Ok, by now everyone has seen the new Microsoft ads, basically nailing Apple on price. I’ve heard and read many things from both sides. The Microsoft supporters (of course) agreeing with the ads, and Apple supporters arguing that the computers are not apples to apples comparisons (no pun intended) and that the PC cost is not the real cost. The buyer must then add for spyware/virus protection, and MS Office.
The way I see it, both sides are right. But what amazes me is how much this has stirred up the Mac world. Ok, the ad’s are not 100% accurate. But the Mac vs PC ads that Apple has run for so long are? Windows PCs still crash regularly? Vista really sucks that bad? If Windows PCs are as “unfun” as Apple claims, then why are more (a whole lot more) games available for a PC then a MAC? Basically, the ads (for the most part) aren’t true, except for the virus attacks part. (although that has been blown way out of proportion) But for years that is ok? Why? Because picking on MS Windows is so popular that it could possibly become an Olympic event if so desired. But picking on Apple? Taboo. A major no no. I Mean come on. Macs ARE OVERPRICED! Just like Viruses are a problem for Windows machines. That’s the way it is for both sides. So Apple, take your criticism in these ads, because (like some of your ads about Windows’ problems with Viruses) it is at least partially true. It’s maybe just not as “fun” as picking on Windows machines, but still true. The fact that it is right on target could be why it has stirred up the Mac fan base so much. The argument that “you are paying for the quality of a Mac” only holds so much water.
And on the comparison of the machines, you can argue that they aren’t fair comparisons. But guess what? The average consumer does NOT care. It doesn’t matter if it has a 250GB hard drive vs a 320GB one. It doesn’t matter for the average consumer that one has an Intel T7500 CPU or a T9400. What people want is a PC (or especially a laptop) that does what they need to do. For most people, that’s access the Internet, watch online videos, and run an office suite. They will all do those tasks just fine. Besides unlike the old days of CPU ratings (ex: a 66mhz Pentium vs a 266 mhz Pentium) most people don’t know why the higher number CPU is faster, it just is. But by how much? Most consumers don’t know, and (big surprise) don’t really care. (This is partially Intel’s own fault, with the new labeling scheme) For me, the $1800 Mac should be a whole lot better than the $529 Dell. Over 3.5X better. You know what? It’s not. It may be a better experience, but not 3.5X better.
As as the “total cost” argument goes, it also mostly false. Macs require MS Office also. It’s not free. But OpenOffice is free. And that allows accessing MS Word/Excel documents. And you don’t need to spend any extra money for an anti-virus program. Several very good ones are available for free for Windows. So that’s another point that is “not true”.
So what “is true”:
Macs ARE WAY too expensive. I’d love to see a $750 Mac laptop. Or the Mac Mini go for $399. But that’s not going to happen. Why? Because Apple has always marketed Macs to be to “higher end” computer. But now that Macs are Intel based with identical CPUs and idential video cards, it’s easier than ever to see how badly Apple is gouging the public. The magic show is all about over for Apple I’m afraid.
PCs ARE prone to getting viruses. Plain & simply. So use a FREE anti-virus/spyware program.
Macs are fun to use. But PCs have the ability to be way more fun.
Vista does stink. Not totally unusable as some have indicated, but not really a great experience. Guess what? You can still get a PC with XP.
No, the Mac software library it no where near as deep as Windows. In some cases Linux software availability is better than Macs.
Both these companies have to realize that PCs are becoming an appliance, more so every day. Consumers want what works for as little cost as possible.
Is anyone in the market for a $200 toaster? Didn’t think so.
