercials?  The commercials were produced before the price drop, but they still report inaccurate information for the times.  (Let's say MS shows these same commercials one year from now and Apple drops their prices $300 more dollars.  Can MS still show the commercials?)

Or at least Ballmer says they did. Anyone have any imperical proof. Corporations in this country were willing to nearly destroy the entire economy, so what's the big deal about making something like this up. They are all lying scumbag cheats.

scottbakertemp: It is not hard to believe... You'll be surprised silly things that company does!!!

We often falsely think that business is serious but, don't forget that in companies ,there is humans involved... And where humans involved, silly things occurs...

murdocdv, how so?  the difinition does not reference price anywhere.   On the other hand, it does reference properties of products / services, and Apple has repeatedly made misrepresentations in that regard.  I would say, by that standard, Apple is in much hotter water than MS.  Of course, either would likely struggle proving it all...

mcwilliams132: LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL So funny LOLO

@EricoF3

I didn't say anything about the cost multiple of the the MacBook Pro vs. the PC, I was simply pointing out the truth, which is that the MacBook Pro is now $300 cheaper then what the ad shows.

But if you are worried about the multiple, since u couldn't do the math yourself, the MacBook Pro @ $1699 is 2.43 $699 PCs, and the former $1999 MacBook Pro is 2.85 $699 PCs. That is still a significant drop in the number of cheap PCs per 15.4" MacBook Pro.

Okay, murdoc, let me take my example further.  MS created these commercials before the price drop and paid for six months worth of TV broadcasting advertisement with various networks.

Are they obligated to pull all of the commercials they made and paid for before Apple's price drop?

@ibarskiy You're joking right. Price is the primary characteristic of laptops being compared in all the Laptop Hunter ads. In the one I linked the MacBook Pro price is now grossly wrong, and has been since June 8.

@de Silentio I am not a lawyer, but I think if Apple wanted to they could sue and get a court to order Microsoft to pull the ads immediately or run corrective ads.

Microsoft of course would have known that, they bore the risk of running ads with clearly identified characteristics of a competitor's product that could change at any time.

"In the one I linked the MacBook Pro price is now grossly wrong, and has been since June 8."

Yup, considering how cheap a comparable PC is, the MacBook Pro price is just wrong!

LOL!

@waethorn

HAHAHAHAHAHA, that was so funny. Please, keep them coming. Let  me help you.

Yup, considering how beautiful a cheap PC is, the MacBook Pro is just gross!

LOL! ROFL!

"I think if Apple wanted to they could sue and get a court to order Microsoft to pull the ads immediately or run corrective ads."

....and Microsoft could sue for libel in the Apple ads.  What's your point?

If Apple really did take Microsoft to court, and Microsoft didn't countersue Apple, Apple would just make themself look like a defensive fool (moreso).

Okay, I don't see any fals advertising. The commercial has Lauren reading from a best buy price sticker that is accurate.  She is reporting accurate information.

Now, if it was a person sitting in front of a white background saying "Mac's cost $2,000", that is different.  Why?  Because it isn't reporting any information, it is stating a claim.

Good move, Microsoft.

murdocdv, who actually cares? The overall point of the ads is to highlight the significant price premium Apple commands in the market compared to Windows-based machines. Even at $1699, it's still more than double the price.

Wow, so apple decided to drop their prices, they are still considerable more expensive then your average non apple laptop.

Maybe Microsoft could do a similar add on high end workstations, as the Mac pro is rediculously high priced, maybe apple could drop it by say 600 USD ?

"Yup, considering how beautiful a cheap PC is, the MacBook Pro is just gross!"

I've seen many cheaper PC's look nicer than MacBooks, sorry to say.

When the PC is cheaper than a grossly overpriced MacBook, I know how beautiful it is to have extra money left in my pocket afterwards too.

For the $1000 saving on the two examples, you could actually go out and buy some actual software to run on the system too.  For $1000, you could buy Photoshop for the PC, and STILL have money left over.  How beautiful is that?

LOL!

lketchum says:

"Apple seems that it will never be able to serve the business market well, because it has no understanding of what it is to sit down and listen to another person's dreams and then commit to helping make them a reality."

Never a truer word spoken.

This has been Apple's problem since it's inception. It's Apple's way, or it's the highway. It's the single biggest difference in approach between Apple and Microsoft. Where Microsoft offers tailored solutions, Apple simply says "put up or shut up." Such abrasive arrogance is an epic failure in the commercial sector, where bottom lines, security and customised solutions rule the roost. It is really a no-brainer as to why Bill Gates is the world's richest man, yet Steve is sulking in a corner about Bill having no taste. News flash for Steve - everyone has different taste.

I like the Laptop Hunters ads. This is the best news story about the on-going Apple-MS feud in a long while! LOL

Apple cannot talk about accuracy in TV spots when its own ads are inaccurate.

And even my Apple's product are "cheaper" now, they are still only "cheaper" compared to the products previous prices, not cheaper compared to PCs.

Not sure who missed it, but Jason Perlow wrote an interesting article titled "Apple Faithful: Arrogance Is Not a Virtue, and Why I Will Never Buy a Mac" in this vein at ZDNET last month.  It's worth a read:  

blogs.zdnet.com/perlow

@techfan - exactly right.

If Kevin Turner's story is even remotely true, then one can only be amazed at the stunning hypocrisy of Apple. They've been running some of the most misleading ads in the history of advertising, yet they are harassing Microsoft about truth. Apple can hardly claim to be a bastion of truth and honesty.

I'd like to see "Mac Guy's" defense of this in a PC vs. Mac ad.

Where are the Apple ads that actually mention price comparisons with dollar figures?

If Apple was smart, they'd try to come up with a value proposition statement backed up by competitive pricing.  Unfortunately for them, they can't.  Their margins are their own biggest adversary.

murdocdv want a computer more than twice of the regular prices just because the computer box can serve as desk decoration...

Choose a computer that is twice the price, have very limited software available just because it is cute... it is a kind of .... Silly choice, isn't it???

lololol

@EricoF3:

Not to mention that that glossy screen does you absolutely no good when working mobile.  LOL!

@Waethorn - I agree.

What's interesting, in terms of marketing prowess, is that Apple has managed to convince millions of people to pay these egregious prices.

Apple fans try to justify their purchase by comparing it to buying a high-end luxury vehicle from Mercedes or BMW. Leaving aside the inherent flaws in comparing two dissimilar industries, the fact of the matter is that under the sexy aluminium chassis, there are industry-standard parts, from the RAM to the graphics to the hard disks. The prowess of a BMW is not just skin deep - it's engineering under the hood is far superior to most average car makers. This cannot be said with Apple machines - they can only be differentiated on design, which despite the attractiveness, is certainly not worth double the asking price of an equivalently specced machine.

@EricoF3:

It begs the question:  YTF would Apple put a "7-hour" battery in a notebook computer that has a screen that makes it completely useless as a mobile computer???

This is where functionality fails for the sake of design.  LOL!  Only Apple would do this.

"Apple fans try to justify their purchase by comparing it to buying a high-end luxury vehicle from Mercedes or BMW. Leaving aside the inherent flaws in comparing two dissimilar industries, the fact of the matter is that under the sexy aluminium chassis, there are industry-standard parts, from the RAM to the graphics to the hard disks."

Considering that ASUS builds MacBooks, I'd rather take the Lambourghini over the Beemer.

@Waethorn

I don't believe a glossy screen makes a laptop completely useless. I prefer glossy screens as they make the image look better. Although, I totally accept the fact that other people have problems with high-gloss screens in which case Apple should make available a matte-screen option on all their machines.

murdocdv, wake up.  Price is not a characteristic of the product.  Price is price.  Indeed, same products may be offered at different prices from different resellers, so you would not be able to use price as the standard as it varies for the same product.

warhol:

Nice article! I really like this passage:

"NeXT, of course, was saved from oblivion by a failing Apple ... which needed a next-generation operating system to revive the Mac platform. Jobs’ triumphant return to Apple, and NextStep’s transformation into Mac OS X of course is history, ..."

Lolololol

They need a next-generation OS to revive the Mac platform... And they use the Really old technology NextStep Unix base OS to achieve that Lolololololololo!!!

REally Funny!!!

@RobertC

It's really not that hard to understand. The ingredient Apple has that no one else does with all their products has been and always will be their software. If you don't value their software, and that produced for their platforms by 3rd parties, you don't buy Apple products.

There are plenty of people with various needs that everyone doesn't need to own a Mac/PC/Chrome OS box (just planning ahead).

Waethorn : Yeah you are right, but Dell do Windows Laptop with glossy screen too... So lololo

@waethorn

@de Silentio asked a question, I gave my best answer. As for the Apple ads being the same as getting the price wrong, again not a lawyer, but this is a easily verifiable fact of the product. Last time I took a pass through the Apple ads, statements about PCs are about experiences that you can easily find any number of people to say those PC experiences happened to them.

If Apple said "Windows XP doesn't include a firewall, Macs do", that would be an obvious lie. Saying PCs crash, or get viruses, etc, well

@Waethorn

"Considering that ASUS builds MacBooks, I'd rather take the Lambourghini over the Beemer."

LOL

@ibarskiy Again, not a lawyer, but price is a characteristic to me. Again, that is the most important characteristic of the products in the laptop hunter ads. I would actually say price is Characteristic Prime for the target audience of the laptop hunter ads.

@ lketchum: thanks for you insightfull post!

Apparently, all this nonsense has something to do with this: www.betanews.com/.../1247759068

murdocdv: Apple develops really old technology software sorry...

I cannot believe they base their UI Shell on a Unix OS ... For me, this fact is incredible, ...

For me doing new with old will always be incredible...

@aemarques Or Mac shipments are up, if Gartner is right:

digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/.../mac-shipments-up-also-mac-shipments-down

Either way, we find out for real next Tuesday when Apple announces their financial results.

murdocdv, even if you account for bundled MacOS and iLife, there is no way that it is worth double the price.

MacOS is not twice the operating system of Windows. In fact, if I was being really generous, they're about the same. I think Macs are actually more difficult to use and not that intuitive. My brother succumbed to the advertising and bought a Mac, and upon using it, one of the most irritating idiocies is that clicking the red bubble on the top left of a window DOESN'T close the application. It simply closes the window. Networking with Windows machines was also a nightmare and took hours to resolve, whereas it was a comparative breeze to get basic networking up and running on my Vista machines. What I DID like was the much faster resume from sleep - it's virtually instantaneous and much more reliable than Windows in that respect.

@EricoF3 Windows XP/Vista/7 are based on Windows NT, which was a fork of the IBM OS/2 project, and also integrated lots of architectural ideas from Digital's VMS OS from the mid-70s:

windowsitpro.com/.../windows-nt-and-vms-the-rest-of-the-story.html

So I guess you are chucking Windows then?

murdocdv, you don't have to be a lawyer to follow simple logic in this case (a college intro to business law pretty much covers it).  Whatever your opinion, we can't use price as a literal standard for sure, again, because there are variations in price so it doesn't work.  We could probably stretch it and use it as a relative standard, but with that, the relationship between the price of a Mac (high) and a price of PC (lower) still remains, so you have no point.

If the high price is lowered yet remains high, there is absolutely no misrepresentation in relative standard terms.

RobertC,

It's not an "idiocy" that closing a window doesn't close the application.  That's the design...the Application is separate from the windows the application displays..the windows are to be thought of as "documents".  It makes 100% complete total sense when you understand what the operating system is presenting you with.

Just because you don't understand something doesn't make it idiotic.

@RobertC

I am not, other's have done this to exhaustion, digging through and trying to align the hardware specs of each PC in those ads and then comparing them to the MacBook lineup and deriving the difference in just software.

Anyway, if you are most familiar with Windows, there is going to be adjustment when going to OS X. Doesn't mean one way is better than the other, I could, but working in both all day long, I see pros/cons for both styles. As for networking, I network my Mac to Windows boxes at work all day long with ease. Home networking in Windows has always been a hassle, but I haven't tested that myself in a long time.

"I don't believe a glossy screen makes a laptop completely useless. I prefer glossy screens as they make the image look better."

I didn't say completely useless, just that they're useless as a mobile computer.  You can't use them in any kind of daylight, and mobile workers hate glossy screens.  Putting the large capacity battery in them is pointless.

"Saying PCs crash, or get viruses, etc, well "

I'm not going to say PC's don't, but there are many a Mac owner that will tell you they crash, and the number of Mac malware incidents is growing, so by claiming that Mac's are superior because it outright doesn't happen to them (which is what is said in the commercials), or that Mac OS X is "inherently more secure because it's based on Unix" (security experts like to laugh about that line because there is nothing in Unix that makes it "inherently" secure) is still a lie.

@ibarskiy Here is the most basic of Google Fu:

www.myprofessionaladvertising.com/Legal%20Issues%20in%20Advertising1.htm

From the article:

"Advertising Law: Price

All of the truth in advertising laws apply to advertising price. If you are making a comparison, it needs to be truthful. If you say that the product is being sold for "$xx" elsewhere, then in fact, other representative retailers must be selling at that price.

A few small retailers selling at the higher price elsewhere are not representative of the market. Media publishers may require you to substantiate your claims before they will print your ad. Contact the FTC for more."

Here's another: www.lawpublish.com/ftc-decprice.html

Clearly, how price is represented is one of the most strictly regulated parts of advertising.

murdocdv: We are all influenced by old technologies when developing new one... And it is good ... This is not my point...

Apple didn't just be influenced buy old technologies... They directly use the old technology as there Back bone for there OS in 1998 or 1998 (don't remember exactly when the first version of Mac OSX)...

Yeah Ok, if you are right, Microsoft use ideas from existing technologies to begin there NT project... I mean, Microsoft use the knowlege of their engenieers that have background from other companies ... Yeah right ... So they use idee from the 70s in a project that begin in the 70s ... Yeah they release Nt in 1993 but they begin to do R&D developpement in the 70s as a Research project...

This is not what Apple does... They just get the FreeBNC Unix OS and put a UI Shell on it and pretend it is next generation OS...

panache1023 is right on that one!!

Pingback from  FunkydoryStokie  &raquo; Blog Archive   &raquo; Apple demanded that Microsoft stop advertising PC price advantage over Macs

murdocdv :

"...Home networking in Windows has always been a hassle..."

Hassle???? Windows home networking just work as plugged in...

@murdocv,

Apple's OS X is a "document centric" environment.

In many ways it is, as Paul has pointed out and documented well, regarded as being "simpler."

That does not make it easier to use. Simpler does not necessarily mean easier, or easiest across the greatest number of tasks.

Windows is both easier to use and simpler - though one might try and argue that Windows 7 and to some extent, Windows Vista, departed from being easier to use in favor of appearing to be simpler. Simpler it may be for a select few tasks, but that is a debate for another time.

Windows is easier to use for more user types than OS X, because it is "discoverable" - without training a user knows where to begin (START) and may select from a variety of evident tasks (Documents, Devices and Printers, or Pictures, for example) and immediately enter into task-based routines designed to support the execution of related steps.

Windows follows this task-based model throughout and draws clear separations between applications and documents. There are those that argue that the document centric model is more efficient and that the task and applications Windows model spawns multiple instances of the same processes. This is simply not true at all. Windows uses shared and parallel components throughout - so multiple instances of Word, or Internet Explorer only use a tiny portion of the resources required for the parent application. Windows assigns and manages memory and other resources similarly - sharing across the platform and weighting resources in favor of where the user's focus is. Windows also employs process allocation and isolation - so one Internet Explorer window, or tab may fault, but not always crash the parent application. MS Office applications do this as well and in each case, such isolation allows extremely granular permissions and unique policies to be applied.

A bit more back on the main track...

While so much that makes Windows Vista great and Windows 7 even better than say, Windows XP, is hidden, much of what makes Windows easier and simpler to use than Mac OS X, or Linux is clearly evident and it is found in how consistently its task based model is followed. Every window, in the context of the parent task, features access to additional tasks... adding a new printer, or burning to a disc, or emailing a picture are obvious examples - and all without having to launch an additional application. When the task is complete, it is truly complete and the associated processes are retired and returned to Windows and the user.

By the way, the idea that even Paul has advanced, that Windows should get rid of the START MENU? Well, I say that is nutty. The start menu, as I have shared, provides THE starting point for all Windows tasks. While the same task may be more easily accessed in the systems tray, or quick launch area, any/all tasks may be entered into from the start menu. To remove it would be to deprecate Windows in ways that would make it much harder to use.

I will say that I anticipate things like “Project Natal” for Windows (late 2010) will enable much more evident us of the ZUI, or Zommable User Interface by incorporating very rich combinations of physical and in the air

touch with natural voice – anticipate much greater use of tiles that work well from the Office-like Fluent UI and as much finger and hand waving as you would mouse and keyboard input. I believe that recent Windows moves toward larger and more evident UI components and objects is being done to set the stage for the increased use of tiles where larger screens are increasingly more common – physical touch therefore becoming more important and relevant to smaller form factor devices – e.g., small notebooks A.K.A. “netbooks” (what a dumb name – as if to say that PC’s can’t see the cloud, or that small notebooks should not be able to do more than see the cloud).

Sorry for the book. LK

@EricoF3 The OS X Kernel is called Darwin, it's open sourced, includes a lot of open source projects,  and you can get the code here:

darwinbuild.macosforge.org/.../wiki

Ha this is funny. Classic case of being able to dish out but falling apart when you're asked to take it

"Just because you don't understand something doesn't make it idiotic."

No, but claiming that it's "easy to use because it's so intuitive" is.

"Home networking in Windows has always been a hassle"

Have you tried setting up Bonjour before?  Oy vey!  

Waethorn,

Are you now saying that something that is intuitive does NOT make it easy to use?

Regardless, for the record, and not that you are attributing those quotes to me, but I didn't say any of them other than

"Just because you don't understand something doesn't make it idiotic", and I think most people would agree with that

Wow that was brilliant! Thanks Paul!!

murdocdv, no one is claiming price is not regulated, per se.  But if you read the FTC guidelines, there is no injury if the relative comparison stands.  So, according to the guidelines, (and the legal definition), there is no injury so long as the advertisements represent that the price of PC is lower than the price of a Mac.  Which is still true (and will be true for the foreseeable future, really).  So chill.  Again, Apple has made much more specific claims as to the actual properties of the product with regard to Windows in their ads, so they would be in real hot water if they tried to pursue this (non) case.

@waethorn

It is well documented that Windows home networking, with the mix of TCP/IP standards, WINS, NetBios names, workgroups, and local security has stymied countless users.

I have never had to configure Bonjour to see all my Macs at home. In fact, there is no UI for it. There is additional configuration to screen share, or share files, but it's pretty straightforward. It could be easier, and I like what MS is doing with pairing codes in 7.

Is there any proof that this is true?

@ibarskiy Nothing to chill about, just fun to debate, hopefully on the merits. I am really glad these two giant corporations, and soon 3 with Google, are going at it. Results in better products for everyone, regardless of what anyone ends up buying.

As a Mac user, I agree that if true, the Apple legal stance is indefensible and just silly.

That said, the MacBook I use for my business runs like a top, the Macs I bought for my kids got them through college with minimal support from me, and the friends I've converted to Macs are not regretting the choice.

Now, one daughter is using an Acer netbook running XP for her work; what a great travel machine. She loves it, and if it works for her, great. Cost is a factor in these decisions, not the decision. There are many, many other factors, and to reduce it all down to price alone is simplistic and narrow minded.

murdocdv said:

@EricoF3 The OS X Kernel is called Darwin, it's open sourced, includes a lot of open source projects,  and you can get the code here:darwinbuild.macosforge.org/.../wiki

No murd, it is not. OS X is based upon teh Mach microkernel and as a project, it is dead. OS X uses a derivative of it (XNU kernel). OS X did depart from the original microkernel structures, but retained select components. Mach itself was derived from Accent of which the lead developer (this may sting a little), is Mr. Richard Rashid of Microsoft Research. He's been in leading roles at Microsoft since 1991.

XNU, which Apple acquired and uses as its operating system kernel was released by Apple Inc. as part of the Darwin "Operating System". XNU was originally developed by the company NeXT for its NEXTSTEP OS.

XNU itself is a hybrid kernel, which combines 2.5 of Mach (its Achilles heel as I see it) and parts of 4.3 BSD, which it needs to leverage its OOPS (method, really) API for writing drivers. Apple later moved to Mach components from vers. 3.0 and additional components from FreeBSD about the same time the driver API was replaced with I/O Kit.

Where it matter (and hurts) OS X features both monolithic and microkernel features.

While it tries, it fails - protected memory and ASLR are two big ones and I have no idea how they plan to get around many of the limitations inherent to the OS's design... The serialization of threads, exclusions, atomicity, etc... these are all areas where Leopard fell apart - necessitating Snow Leopard. How they have the nerve to charge people for it....? I dunno... Snow? Snowing? as in getting "Snowed?

Sorry to present it this way, but please don't connect to the Internet on a Mac. You may not have any idea of what people even better trained and more skilled than I am can and are doing to any *nix based OS... and I'm pretty good and I do wear a white hat. You want to be safe? Run Windows Vista or 7 and IE 8 in its default protected mode as a standard user.

Networking in windows is simple, but of course I deal with networking all day, for the average joe it might be bit hard, but apple doesn't do it more easily if you ask me. In the workspace, OSX is difficult to integrate into active directory for instance, where something basic as sbm packet signing still doesn't work properly, even though it was one of the 300 new features that were announce/touted by Apple for Leopard.

But all of that is off topic, the moral of the story is that Apple hardware IS more expensive then comparable no apple hardware, that is a plain fact.

The price difference is not justfied with the components used, so the usage of phrases like Apple tax are fully justified.

Not sure if the whole story is true, but if it is, Apple shows itself a very sore loser.

"The OS X Kernel is called Darwin, it's open sourced"

Darwin is open source, but Apple's use of open source software flies against the concepts of the GPL.

If Mac OS X were released under the GPL, Apple wouldn't be able to charge for it.

Open source is a joke, really.  

On one side, you have the GPL, which is a hippy-centric "everything should be free" concept, so long as every code link is also part of the GPL in some sort of Communistic sense.  The whole idea also against software patents and royalties, so you can't make money off of the innovation.  It's put absolutely no value on the end product, but hey, workers can get paid equally to the guy that comes up with the idea.

Then you have BSD, in which you can link closed-source projects to it so that the entire package can become commercial, thereby subsidizing the open source development costs and nobody would be the wiser, because once it's commercial, you can patent the sh*t out of it so nobody can tell if you're ripping off the "community".  It's Capitalism at it's finest - steal from the little guy.

Guess which one Apple uses?

In either case, somebody's getting hosed.

@lketchum

The start button was dead in Vista, replaced by the orb. The start menu is just about deprecated in 7, and I wager it's totally gone in the next release.

OS X has the Finder, which does nearly everything the Start Menu does. Seriously, if you want to browse all your apps instead of searching, an about 300px wide non-resizable menu is the way to go?

"Are you now saying that something that is intuitive does NOT make it easy to use?"

Nope.  I said that claiming that Mac OS X is either easy or intuitive is idiotic.

Obviously from the former point, if someones intuition is wrong, then the point of OS X being intuitive is false, hence it is not easy to use.

BTW:  "simple" != "simplistic"

"simple" does not.

The proper term you should be using when referring to OS X is "simplistic".  Even Paul got that wrong.  There is nothing simple about OS X because it's not naturally intuitive.

"The start button was dead in Vista, replaced by the orb. The start menu is just about deprecated in 7, and I wager it's totally gone in the next release."

Nah, ever ran Vista or Win7 ?

I like the start menu much more in Vista, as it included the search part, at the bottom, where for instance type cmd, would bring up the command prompt, but it does much more stuff. Needless to say, it will not go away any time soon.

On a somewhat release note Apple just release an update to iTunes that does not allow the Palm Pre to sync with itunes. Nice apple hurt those that actually like itunes

@lketchum It doesn't sting that Mr. Rashid was at Carnegie Mellon where the main Mach work was done before he left for MS Research.

Your right though, I did confuse the name of the OS X kernel, shouldn't have said kernel, but was trying to show where all the bits below the GUI where.

Anyway, I've been on Macs for 5 years, and most of my friends and family have converted over in the same time, and the amount of me supporting their computers has dropped from near daily to near zero. Mostly because of viruses, malware, or drive-by downloads. Sorry, but while you like the security features in newer Windows versions, OS X users have been and will most likely continue to be safer for a number of reasons. Snow Leopard will fully adopt ASLR and protected memory. We'll see how complete the implementation, or how well it works.

"It is well documented that Windows home networking, with the mix of TCP/IP standards, WINS, NetBios names, workgroups, and local security has stymied countless users."

Let's break that down shall we?:

TCP/IP - current standard for networking

WINS - translates NetBIOS names to IP addresses (deprecated)

NetBIOS - used since the early 80's (deprecated)

Workgroups - grouping system used before DNS (deprecated)

That leaves local security policies, which are the most important part of having remote access to another computers files.

"OS X users have been and will most likely continue to be safer for a number of reasons"

You can thank the lack of market penetration for that.

"Apple: we're impotent in the computer industry"(TM)

LOL!

Waethorn,

For the record, I never said anything about anything being simple or simplistic.

In fact, I originally didn't say anything about intuitive either, just that not understanding something doesn't make it idiotic.

@Waethorn

Deprecated, but still there and still important.

@murdocdv

"The start button was dead in Vista, replaced by the orb. The start menu is just about deprecated in 7, and I wager it's totally gone in the next release."

No, murd, the letters forming the word "start" were removed from the Windows Start button. The "Orb" is actually called the "Pearl" and the start menu was extended as sjaak327 has properly observed.

One may easily search for apps from the start menu by beginning to type the first few letters of the app name - which most often includes logical descriptors, like snip for the snipping tool, or pai for paint, etc... it is very easy to use.

As regards finder... oh man... c'mon... you do recall that the finder appeared only after "Instant Search" was demo'd in Nov 2003 for Longhorn and after it shipped for XP and W2K3 Server as Windows Desktop Search?

As originally shipped, Finder was pretty weak and it does not leverage objects as Windows Instant Search does across an entirely virtualized named space.

And Finally, going all the way back to 2002, Windows shipped identical functionality as found in expose within the software used for input devices. While it is not as pretty as FLIP and FLIP 3D, it's still there as an option. I don't want to argue like this - this back and forth. There is a better way. Just write what you can prove - prove it to yourself first and then post and guys like me won't have to work  so hard to explain what the far more complicated truth is. Just post what you can support as fact and separate it from opinion, or support your opinions with facts. It's bad out here and a lot of folks have been speaking about Windows out of context and out of turn for a long time. Too long.

@johnpapola:

Send Apple some of that Enzyte that SpikeTV always advertises.

LOL!

"Apple ... has no understanding of what it is to sit down and listen to another person's dreams and then commit to helping make them a reality."

Wow. What a crock. Drama queen.

"Sorry, but while you like the security features in newer Windows versions, OS X users have been and will most likely continue to be safer for a number of reasons'"

Unfortunately not because OSX is secure.

Tiny marketshare is the one and only reason, end of story.

And I wonder how many cases of fraud have occured among Mac users, since Apple didn't equip Safari with something as elementary as a Phishing filter, until what, 9 months ago.

For a safe OS, you need to go Vista or Win7. The drive by download problems, are people that still ran that piece of junk called XP.

@Waethorn

Market share is a part of it, but as I suggested, not the only reason.

I don't know what you are doing building PCs, you should get a show in Vegas

"For the record, I never said anything about anything being simple or simplistic."

Not you.  It was stated before though.  I get what you said.

"after it shipped for XP and W2K3 Server as Windows Desktop Search"

Actually, it shipped as "MSN Desktop Search" long before that.

"As regards finder... oh man... c'mon... you do recall that the finder appeared only after "Instant Search" was demo'd in Nov 2003 for Longhorn and after it shipped for XP and W2K3 Server as Windows Desktop Search?"

Do you even know what "Finder" is?

Here, let me help you:

en.wikipedia.org/.../Finder_(software)

murd said:

"@lketchum It doesn't sting that Mr. Rashid was at Carnegie Mellon where the main Mach work was done before he left for MS Research."

You do know that Microsoft (yes that Microsoft) allowed Mr. Rashid to continue to contribute to the project - even though the company knew that the work was being done to provide the absolutely essential glue Apple needed binding one kernel to the other - Mach to 4.3 BSD? That with the full understanding that Microsoft would be enabling Apple to eventually run a more modern OS, they allowed the development of communications processors to continue - without which there would have never been an OS X as we know it?

See, this whole thing and the reason I have started to post publicly again, is that really nice people - young people are being taken for a Missouri Boat ride. Somehow it has to be okay for people to simply learn and understand what really drives CS and not simply parrot what Apple shovels out the door as fact. As I have said, I just don't like how Apple presents itself in the market place. It's not humble, or accurate and nice people end up paying way too much for a computer that they really wouldn't want if they did understand just how flawed, incongruous and potentially dangerous the product is.

@lotsamystuff

Yes, and I was referring to how OS X search is integrated to it and how instant search in Windows obviates the need for such things.

@lketchum

The point of the Start Menu task-based discussion that began was specifically referencing the word "Start" as the entry point to the menu being so easy to use. It isn't in Vista, isn't in 7. That's a fact.

My point by comparing to the Start Menu to the Finder is that the Finder contains most, possibly all, of the functionality the Start Menu has without being an about 300px wide non-resizable menu. Would you like to browse your Programs with larger icons, oh you can't. That is a fact. The point is that that kind of usability problem, if you wanted to leave navigation in Windows, is to simply make Win Explorer do all that stuff, just like the Finder. You could still have system Search easily available outside Win Explorer, like in OS X with the Spotlight icon on the menu bar.

I don't even know what you are talking about "speaking about Windows out of context".

"Market share is a part of it, but as I suggested, not the only reason."

And those other reasons are what exactly?....

If you say it's because it's based on Unix code and Unix is inherently safe, you deserve a slap.

"I don't know what you are doing building PCs, you should get a show in Vegas"

There are some companies that value being small because it gives them advantages that big companies don't recognize.

"Apple ... has no understanding of what it is to sit down and listen to another person's dreams and then commit to helping make them a reality."

That's where my company and Apple differ.  Steve Jobs has aspirations of making it big in the computer industry, but his company can't deliver.  I have no such grandeur illusions (or is that "delusions"?), but my company is also steadily expanding.

@lketchum

What do I care if Microsoft allowed Mr. Rashid to continue contributing to the Mach project. Apple the company wasn't using Mach at the time, NEXT was. Apple didn't merge with NEXT until 1996. Your whole dramatic paragraph is ridiculous in face of a simple timeline.

"The point of the Start Menu task-based discussion that began was specifically referencing the word "Start" as the entry point to the menu being so easy to use. It isn't in Vista, isn't in 7. That's a fact."

They are present in Vista. In server 2008 which is Vista's server brother, sharing the same kernel, it is even there by default, after you've installed the OS.

You obviously don't know what you are talking about.

A couple of thoughts....

1) It was pretty silly for Apple to call on this.  But it does sound like it is false advertising if they are still running the commercial with the $1999 price.    While Apple's I'm a Mac/I'm a PC adds may stretch the truth, I challenge anyone to point out a factual misrepresentation in any of them.

2) The laptop hunter adds are interesting, but really only show one thing. Apple does not compete in the low end market.  

3) Apple products are normally more expensive then a PC counterpart, but no where near the amounts stated. The $649 machine is not anywhere near the same as the $1199 Macbook pro.  Size, weight, quality of manufacturing, etc.  If you want a bug bulky machine that feels cheaply put together, that is fine. For many cost is the only important factor and I can understand that.  But compare a high end 15" PC laptop and a 15" Macbook pro.  The difference is normally about $200 when you match features as close as possible.  The PC normally has better graphics card, but the size, weight, quality of the machine (unibody frame, magsafe, etc) tilt to the Mac.  

4) Its kind of ironic that the cost of upgrading to Windows 7 is going to be WAY more expensive than the cost of upgrading to Mac OS X 10.6.   Windows is MUCH more expensive than Mac OS X.  Go compare the retail costs of 10.5 and Vista Ultimate.  Maybe Apple should make a commercial showing someone walking into best buy and comparing that:  $319.95 vs. $129.

@waethorn

Some other reasons are, of course, some of the same work Microsoft has done: low number of default process listening to the network, usable standard user accounts, authenticated access to install applications, automatic system updates, and sandboxing. Of course, users can choose to do whatever they want or ignore safety warnings at there discretion.

I'd like proof that this actually happened. Some high up guy at Microsoft saying Apple called him, doesn't necessarily make it so.

Oh well, the flame war here is entertaining as always.

Windows is MUCH more expensive than Mac OS X.  Go compare the retail costs of 10.5 and Vista Ultimate.  Maybe Apple should make a commercial showing someone walking into best buy and comparing that:  $319.95 vs. $129.

I like them do that, and then take those two versions on head to head, soon you realise that OSX falls way short. Compare Leopard with home premium, same functionality (alltough the front row in OSX falls way short as compared to media Center.

@sjaak327

I only said the word "Start" was no longer on the button, I called it an orb that is left. Here is a link to Microsoft's Vista Press Screenshots:

www.microsoft.com/.../default.mspx

No "start" text anymore. I didn't say the start menu was gone yet, but I think it will eventually be gone and removing it and giving the functionality to Explorer solves some Windows usability problems.

Hey People, what listen lketchum told! Like all my objective Unix/Linux Developper friend, he says really important and interesting things...

Nobody listen to me because I have no credibility about that, as  I am a Windows developer, But MacOS is Unix based OS (FreeBNC) and it is really old technologies but he had something interesting here : MacOS X is dangerous!!

Read the following, from lketchum, this guys know what he's talking about!!

"lketchum said:

murdocdv said:

@EricoF3 The OS X Kernel is called Darwin, it's open sourced, includes a lot of open source projects,  and you can get the code here:darwinbuild.macosforge.org/.../wiki

No murd, it is not. OS X is based upon teh Mach microkernel and as a project, it is dead. OS X uses a derivative of it (XNU kernel). OS X did depart from the original microkernel structures, but retained select components. Mach itself was derived from Accent of which the lead developer (this may sting a little), is Mr. Richard Rashid of Microsoft Research. He's been in leading roles at Microsoft since 1991.

XNU, which Apple acquired and uses as its operating system kernel was released by Apple Inc. as part of the Darwin "Operating System". XNU was originally developed by the company NeXT for its NEXTSTEP OS.

XNU itself is a hybrid kernel, which combines 2.5 of Mach (its Achilles heel as I see it) and parts of 4.3 BSD, which it needs to leverage its OOPS (method, really) API for writing drivers. Apple later moved to Mach components from vers. 3.0 and additional components from FreeBSD about the same time the driver API was replaced with I/O Kit.

Where it matter (and hurts) OS X features both monolithic and microkernel features.

While it tries, it fails - protected memory and ASLR are two big ones and I have no idea how they plan to get around many of the limitations inherent to the OS's design... The serialization of threads, exclusions, atomicity, etc... these are all areas where Leopard fell apart - necessitating Snow Leopard. How they have the nerve to charge people for it....? I dunno... Snow? Snowing? as in getting "Snowed?

Sorry to present it this way, but please don't connect to the Internet on a Mac. You may not have any idea of what people even better trained and more skilled than I am can and are doing to any *nix based OS... and I'm pretty good and I do wear a white hat. You want to be safe? Run Windows Vista or 7 and IE 8 in its default protected mode as a standard user. "

@murdocdv,

The point is that it is still there if the user chooses so, as the Windows Classic mode, still features a startmenu icon, with the actual word start.

On server 2008, this is enabled by default, and only after you have installed some additional stuff and enabled the theme service, you can get it replaced by the orb.

murdocdv said:

"@sjaak327

I only said the word "Start" was no longer on the button, I called it an orb that is left. Here is a link to Microsoft's Vista Press Screenshots:

www.microsoft.com/.../default.mspx"

Murd, please see the high res image from your own post, Sir - and reference the link from it, www.microsoft.com/.../imageviewer.mspx

To... The Windows Vista "Start Button"

It is there and what it provides from there is only one reason why Windows is easier, simpler, safer and generally more enjoyable to use.

We're all getting a little silly, but so long as we're not mean, it can be fun.

"I like them do that, and then take those two versions on head to head, soon you realise that OSX falls way short. Compare Leopard with home premium, same functionality (alltough the front row in OSX falls way short as compared to media Center."

There are features in each that the other does not have... kind of like the laptops.  Yet Windows cost 2.48x as much. Is that not the point of the laptop hunter ads?  Just say that these are similar yet one costs alot less?

@sjack327 you are totally wrong about sales numbers.  Mac sales are only down something like 1.2% yet the PC market is down much further.

"The point of the Start Menu task-based discussion that began was specifically referencing the word "Start" as the entry point to the menu being so easy to use. It isn't in Vista, isn't in 7. That's a fact."

In Windows Vista, there's something called the "Welcome Center" which has links to starter applications, including, but not limited to, video tutorials on how to use Windows, computer basics, and a "What's New" for Windows Vista.

XP didn't have that.

That's a fact.

"Go compare the retail costs of 10.5 and Vista Ultimate."

Make sure you compare a copy of OS X to an upgrade copy of Visa, because you can't buy OS X as a full version without first buying a Mac, since all Mac's come with it.  You can buy a PC without an OS though.

"Some other reasons are, of course, some of the same work Microsoft has done"

So how is it "safer" than Windows exactly?

My question still stands.

"authenticated access to install applications"

I just want to make one thing perfect clear here: software should NEVER be allowed to be installed under "user" privileges.  Period.  

Lets see a reason why:  a user has access to files that are available to all user accounts with only read access.  That user has internet access, and they download and  install a program under their account and user space, and that program also gets access to those files.  The contents of those files gets sent over the internet.

How does an administrator control that?

This is why Microsoft has certain rules about software installation on Windows.  Software should only be installed in the Program Files folder because it has very strict user restrictions, and user data is kept within the user space.

Point of interest:  Google Chrome circumvents this.

What no one mentions, and I still dont know why is......

What laptops does Microsoft make again?  We know Apple makes a Macbook Pro and we know how much it cost today.   I would love to see a comparison of exact hardware if its possible.  The comparison of course would not include any hardware from Microsoft.

"Sorry to present it this way, but please don't connect to the Internet on a Mac. You may not have any idea of what people even better trained and more skilled than I am can and are doing to any *nix based OS... and I'm pretty good and I do wear a white hat. You want to be safe? Run Windows Vista or 7 and IE 8 in its default protected mode as a standard user."

Sounds like a plan, right up to the point where you compare ACTUAL attacks on PC's vs Mac's.  At that point it unravels pretty quick.  You know like saying there WMD's in Iraq.

rr0de74@live.com :"Sounds like a plan, right up to the point where you compare ACTUAL attacks on PC's vs Mac's.  At that point it unravels pretty quick.  You know like saying there WMD's in Iraq."

Baaaaaaaaaaaa.... Silly... Windows Is much more attack just because it own near all the market... This is a statistic matter here ... Dop!!

"Make sure you compare a copy of OS X to an upgrade copy of Visa, because you can't buy OS X as a full version without first buying a Mac, since all Mac's come with it.  You can buy a PC without an OS though."

All retail versions of Mac OS X 10.5 are full versions. The only upgrade version so far was 10.1 and that was free if you owned 10.0.

The laptop hunter ads don't do a real comparison of value. They just show some people going into a store looking at machines and saying the Macs really nice, but are too expensive.  This is no different than someone going in and comparing retail versions of OS X and Windows.   Windows is more expensive.  That is the product that Microsoft sells, not the laptops.

rr0de74@live.com : "What laptops does Microsoft make again?  We know Apple makes a Macbook Pro and we know how much it cost today.   I would love to see a comparison of exact hardware if its possible.  The comparison of course would not include any hardware from Microsoft."

Do you really think Pear, Sorry I mean Apple, is doing any Hardware??

Apple don't do any Hardware except the cute kind of computer boxs... Ho yeah they do Flat Screen enclosure too...

Apple just use same hardware (in a limited matter, because they only support certain specific devices) than PC but they put the same cheap hardware in a cute box and the just put a cute UI shell on a really really really old Unix OS...

yoshipod! This is not the point of Waethorn He mean that If you cannot buy MacOS X if you don't have a Mac (Wich came with a version of MacOS X) the low price of the MacOS X Box should be compare with an upgrade of Windows because we can only compare oranges with oranges...

Is there any solid reason as to why there is a repeated assertion in this Discussion Board that Unix is not secure?

I am calling shenanigans! No lawyer/lawfirm calls a COO to tell him to pull an ad or report any falsehood!

" JBCollie  said:

Is there any solid reason as to why there is a repeated assertion in this Discussion Board that Unix is not secure?"

YESSS! Just because Unix and Linux software developers and specialists told it is not secure!

JBCollie, Unix and Linux is not just insecure, it is really really really old technologies and nobody should base their new technologies on this...

"yoshipod! This is not the point of Waethorn He mean that If you cannot buy MacOS X if you don't have a Mac (Wich came with a version of MacOS X) the low price of the MacOS X Box should be compare with an upgrade of Windows because we can only compare oranges with oranges..."

Of course you can buy it if you don't have a Mac.  Apple does not check for ownership when you make the purchase.  Now running it within the guidelines of the License agreement, that's another story.   But people will buy OS X and install it on custom built hardware.

Lets also look at the cost of upgrading for a family owning multiple computers.  

Upgrade price of 5 copies of OS x 10.5 $199. Upgrade price of 5 copies of  Vista Home Premium $649.75.

Just about every product that Microsoft makes where Apple has a comparable product is MORE expensive.   Have you ever compared server license costs?  

"What laptops does Microsoft make again?  We know Apple makes a Macbook Pro and we know how much it cost today."

Apple is attacking the value proposition of the PC market with attacks put squarely on Windows, and you don't expect them to retaliate?

"I would love to see a comparison of exact hardware if its possible.  The comparison of course would not include any hardware from Microsoft."

None of them include hardware from Microsoft actually, and the actual models are on the Laptop Hunters website.

"All retail versions of Mac OS X 10.5 are full versions. The only upgrade version so far was 10.1 and that was free if you owned 10.0."

Sorry, but that's just wrong.

You can't install a copy of Mac OS X on a Mac system without a present license because there is no such thing.  All Mac systems ship with a full OS X license, hence the boxed software is an upgrade.

You can't install a copy of Mac OS X on a Mac system without a present license because there is no such thing.  All Mac systems ship with a full OS X license, hence the boxed software is an upgrade.

Wrong.  

OS X does not check for prior versions when installing.  It does not matter if you were running Mac OS 9, Mac OS X 10.0, 10.3, or have an blank hard drive in the machine with no OS installed at all.   No license codes to enter.  All you need is the supported hardware.

"What no one mentions, and I still dont know why is......

What laptops does Microsoft make again?  We know Apple makes a Macbook Pro and we know how much it cost today.   I would love to see a comparison of exact hardware if its possible.  The comparison of course would not include any hardware from Microsoft."

Exactly!

The COO of Microsoft is "turning cartwheels" because of a so-called advertising victory concerning a product that Microsoft DOES NOT MAKE. Laser-like product focus of this sort is what makes for certain success.....or maybe not.

Equally funny, is the fact that Microsoft, which outsells Apple 30:1 in desktop OS software, wants to trumpet this as a David vs. Goliath victory. Huh? From Turner's reaction, and the smug comments here, you would think the numbers were the other way around. I thought Apple was the company that Microsoft "doesn't spend much time thinking about"?

Why so nervous, fellows?

Apple demanding that Microsoft pull their ads, now that's funny,  Apple at its hypocritical best. The Apple sycophant's will go nuts on this one.

Damn it! Just buy what you want to and use it. This is retarded.

Wow, LOL. That's priceless Paul. What the heck was Apple legal thinking? That hands Microsoft a PR victory and a morale booster.

Apple complaining about the Laptop Hunter ads? That's truely a laugh. Nobody at Microsoft ever complained to Apple about the very deceptive Mac vs PC ads.

However, Apple has only themselves to blame for for their shipments dropping 12.4%.

rr0de74@live.com said:

"@sjack327 you are totally wrong about sales numbers.  Mac sales are only down something like 1.2% yet the PC market is down much further."

rrode74,

I'm sorry to prove you wrong, but according to both Gartner and IDC, Apple shipped 12.4 fewer macs than a year ago. The falling sales down to 1.21 million Macs in 2009. That means Dell, PC, Acer, and Toshiba sold more PC's in the U.S. than Apple did. I seriously doubt that IDC would release false information here. So the recession, the Laptop Hunter ads, and improvements to Microsoft products are having a definite impact on Apple's business. Why else would their legal department make such a silly and desperate call to Microsoft?

No wonder Apple complained. Selling fewer Macs and dropping to 5th place amonst US vendors, would make you wonder why the premium brand dropped to 5th against the cheap makers.

Oh and by the way, Apple doesn't make their notebooks. They just have other manufactuerers do it, just like Microsoft focuses on software and has hardware partners that build their own computers.

www.electronista.com/.../quanta.seals.apple.deal

"There are features in each that the other does not have... kind of like the laptops.  Yet Windows cost 2.48x as much."

No it doesn't  it;s a few bucks more, you are comparing OSX to the full windows version, and no way you can hold up that they are comparable. They are simply not comparable.

So OSX should rightly be compared with Home premium, then the 2.48 times as much becomes a few bucks.

But since the prices of the Apple hardware are seriously more expensive, there is really no reason for this discussion. I mean, even if you still insist on comparing OSX against the most expensive Vista or Win7 sku, the total cost of ownership for your mac is much much higher.

In the corporate world, the cost of maintaining and integrating a Mac machine into the corporate networking envirorment is twice as high (rough estimation), pricesly the reason why Apple's marketshare in the corporate world is next to nothing.

OS Deployment features in OSX, management features (group policy on Windows) are not existing, or so half baked, no one can effectively use it.

"Baaaaaaaaaaaa.... Silly... Windows Is much more attack just because it own near all the market... This is a statistic matter here ... Dop!!"

I dont really care what kind of "matter" it is, the FACTS for me and many others would be ACTUAL attacks.  Windows is ACTUALLY attacked millions of times a day.

Is "Dop" a word?

"I dont really care what kind of "matter" it is, the FACTS for me and many others would be ACTUAL attacks.  Windows is ACTUALLY attacked millions of times a day."

Yes correct, of course maintaining that OSX isn't is simply lying trough your theeth.

Furthermore, the vast vast majority of problems in Windows occur on XP, which is 8 years old. If you compare Leopard with Vista, then it becomes apparent which is the safer OS. Look at the number of security threads that are published for Leopard as opposed to Vista.

Take into account that Apple is slow and inaccurate at fixing these threads, and the difference becomes even more striking.

@Yoshipod:"I challenge anyone to point out a factual misrepresentation in any of them. "

Year 2007, Commercial: Computer Cart.  Mac guy says that Macs don't get cryptic errors.  I did a check online and found a few.

False advertising.

(Yes, I have nothing to do)

@Yoshipod: "It does not matter if you were running Mac OS 9, Mac OS X 10.0, 10.3, or have an blank hard drive in the machine with no OS installed at all.   No license codes to enter.  All you need is the supported hardware."

Really?  I thought that you had to pay full price for Snow Leapord if you had a Mac version prior to Leopard.  How would they know what version you had if you have a blank hard drive?

I find it hilarious that the Apple lawyer contacted Microsoft...what I find much more amusing is all of you brand loyalists going at each other like this! Paul hit this one out of the park when it comes to hits on his blog!

--tayme

"No it doesn't  it;s a few bucks more, you are comparing OSX to the full windows version, and no way you can hold up that they are comparable. They are simply not comparable.

So OSX should rightly be compared with Home premium, then the 2.48 times as much becomes a few bucks.

But since the prices of the Apple hardware are seriously more expensive, there is really no reason for this discussion. I mean, even if you still insist on comparing OSX against the most expensive Vista or Win7 sku, the total cost of ownership for your mac is much much higher.

In the corporate world, the cost of maintaining and integrating a Mac machine into the corporate networking envirorment is twice as high (rough estimation), pricesly the reason why Apple's marketshare in the corporate world is next to nothing.

OS Deployment features in OSX, management features (group policy on Windows) are not existing, or so half baked, no one can effectively use it".

I'm sorry but you can't have it both ways.

If you are going to compare a Macbook Pro to a $699 PC laptop, then I can compare the retail prices of each OS.  Even if you compare against home premium its still half the cost.

Now turn that same deductive reasoning on the laptop hunter ads, and the statement from the COO of Microsoft.  A 5.5lb., 1" thick laptop can not be compared against a 7.0lb 1.5" thick machine.  Go compare the costs of the high end PC laptops against the Mac Book Pro.  Then you find the prices are much more similar.  The Macbook Pros are much nicer than any laptop I have seen.  Made from Aluminum, not plastic. They feel strong. Try putting pressure on the body. It does not bend like the cheap plastic PC laptops. Once you have had someone trip out the power cord on a magsafe you will understand how valuable that feature is.  People get laptops because they are portable. No other machine on the market has the size, weight, strength, performance and feel of  Macbook pro.   There are plenty of cheap PCs there are no cheap Macs.  Just ones that are a good VALUE.

I have no idea where you get your information, but the TCO of a Mac is much less than that of a PC.  They may cost a little more upfront, but the support costs are far less.  Find me a study, not funded by Microsoft, that shows the TCO of a Mac is more than a PC. They cost less.  Just google "TCO mac vs windows",  all show the Mac as lower TCO.  Maybe your company is different but study after study shows they just cost less.

Really?  I thought that you had to pay full price for Snow Leapord if you had a Mac version prior to Leopard.  How would they know what version you had if you have a blank hard drive?

I believe you are absolutely right.

However, If you read what I wrote, I said the only version so far that was an upgrade was 10.1.  10.6 is not available yet. So any version of OS X you can buy today, or in the past was a full version and not an upgrade.

Even more amazing is how the people posting on Paul's board seem to be getting more and more juvenile & less and less "IT Pro". It shows by all of the usage of LOL. This is a term of the under 21 crowd.

--tayme

rr0de74@live.com the fact that OS X is less attacked does not mean security hole does not exist.... Here is the real problem...

Windows have the advantage that hackers that do attack it reveals these holes... On Mac OS X you just don't know where are security holes!! Is it better??

If you prefer ignorance... Its your problem...

Note : "Dop" is not a word it is a sound

@Yoshipod... Do you really don't understand what we told??

We know that we can buy MacOS X if you don't have a Mac computer... but what will you do with it?? Put the DVD in your toaster??

Apple does not need to sell Retail box of the Mac OS X for a higher price because they know if you buy it it is because you necessarily have a Mac and already pay full price for the version that came with it ... So it is like the retail box you purchase is an upgrade...

On the Windows side it is not true because Microsoft have no guarantee you already pay for windows when you bought your PC because you could buy Linux ( for example) bundled with you PC computer...

So ... To compare orange with orange when you compare the price of MacOS X you must compare it with the Windows upgrade price...

Simple, or am I difficult to follow here?? Somebody??

Also, the real difference is Apple Make you pay Full price for their OS When you buy the initially the Mac machine and after they sell you upgrade at cheap price...

Microsoft, charge you rebate price when you buy windows bundled with the PC and sell you a little higher price for future upgrade ...

How is best?? I think finally it is the same!!

Pingback from  Microsoft ads irk Apple &laquo; Longing for a break

Windows 7 to be in stores October 22.

All you Borg drones must be creaming your pants! Sad really. Especially when you're being charged like a wounded bull for a minor upgrade. Suckers!

The important thing to remember is that Microsoft were spreading lies with their ads, whereas Apple is always truthful in theirs. Get the facts right and Microsoft would not have any problems. Be evil, like Microsoft is, and you get convicted by the DOJ, EU and more. Microsoft, evil since 1975.

shitshady: Um, it makes no difference to me. Microsoft is still a joke and lies year after year. Steals from others also. Does not innovated (until others do and they copy). Microsoft is a joke in IT.

@robertsjoe

lol, "...minor upgrade." So I see that you have been suckered into believing the what the haters are saying.

All anyone has to do it use Vista for a week, then use Windows 7 on the same machine for a week. Then you realize that this is a big must have upgrade.

Enough said.

"So ... To compare orange with orange when you compare the price of MacOS X you must compare it with the Windows upgrade price...

Simple, or am I difficult to follow here?? Somebody??"

Then you must realize you can't compare a Macbook Pro with a cheap $699 PC laptop.

Compare it to the high end PC laptops which cost close to the same.

That's the point I am making.  All this analysis one comparing retail prices on the OS, but you are not doing any on the laptops themselves.

Lololo : Apple user always make me cry lolololol Silly mac user like robertsjoe lolololo

Subzero,

You said, "Nobody at Microsoft ever complained to Apple about the very deceptive Mac vs PC ads."

You know this....how?

HOW do you know that "nobody at Microsoft ever complained to Apple about the very deceptive Mac vs PC ads."???

Also...How do you know for sure that this supposed phone call from Apple legal even took place?

Just asking.

"Then you must realize you can't compare a Macbook Pro with a cheap $699 PC laptop."

Sure, and not everyone wants or can afford a high end laptop. I can't and will not pay $1500 for a laptop, when a $500 one does what I need for a lot less. OK, so Snow Leopard is extremely cheap at $29, but what am I going to do with it? Put it in a toaster like Erico suggests?

I'm sure the build quality of a $50k Boxster is much better than that of a $20k Honda Civic. I'm also sure that a Boxster looks nicer and has a lot more stuff thrown in too. In the end, it's just a car that takes one from point A to point B. Not everyone wants to spend $50k on a vehicle. Moreover, you don't see Porsche comparing itself to Honda. For whatever it's worth, it was Apple that started this "we're better than $500 PC" game.

Imacs are  at least close to all-in-one prices for Vista, but they are mid to low end and small differences yield a higher percent. But I price Xeon work stations at Dell and HP, as someone posted should be done. The PC version cost hundreds to over a $1000 difference. It's the laptops that are way overpriced. I found Mac Pro's 50% nore than simialr Vista hardware, including adding software to be similar to iLife apps. hat hurts is that laptops were Apples sales leaders, at least in the recent past.

Personally, I'm at the shore using my $400 Vista laptop with a glossy screen. Me and the kids like it a lot. If they ruin it by dropping it or spilling a drink on it, I'll just buy a new one. If they ruined a Mac Pro lappy, I'd throw a sh*t fit, so my cheapo lappy is perfect for the Dr.WAM family. I would recommend it in a heaqrt beat. No HDMI out, but many newer cheapo models have it now. Well, to each his or her own. Now back to the boardwalk.

Good night all.

PS Tayme, keep up with them workouts. I'm gonna arm wrestle you soon. I'll let you use both arms ;)

Waethorn:

Sorry but this makes me laugh:

"You can't install a copy of Mac OS X on a Mac system without a present license because there is no such thing.  All Mac systems ship with a full OS X license, hence the boxed software is an upgrade."

Dude. I upgraded the hard drive in my Powerbook just after Christmas. I installed the drive. Then I installed my retailed, boxed copy of OS 10.4.

It did a full install. It didn't complain that there was no prior version of the OS installed. Hell, it even formatted the drive for me. Imagine that!

That being said, I still think this whole story is a crock.

Nice end talk guys!! Good night all ... See you in the next Paul's post!!

"Also...How do you know for sure that this supposed phone call from Apple legal even took place?"

Most likely because Microsoft are making it up.

"LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL"

What does that mean? Laugh out loud out loud out loud...? Is it like a laughter club thingy?

@RunTimeError: Holly ***!!! nobody understand the discussion... I mean no mac user understand the discussion...

Mac user are really really weird...

We don't told you cannot install a fresh copy of MacOS X without the old version DVD or installation ... We just tell that buying a full retail MacOS X box is in fact an upgrade because you necessarily have an old version on you actual Mac... An Apple is sure of that so they don't have to charge you the full price so it explain why the MacOS X full retail box is less expensive than a Full retail version of Windows...

In fact you cannot compare a full retail MacOS X box with a full retail Windows box ... You should compare it with the Windows Upgrade box...

Pffff.... When a mac user decided to not understand something... it is hard sometimes...

@shark47 : yes it is "Laugh out loud out loud out loud" lololol

Great to see Microsoft being beaten in another market: www.microsoft.com/.../default.mspx

Why are so many mac fanboys/trolls hanging around a Windows site?

"Ocean said:

Is there any proof that this is true?"

Is there any proof that it isn't?

If you believe that this never happened and it was something he made up while waiting for his flight out of Seattle, prove it.

@rc0nwa: Because Mac fanboys/trolls are like scientologists they always try to control all around the world to be sure nobody talk about there sect... They are a little paranoiac.

@rc0nway: "Why are so many mac fanboys/trolls hanging around a Windows site?"

Because Paul hates Apple and continues to post about them. About 30-40% of the total posts on this site are Apple related, and a majority of those are anti-Apple.

OT - @DRWAM - I am now 30 lbs down and ran my first organized 5k...my knees are holding up well. I feel better and am starting to look better(according to my wife, the young hotties probably don't think so!) Thanks for the comment!

--tayme

"In fact you cannot compare a full retail MacOS X box with a full retail Windows box ... You should compare it with the Windows Upgrade box...

Pffff.... When a mac user decided to not understand something... it is hard sometimes..."

We understand it fine.  You seem to not grasp it.

If these laptop hunter ads are comparing low end PCs with high end Macs to show they are expensive, then its perfectly reasonable to do the same with the OS.

Microsoft does not make laptops.  They have no part in the expense, or lack there of.  Their products are more expensive than Apples.

I am doing the exact same thing that Microsoft is.

I am walking into a store and looking at the retail price of their products and comparing it to Apples retail price.  

Please show me where on the Mac OS 10.5 box it says it is an upgrade.  Since it does not say upgrade, I am comparing it to the full version of Windows.  Since 10.5 only comes in one version, will all the features, I am comparing it to the top of the line windows version.  Is that not what Microsoft is doing in their ads?

I agree fully that on average, a mac laptop is more expensive.  Apple does not make low end products.  No one here has said anything otherwise.  If price is the sole factor in your decision, so be it.  But if you have problems with my comparison about the OS, then you should have the exact same problems with Microsoft comparing the laptops.

@yoshipod: Ok so if you want... Apple does high end Computer because their prices are higher and Microsoft does not do computer it does not do high end computer...

So if I continue in your thinking way, Microsoft do high end operating system and Apple do low end operating system... because of their prices...

Ok ... I can live with that lololo

"Even more amazing is how the people posting on Paul's board seem to be getting more and more juvenile & less and less "IT Pro."

Nope. Not amazing at all. It all comes down from the top--Paul--who is getting more snarky and much less "IT Pro" as time goes on. Read his many, many mocking posts on Apple and tell me what there is in there that one could call professional?

There's something about Apple that just frosts him. He can't stand their success, and he's utterly irrational on any topic involving Apple. Over time, this odd little corner of the internet has become populated mainly with like-minded dittoheads, and it produces the insular, nonsensical self-amplification you'd expect in such an environment.

This isn't really surprising at all if you go back and look at the old Nexus site, or Paul's earlier postings on usenet.

The surprise in this "story", if it is really true, is that the COO of Microsoft is such an idiot. I'm come to expect this level of schoolboy churlishness from Paul, but I'm surprised by Microsoft coming out with this in such a childish manner. From the pictures, he looks old enough to know better.

Finally, I have to wonder if this is just a fake, a la the Nicolas Sarkozy phone prank that fooled Sarah Palin. I'd like some independent confirmation....

Shark,

Your comment of "prove that it isn't true" is so stupid as to be laughable.

Guess what?  Microsoft called Apple yesterday to ask them to please not license OSX for use on non-Apple hardware, because they are afraid if that happens, Windows will surely lose its dominant position.

Now go prove that call never happened.  You can't?  Oh, so I guess it really did happen.

@yoshipod: you know this is not just a matter eye to eye, teeth to teeth...

If you think taking your revenge on Microsoft publicity in this discussion thread will change anything, you have a little childish attitude...or it is a naive thinking way of living!

"So if I continue in your thinking way, Microsoft do high end operating system and Apple do low end operating system... because of their prices...

Ok ... I can live with that lololo"

Thus you agree that Microsoft is hypocritical with their ads then.

They are saying that Macs are more expensive than products they don't make. However,  their products are more expensive than Apples.

@panache1023: Stop this kind of statement... The Apple and Microsoft Lawyers probably get a talk all days so...

"@yoshipod: you know this is not just a matter eye to eye, teeth to teeth...

If you think taking your revenge on Microsoft publicity in this discussion thread will change anything, you have a little childish attitude...or it is a naive thinking way of living!"

Who said anything about taking revenge. I am simply pointing out the hypocrisy of Microsoft's pricing of Windows and their calling out Apple's pricing of the Mac.

Windows costs more than OS X.  Its that simple.  Go to each vendors website and check out the retail price.

Apple Laptops cost more than most other PC laptops.

Why is this so hard to accept?  It is the truth.

@yoshipod: ok, I can admit that microsoft don't do cumputers so they can clam that their computer are less expensive then Apple's computers if you admit that Microsoft do High end Operating System and Apple do low and Operating system...

So Microsoft is hypocrit in their, "We are less expensive then Apple" ads and Apple is hypocrit in their "I am a Mac, I am a PC" ads...

If you prefer it like this I can agree with you...

You can't ever get a Windows user to see common sense. Especially now that they know that Windows 7 is out October 22. Now they make even less sense.

@ yoshipod: yes, but... this is not the point of the discussion!!

You are right, if we just check retail price of the Windows box, it cost more than OSX... But this is not the point of the Microsoft ads... They just show that PC Laptop of any brand (which run windows and not MacOS X) are cheaper than a Mac laptop ... and this is the thruth!!

Compare with "I am a Mac, I am a PC" ads which vehiculate false information (of subjective information) which one is more hypocrit???I ask you!!

"So Microsoft is hypocrit in their, "We are less expensive then Apple" ads and Apple is hypocrit in their "I am a Mac, I am a PC" ads...

If you prefer it like this I can agree with you..."

How so.  Please point out one thing in those ads that you can concretely prove.

I agree they certainly stretch the truth to their advantage, but there is nothing hypocritical about them.

@robertsjoe: Ok so show me what is common sens??

@ All mac users: You know its like if we are at the homedepot and we check for nails and I told you that the nail box A (which contains 100 nails) seams to be more expensive than the nail box B (which contains 25 nails) but this is only because the A contains 3 time the nails of the B... So I told you that the A is les expensive than the B and you to reply : "No no!! The price of the box B is less so the A is more expensive... don't try to convince me.... I put my finger in my ears lalalalala.... I don't ear anything"...

But is is simple... THe Box A is less expensive than the Box B because the Box A contain for time of the nails that is contains in the Box B and the A is twice the price of the box B...

So witch one is less expensive???

@yoshipod: I don't have to prove anything. Apple just talk about subjective thing in their ads but Microsoft talk about concrete objective things in their ads... Prices of a full PC system laptop of any brand running windows compared to a Mac OSX Computer....

"@yoshipod: I don't have to prove anything. Apple just talk about subjective thing in their ads but Microsoft talk about concrete objective things in their ads... Prices of a full PC system laptop of any brand running windows compared to a Mac OSX Computer...."

Then what is hypocritical about Apple's ads.  

I agree that the laptop hunter ads show concrete data.  (However, they are now grossly outdated, thus the reported call from Apple asking for removal. For example saying the best mac laptop under $2000 comes with just 2GB or RAM, actually they have 3 that come with 4GB of RAM and cost under $2K, and another one that can be upgraded to 4GB and still cost under $2K.).

I also showed concrete data that Windows costs more than OS X.

Thus the hypocrisy.

Please point out the hypocrisy of the "I'm a mac" ads. I agree they can be very subjective and anecdotal.  But they are not hypocritical.

"The important thing to remember is that Microsoft were spreading lies with their ads, whereas Apple is always truthful in theirs."

rj, you get funnier and more delusional every day.  Must suck to have the company you adore so much have to talk to MS at all.

"Microsoft is a joke in IT."

Do you even have a remote clue as to what you are talking about?  Obviously not.

Speaking of chuck:

"There's something about MS that just frosts him. He can't stand their success, and he's utterly irrational on any topic involving MS. Over time, this odd little corner of the internet has become populated mainly with like-minded dittoheads, and it produces the insular, nonsensical self-amplification you'd expect in such an environment."

Anyway, if this is fake, it will be rebuked by Apple extremely quickly.  If we hear nothing from Apple in the next 1-3 days, it's true.

yoshi, the hypocrisy of this is not necessarily in the ads themselves, but is more within the company and the troll-like followers that little the Internet (rj, I'm looking at you).  For a while, some, like chuck, and many, many others, have openly told us that they don't mind paying more, as they get what is known as "utils of satisfaction" from the purchase, even though it is more.  That is fine.  However, to see their beloved company have to succumb to the pressure and basically have to say, "hey, we're not as expensive as you think" (no doubt the claim originating from an overzealous legal department and not from El Jobso himself) is where the hypocrisy lies.  On the one hand, they will tell you how it is OK to pay more, and how you are getting a value added experience with a Mac.  But on the other hand, they complain about the pricing difference.  Costs DO matter.

No doubt, what this really is telling me is that the ads are of course somewhat working.  That they have awaken the sleeping giant and MS is playing for keeps.  And that the effects of the poor economy are indeed impacting the sales of premium priced Macs compared to their Windows competitors, especially in the face of netbooks.

At a higher level, this is about MS empowering people in a down economy, showing them they can get a good deal when purchasing a computer, and Apple is remaining as smug as ever.  Which do you think plays better in the current environment?

@yoshipod

The I'm a Mac ads are getting more ridiculous, the one showing all the fine print is the most hypocritical of all.

Any "fine print" with your Mac manual about how your computer may become obsolete and unsupported as soon as 3 years after purchase? Or security updates may be up to half a gig periodically and brick your machine.

I see they're bragging about how much smaller Snow Leopard is than Leopard, what they forgot to mention is that they just F***ed all the PowerPC owners, even the most recent G5 and G4 Powerbook owners from just 3 years ago, that's how they made Snow Leopard so much smaller. How soon will they totally stop updating Tiger?

MS still has security updates for Windows 2000 and will for another year.

Mac's are cheaper than Windows based PC's, thats what the ads are about. The general public gets a new OS with their computer, and Windows didn't charge for Service Pack 1 or two for XP or Vista. The difference between 10.1 and 10.4 was little more than service pack upgrades, yet you paid $129 for each one. So with Snow Leopard you finally get a fair Service Pack price. Finally. I paid $37f or Windows  7 upgrade from Micro Center so I paid about 1200 less for a laptop with the exact specs as a Macbook Pro 2 years ago, I paid 8 bucks more for the upgrade.

How is Apple cheaper again?

"How is Apple cheaper again?"

It isn't any way you look at it :)

But of course if people want to kid themselves and think it is high end, that's ok.

Pingback from  LOL! Apple demanded that Microsoft stop advertising PC price advantage over Macs &#8211; SuperSite Blog &laquo; JohnsonsPlace

In Italy we have a motto for things like these.

Translated, sounds like this (sort of): "A swine naming a dove pig"

WIndows DOES NOT COST more than OSX.

Unless we talk about retail versions.

If you buy a new PC the OEM price of Vista Ultimate is more or less 180 $, Home premium is 140 $.

So, what exactly are you talking about?

"Now go prove that call never happened.  You can't?  Oh, so I guess it really did happen."

Yeah, sure, an anonymous poster on the internet has the same amount of credibility as the COO of a company? Not so fast, buster.

Again, this isn't robertsjoe, sitting in his mom's basement, writing comments. It's the COO of the largest software company in the world. The risks associated with lying about something like this is a lot, lot higher for him. Considering how easy it is for Apple to deny it, I don't see what incentive he had to lie. Again, if you do claim that he did lie, prove it. And while you're at it, you might want to offer some proof to back up your previous comment too.

panache1023

Prove it?

"Because two weeks ago we got a call from the Apple legal department saying, hey -- this is a true story -- saying, "Hey, you need to stop running those ads, we lowered our prices."

blogs.zdnet.com/hardware

www.microsoft.com/.../07-15-09WPC2009.mspx

www.pcworld.com/.../ms_exec_apple_complained_about_laptop_hunters_ads.html

arstechnica.com/.../apple-demanded-microsoft-to-stop-its-laptop-hunters-ads.ars

www.engadget.com/.../microsoft-exec-says-apple-asked-them-stop-airing-laptop-hunters

So all these websites are wrong? LOL. Yeah, please find me some proof! Do we have an official Apple response? So far, nothing yet from Apple. I think you just don't want to admit that Apple is crying, "Uncle, Uncle!"

"WIndows DOES NOT COST more than OSX.

Unless we talk about retail versions."

That is exactly what we are talking about if you read the thread.

The Laptops in the ads are not cheaper because of Microsoft, they are cheaper because of the hardware companies like HP that make them.

Microsoft products are more expensive than competing products based on the published retail prices.  That is the entire point.

Everyone is up in arms about that comparison.

If Apple made an ad where someone walked into Best Buy looked at the cost of Windows Ultimate retail and saw it was $319.95, then went to an Apple store and looked at 10.5 retail at $129, and claimed that Windows was way more expensive, what would be wrong with that.

If you want to respond about the total cost, including the hardware, tech support, discounted prices, TCO, etc., that is fine.  Just be sure to do the same with the laptop hunter ads.

"The I'm a Mac ads are getting more ridiculous, the one showing all the fine print is the most hypocritical of all.

Any "fine print" with your Mac manual about how your computer may become obsolete and unsupported as soon as 3 years after purchase? Or security updates may be up to half a gig periodically and brick your machine.

I see they're bragging about how much smaller Snow Leopard is than Leopard, what they forgot to mention is that they just F***ed all the PowerPC owners, even the most recent G5 and G4 Powerbook owners from just 3 years ago, that's how they made Snow Leopard so much smaller. How soon will they totally stop updating Tiger?

MS still has security updates for Windows 2000 and will for another year.

Mac's are cheaper than Windows based PC's, thats what the ads are about. The general public gets a new OS with their computer, and Windows didn't charge for Service Pack 1 or two for XP or Vista. The difference between 10.1 and 10.4 was little more than service pack upgrades, yet you paid $129 for each one. So with Snow Leopard you finally get a fair Service Pack price. Finally. I paid $37f or Windows  7 upgrade from Micro Center so I paid about 1200 less for a laptop with the exact specs as a Macbook Pro 2 years ago, I paid 8 bucks more for the upgrade.

How is Apple cheaper again?"

So once Snow Leopard ships all G4s and G5s will suddenly stop working. Will apple no longer provide contracted service to those customers?  Did I miss something there?  

You are really pulling at straws there.  Neither Apple, nor Microsoft, nor any company makes claims that their current products will work with all future ones.  You need to look up the definition of hypocrisy.

If you thing the difference between 10.1 and 10.4 is a service pack, you are just trolling. Each update offer features that to users made it worthwhile. In addition, each OS ran faster on the same hardware as the prior version.  If that is not worthwhile, I don't know what is.

Upgrading from Windows NT to 2000 to XP were all service pack upgrades....

See what I did there? Does that not sound foolish?

My original statement stands.   Windows costs more then OS X based on retail pricing.  

"If Apple made an ad where someone walked into Best Buy looked at the cost of Windows Ultimate retail and saw it was $319.95, then went to an Apple store and looked at 10.5 retail at $129, and claimed that Windows was way more expensive, what would be wrong with that."

Nothing. It's the same approach as the "laptop hunter" ads.

Presumably, if Microsoft really goes ahead with this hilarious idea to have "Microsoft Stores", that's exactly what they'll stock on the shelves. Such deals!

Subzero,

1)  I hardly think that even if this is true, it's anything crying "uncle, uncle".  The commercials don't show anything that isn't publicly available knowledge.

2).  You are showing multiple links that are all repeating the SAME STORY.  

3)  Personally, I don't care either way if it's true or not.  The point is, saying, "It's definitely true because an MS executive said it and you can't prove otherwise" is hardly proof of it happening or not

A company that is as profitable as Apple will be crying "uncle" (again) when they are close to bankruptcy, not when they are still extremely profitable.

give me a break

@Yoshipod

"If Apple made an ad where someone walked into Best Buy looked at the cost of Windows Ultimate retail and saw it was $319.95, then went to an Apple store and looked at 10.5 retail at $129, and claimed that Windows was way more expensive, what would be wrong with that."

Can you just walk in to the Apple store and say "I would like to buy this Mac without OS X, I already have the 129$ disc from my old Mac?"

Or can you just build your own Mac, and install your "Retail" OS X?

Apple can keep selling those service p..I mean operating systems cheaper price, because they know people buying them have already paid the retail price of it, when they purchased the Mac.

@subzero  I'm sorry to prove you wrong, but according to both Gartner and IDC, Apple shipped 12.4 fewer macs than a year ago. The falling sales down to 1.21 million Macs in 2009.

Hmmm... someone needs to do their research. Gartner has Apple's year over year sales going up and IDC has them going down. Both are estimates and not based on actual numbers. you aren't "proving" anything.

Per the actual article. I have no doubt some sort of conversation happened between Apple and Microsoft. I do doubt that it happened the way Turner claims. I find it odd that Apple legal has his number and that he has the kind of free time in his day to just get some random call. Secondly no COO worth his salt is going to take a call from his competitors legal team. It would be a little more formal than just a phone call that he got and would involve Microsoft legal reps.

So the "one day i got a call" narrative is probably a bit of stretch.

The other thing that i find odd is that he mentioned it at all. In addition to being competitors, Apple is also one of the largest Windows developers in the world. As such I would imagine that there is a fair amount of conversation between the two and while they give each other crap in ads. I find it a little unprofessional to go and recount what happens in private meetings with your developers.

"Can you just walk in to the Apple store and say "I would like to buy this Mac without OS X, I already have the 129$ disc from my old Mac?"

Or can you just build your own Mac, and install your "Retail" OS X?

Apple can keep selling those service p..I mean operating systems cheaper price, because they know people buying them have already paid the retail price of it, when they purchased the Mac."

Can you walk into Best Buy, choose a PC there with Windows installed and say please discount it by $319.95 since I already have a Windows Ultimate License?  That argument works both ways.

And yes, you can build your own box and install a retail copy of OS X on it.  It is against the terms of service, but you can still do, and there are many websites out there with instructions.

Why is it that you are so willing to dig deeper into the OS X vs Windows retail pricing to show that its not as simple as I make it sound, yet you don't do the same for the Laptops that Microsoft if comparing.  That is the point of all my posts.  

There have been may good arguments as to why its not right to just compare retail costs of each OS.  Yet nobody seems to want to do the same for the hardware. The only specs being compared are amount of RAM, HD & screen size.  There are many other important parts that make up a laptop.  Weight, size, battery life, screen resolution, RAM speed, motherboard, case, durability, etc.  

Apple does not make $700 laptops. But if you compare similarly specced laptops from Dell & HP (size, weight, battery, etc.)  Sudden the Macbook Pros are not really that much more expensive.

If this story is to be believed (and I have no real reason to doubt it), then turn that analysis on it as well.  Apple asked to remove the commercials that state incorrect information.  And its more than just the $100 difference.

@ModernDislocation,

However, Gartner's numbers didn't show a huge gain like Apple would have you believe. Apple keeps touting that it makes huge gains all the time. Not according to IDC and Gartner. That gives more credibility to IDC's numbers that Apple did lose some ground as other PC makers are adapting to what Apple is doing and learning how to make better machines. As AMD up's its game and slowly makes inroads on Intel's marketshare, Intel is forced to make better processors that use less heat, less energy, and gives more performance. PC Manufacturers are figuring out how to make their products last longer, finding the best mix of materials, finding designs that are appealing to consumers, and blunting more of the "Premium" argument that Mac fans like to employ.

Why else would Apple's legal department complain? There are many inaccuracies in the Mac vs PC commericals. Yet there has not ever been one complaint reported by Microsoft. Unless you can prove otherwise.

Is it really so hard to believe that maybe Microsoft has found its groove, that they are starting to take the fight back to Apple with its partners? Many writers out there have been noticing this upward trend with Microsoft and its products lately. Perhaps Microsoft and its PC partners are taking Apple quite seriously. I beleive both have analysed Apple's strengths and weakness, and are adapting to both of Apple's strengths and weaknesses. As more people lose their jobs, we'll see if Apple can keep up their unrealistic prices when more businesses go under and the unemployment rate continues to rise.

The only thing that do apple financial result are good is because of MP3 player (iPod) marcket...

Apple is the most important MP3 player seller in the world... This is there niche ... So don't try to confusing us by telling Apple is better in their computer sells then PC with Windows, this is not true!!!

Installed base (each letter represents 0.5%)

W = Windows

M = Macintosh OS X

O = Other (Linux, Unix, Commodore 64, etc)

WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWMMMMMMMOO

Apple's a niche player who in a good year is less than 5% of the installed base and in a bad year is less than 5% of the installed base and that's been true for well over a decade with or without Jobs.

Get over it.

Since Paul's software doesn't like long strings...

WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWMWWWW

WWWWWWWWWWWWWMWWWWWW

WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWMWWWW

WWWWOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

WWWWWWWWWWWWWMWWWWWW

WWMWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWMWWWW

WWWMWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

WWWWWWWWWWWWWOWWWWWW

@Subzero -

I don't really follow your response. You seem to think I am making some sort of larger argument. My sole point was that your  claims with respect to IDC and Gartner were incorrect. You said they both showed a 12% decline. This is simply not true as one clearly showed Apple's sales growing. Arguing that they don't show the amount of growth Apple claims is entirely irrelevant and doesn't change the fact that your claim was incorrect.  In addition you keep touting these numbers as if they are fact. As it stands they are just guesses and we will not know the real numbers until Wednesday.

I am not sure what AMD, Microsoft complaining or not complaining, Microsoft finding it grove or any of the other topics you touched on in your response had to do with what I said as I made no mention nor claims on these subjects.

"Apple's a niche player who in a good year is less than 5% of the installed base and in a bad year is less than 5% of the installed base and that's been true for well over a decade with or without Jobs."

Non sequitur response. Marketshare numbers are well known and not in dispute, except for the current IDC/Gartner disagreement. The Sherlock Holmes quote applies "It is a capital mistake to theorize in advance of the facts" and we'll have the facts next week, when Apple announces financials.

Of course, there are other facts that are never reported on the win mediocrity site, like Dell being down 17% and virtually ALL PC vendors down as well, with the exception of those that make netbooks as a heavy portion of their product line. But context like that doesn't fit well with Paul's snarky LOL! approach to the "facts".

Pingback from  LOL! Apple demanded that Microsoft stop advertising PC price advantage over Macs | Everything Microsoft