ActiveWin.com - The Most Activated Windows Resource

ActiveWin

User Controls

New User

Edit/View My Profile

Active Network

ActiveMac

ActiveWin

ActiveXbox

DirectX

Downloads

FAQs

Interviews

MS Games & Hardware

Reviews

Rocky Bytes

Support Center

TopTechTips

Windows 2000

Windows Me

Windows Server 2003

Windows Vista

Windows XP

News Centers

Windows/Microsoft

Apple/Mac

Xbox/Xbox 360

News Search

XML/RSS Newsfeeds

Pocket PC Site

FAQ's

Windows Vista

Windows 98/98 SE

Windows 2000

Windows Me

Windows Server 2003

Windows XP

Windows 7

Windows 8

Internet Explorer 6

Internet Explorer 5

Xbox 360

Xbox

DirectX

DVD's

Latest Reviews

Xbox/Games

Fable 2

Applications

Windows Server 2008 R2

Windows 7

Adobe CS5 Master Collection

Hardware

Microsoft Express Mouse

Latest Interviews

Mike Swanson

Site News/Info

About This Site

Advertise

Affiliates

Default Home Page

Link To Us

Macs vs. PCs: Is it still a ‘tax’ if users happily pay a premium?

Time: 00:25 EST/05:25 GMT | News Source: | Posted By: Kenneth van Surksum

It’s the eve of MacWorld Expo and Microsoft officials are out talking up the idea of the “Apple tax” again.

The Windows team last mentioned the Apple tax concept during Microsoft’s Professional Developers Conference (PDC) in late October. Then, as now, the Softies’ contention is that Apple’s higher prices — coupled with fewer natively ported apps — is making Macs less appealing to customers and partners.

Read Only Comments
Return to News

Displaying Comments 1 through 26 of 26

This is an archived static copy of ActiveWin.com.

#1 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at Tuesday, January 06, 2009 08:28:02 AM

Geez, MS can't even innovate an original insult? There is no such thing as an Apple Tax. Everyone that buys an Apple wants OSX. Not everyone who buys a PC wants Windows.

#2 By 92283 (70.67.2.125) at Tuesday, January 06, 2009 09:11:14 AM

Its a HUGE TAX.

Thousands of dollars in some cases.

#3 By 23275 (24.196.4.141) at Tuesday, January 06, 2009 09:25:42 AM

#1, oh please... most people who buy a Mac ask us how to put Vista on it. Most people who buyt a Mac don't even know what OS X is. We've helped a large number of people who own businesses that have kids in school that come to us "for help" because some asshat at the university told them that a Mac was "mandatory" - when that does not work out for the student, we end up configuring Vista on the machine - and yes... there is a huge cost penalty for Mac users. "Everyone that buys an Apple wants OSX. Not everyone who buys a PC wants Windows." Everyone? Really? and you would know because....?

You cannot tell me that the components found in a Mac are not more cheaply found in/on PC's.
You cannot tell me that there are enough choices, or new hardware innovations to avoid the other side of the Apple tax - the penalty paid for selecting one in the context of less for more - fewer ports, fewer choices and more cost as a result - more than the already much higher entry point.

Finally, as regards "innovative design" I do not think it can be said that Apple/Mac offer anything by way of aesthetics that cannot be found on PC's of 2009. There are some amazing PC designs and happily, there are enough that the PC buyer does not have to look and act like everyone else in the process. The biggest Apple/Mac tax there is, is looking like a tard that either has too much money for his/her own good, or worse, a tard that can't pay his light bill, but buys a Mac regardless.

#4 By 23275 (24.196.4.141) at Tuesday, January 06, 2009 09:36:38 AM

Drop a Blu-ray disc in one of our machines and watch the user quite literally say: "Wow!"

Drop a Blu-ray disc in a Mac.... nada... can't play it and never will.

I mention this one because do the math... HD downloads stink when compared to Blu-ray. They really do. The bit rate just ain't there in the download.

I mention it, because differentiation really does matter and being able to enjoy the very best video and audio does matter...

Consider this... people spend a good bit of hard earned money on computers - they expect to be able to do about anything on them... when they find out, despite their investment, that they can't do x, y, or z on a Mac without "spending more" or AT ALL... they get pretty upset.

We could move onto the Mac missing built-in EVDO/3G, etc... but that would be over-kill - regardless of how it stands as a really big deal for people. About Any PC based laptop can be made to use a multi-radio internal card and add 3G/EVDO. I hope they add that today.

and finally... by the time you get done adding all the USB based do-dads, dongles and third party clutter, that new Mac looks like a high priced hooker on life support in a plastic surgeon's operatory. funny how Apple's ads never show what a real-world Mac looks like... a daisy-chained USB mess at best, or incomplete at worst.

#5 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at Tuesday, January 06, 2009 10:31:35 AM

#3: But don't forget that you live in MSWorld, where everyone loves Microsoft and thinks Windows is awesome. In MSWorld, people buy toasters and then run to you to install Vista on them for a superior bread-browning experience and the ecosystem of jam & marmalade that go along with it.

Everyone? Really? and you would know because....?

I've never heard of anyone buying a Mac so that they could wipe it and install Windows. I've heard of thousands that bought a PC, wiped Windows and then installed whatever. I've heard mythical reports of MSLand, where people buy Macs and then rush to install Vista on them, but in the real world it doesn't happen that way, or at least in any statistically meaningful way.

You cannot tell me that the components found in a Mac are not more cheaply found in/on PC's.

You're going off again. This thread is about the supposed Apple Tax, which has absolutely nothing to do with the price of hardware components. Edit: I have no idea of the unit price of mb components and neither do you.

You know, you're starting to approach levels of absurdity not seen since parkkker was in his heyday. He would say anything at all, no matter how silly, to try and defend MS, and now you're doing the same thing.

#4: What does any of this have to do with the topic at hand? Yes, PCs are cheaper. So what? How does that relate to the MS Tax, or the nonsensical Apple Tax that this article talks about? Any why do you go on about Blu-Ray? When I want to watch a BD, I use my home theatre like the vast majority of people and not my PC. As for saying Mac will never play Blu-Ray, I thought you might have learned your lesson after telling me a year or two ago that Vista would never be hacked thanks to the alphabet soup of acronyms it has.

This post was edited by Latch on Tuesday, January 06, 2009 at 10:36.

#6 By 23275 (24.196.4.141) at Tuesday, January 06, 2009 11:09:04 AM

component pricing is entirely relevant. and I know exactly what components cost... I buy them each and every day and their prices are published. and no, we don't buy on the spot market, but the same markets all other buy from. You think the fabs and foundrys Apple uses are unique? Silly - they don't own a single fab and the lines that build their systems also build many others.

You must not get out much, because there are plenty of people who own Macs that run Windows Vista and never boot into OS X. I know of several parents that inherited their kid's Mac after buying them a new HP, or computer from myself. They run Vista and miss a lot of the ports and features native to a Windows laptop.

Very large numbers of PC's also connect to HDTV's - we do it all the time and remote the desktop via UW to support productivity. A great many use a PC as a media HUB and extend its experience. Silent PC's are quite normal.

There is an Apple tax. It is substantial and it goes well beyond being more expensive.

#7 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at Tuesday, January 06, 2009 11:50:32 AM

#6: You buy components every day for your small shop, and somehow that gives you insight into how much a mainboard fab pays? Please. Besides, Apple isn't reinventing the wheel; they're likely taking a commodity mainboard from an established manufacturer and getting the plant to customize it slightly. Now you've got my curiosity piquied; you're an MS parnter that does custom boxes. Why are you buying components, and every day at that? Do you have your own plant in the back making Ketchum-brand mainboards?

You must not get out much,

I must admit that I don't spend much time in MSLand where all these amazing things you talk about happen. Next you'll be telling me about the MS cats that chase the Apple dogs down Microsoft Lane.

Very large numbers of PC's also connect to HDTV's

Really? How many? Could you present it in the context of a percentage of total PC & TV owners? <1%? <0.001%??

There is an Apple tax. It is substantial and it goes well beyond being more expensive.

OK then, if you insist. Strangely, only microbots seem to believe there is such a thing as an Apple Tax whereas the rest of the world is aware of the MS Tax and what it's about. Neither you nor parkkker have ever bothered to explain how exactly having a higher-priced offering is considered a tax.

#8 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at Tuesday, January 06, 2009 12:48:13 PM

#7: Apple markets themselves as a Porsche when in reality they are just a Camry. Would you pay 3 to 4 times more for a Porsche body on a Camry frame with a Camry engine and Camry suspension? I didn't think so.

You criticize Lloyd for generalities like "Very large numbers of PC's also connect to HDTV's" yet in your 1st post you stated: "Everyone that buys an Apple wants OSX"

Everyone? Really? You know this how?

"I've heard mythical reports of MSLand, where people buy Macs and then rush to install Vista"

So what Mythology is Bootcamp from?

If you have to install another OS to perform some feature or run some program that OSX does not support then that is an Apple TAX. And I also believe that their overpriced hardware falls into that category as well.

#9 By 23275 (24.196.4.141) at Tuesday, January 06, 2009 12:55:00 PM

Latch, we build a lot of machines. Our buildings span 38,00 sq feet and we've added a third.
Members run in the hundreds of thousands and we support 1008 SMB's in 17 markets. We constantly track component pricing and manage inventory perhaps better than even the biggest OEM. So well that we sell MES and Inv Mgmnt ERP software we built. We do not sell to the public, because we deliver our hardware as a service - operating three unique companies around hardware, software and services. We do not out-source our builds - all are built in-house and all are supported directly by the people that build them - so we very much get the high touch Apple attempts to hold out (they fail at it in my opinion, but sustain the illusion well). We order daily. We build and deliver daily/nightly - baking in hosted and managed services for each new network, or system.

You would probably be stunned by the number of businesses that integrate and use HD TV and video. All practices we manage from aestehtics to ocular and orthodontic - all of them use and transport media from Vista PC's. Same is true in legal... case presentation and certainly in restaurants of most types. Each of these customers also has homes and into them we extend the office and media services. We are not at all unique, or alone - many partners do exactly the same thing. We even do play and activity centers - you know, event oriented places where kids have birthdays - all use HD media and all run Vista. It is great for that. So yeah, we're a busy group of people and Apple is by far more costly, less capable and frankly, less fun... one has to endure far too many snarks and small minded people in that camp. for sure there are some nice things about Apple/Mac and Apple fans, but there are too many reasons to let that dog lay where it is - high cost is only one of many.

#10 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at Tuesday, January 06, 2009 01:28:13 PM

#8: I don't know if I would agree that Apple markets themselves as a Porsche compared to a Camry, but whatever.

You criticize Lloyd for generalities like "Very large numbers of PC's also connect to HDTV's" yet in your 1st post you stated: "Everyone that buys an Apple wants OSX"

We go back & forth like this; it was my turn. Neither of us can "prove" anything to anyone else. We all make sweeping statements and use weasel words based on our personal anecdotal observations because that's all we really have here.

So what Mythology is Bootcamp from?

It's for people like AWBrian. I was talking about these users that Ketchum claims buy a Mac and then wipe it to install Vista. Actually, I might have made an incorrect assumption. Perhaps he meant they install Vista under bootcamp as opposed to a complete hd wipe; he wasn't clear on that. At any rate, this is not an indication of any weakness from Apple or superiority of Windows. It's the reality of dealing with an entrenched monopoly that thrives off of closed, proprietary file formats to achieve lock-in. For example, I doubt AWBrian would need bootcamp if MS Publisher files were compatible with anything in the universe.

If you have to install another OS to perform some feature or run some program that OSX does not support then that is an Apple TAX.

Um, no. A tax is an added charge that you cannot avoid that gives you no value, or at least it is in the context of the MS tax.

And I also believe that their overpriced hardware falls into that category as well.

By your definition, there is also a Ford tax, a Chevy tax, a Dodge tax, a Honda tax etc etc etc because Lada's are cheaper. There is a big difference between a tax and a premium, even if the end result is the same -- you pay more than you otherwise could have. The difference (and I'll say it yet again) is that with the MS tax, you're charged for Windows on a brand PC whether you want Windows or not. The same isn't true for Apple. Just having higher prices isn't a tax, no matter how much MS and it's minions wish that were the case. AWBrian wasn't forced to pay for software he didn't want. He wanted Publisher to service his customers, and therefore he spends the money to enhance his business service. That's a cost of doing business, not a tax.

#9: Your business sounds impressive and you deserve credit for building it to where it is now (assuming that's what you did).

You would probably be stunned by the number of businesses that integrate and use HD TV and video.

Not really, but I look at the whole pie and not just the business part like you do. Consumners vastly outnumber companies.

#11 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at Tuesday, January 06, 2009 01:28:57 PM

AW strikes again.

This post was edited by Latch on Tuesday, January 06, 2009 at 13:30.

#12 By 3746 (72.12.161.38) at Tuesday, January 06, 2009 02:11:18 PM

In the last couple years I have run into quite a few people that have bought a Mac and did not know what they were getting into. It has really got started since the whole switch campaign began and the anti vista stuff has been flying around. The last one was a real estate agent that for some reason got talked into buying a macbook pro because it was "better". A couple of grand later she realized that she couldn't access th industry online website because it was IE only. So a copy of Vista went on and she spends 95 percent of her time in Windows. She kept telling me the whole time that Apple is better I guess trying to convince herself that she could have spent half the money and been better off.

#13 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at Tuesday, January 06, 2009 02:21:35 PM

#12: And if her industry portal wasn't stupidly tied to IE, she'd be happy as a clam with her Mac. The fact that she had to change her entire computer for the sake of one website is a perfect example of how MS and its proprietary web nonsense is bad for computing, and how coding to standards is so important from both a usability and development perspective.

#14 By 3746 (72.12.161.38) at Tuesday, January 06, 2009 03:45:45 PM

#13

Actually no she wouldn't have been happy as a clam - the industry website was just one example. The fact is that the applications and things she needed were windows based. She took the advice of someone who had an agenda (that Apple is better) and didn't take into account her actual needs.

#15 By 16797 (65.95.8.9) at Tuesday, January 06, 2009 03:54:07 PM

#13 Yeah but that portal *IS* tied to IE.

So, in short: if only there weren't sites tied to IE and if only intranet web apps weren't using Win authentication and if only you could open Publisher files (ask AWBrian) and if only you could run SQL Server, Visual Studio or AutoCAD and if only companies weren't using Active Directory to centrally manage networks and if only all those games weren't Win only..

And if only pigs could fly, you wouldn't be an asshat.

#16 By 89445 (65.26.238.118) at Tuesday, January 06, 2009 09:11:06 PM

#13

While the Mac is a nice machine, its a little late to the game. People are so used to the applications that run in Windows, have so much time and money invested in them, that the Mac is foreign. And you can blame it on Microsoft and their influence, but that isn't going to change those facts.

Reading your responses is quite entertaining.

The Apple tax, btw, is not the same kind of tax you talk about with Microsoft. You see, the Apple tax is the extra money you pay to Apple to achieve what you can get in the Windows world for oh, 1/2 to 1/3 the price. The tax you pay to Apple by only being "allowed" to run their OS on their own overpriced (and come now, no one can deny this) hardware. Now imagine if Microsoft made you run Windows on only hardware they provided. OMG! Anti-trust nut heads from around the world would be opening their pockets for Microsoft to pour the cash in!!

Another thing I find rather amusing... let's add to the tax. One of the biggest developments this year was virtualization for the Mac so it could (anyone want to jump in here? :) ) RUN WINDOWS APPLICATIONS! Now why would anyone want to do that if Macs have it all? Why was the buzz all around the world going crazy with news stories when this came out? Ok, now that we bought our overpriced Mac and found that it can't do everything the PC does, we need to spend MORE money so that we can proudly run Windows again. But wait, why then did we buy that Mac in the first place??

I rest my case.

#17 By 15406 (99.240.65.32) at Tuesday, January 06, 2009 09:49:48 PM

#14: That's different then. If her work world revolved around Windows apps & data then it was certainly not very smart for her to get a Mac.

#15: Most of what you listed can be easily worked around. The rest is changing as we speak thanks to the ongoing adoption of open standards in web and file protocols. This is progress and this is a good thing.

#16: RUN WINDOWS APPLICATIONS! Now why would anyone want to do that if Macs have it all?

Nobody here said Macs have it all. Nothing has it all. Millions of people use Macs every day without touching Windows other than indirectly (IIS web servers, for example). Some require Windows for various reasons and use some type of VM. I do not believe they represent a significant proportion of Mac users, but I don't know for sure as I've never seen any definitive polls on the subject. Why would someone buy a diesel car when they know there isn't a diesel pump around for 30 miles? You seem to believe that most Mac users immediately regret their decision and then limp back to Windows via VM. Why do you believe this to be true?

#18 By 23275 (24.196.4.141) at Wednesday, January 07, 2009 08:51:23 AM

Mac buyer's remorse is often quite real - I've seen people really twisted up about it, and equally, I have seen plenty of people twisted up over Microsoft (I hope they read this).

Many people we work with have tried Macs in at least some way - usually opposite high school, or college age kids. Despite the marketing and the perception, the Macs have not always worked out. A lot of parents simply do not know and they come to us after the fact and explain what they have going on and that the Mac sent to school works with some of the school's network, but not all of it - that happens about 80% of the time. It's frustrating for all.
Interestingly, many blame Microsoft. They say: "If Vista weren't so bad..." - without ever having seen or used it! MS quite obviously blew the communication around Vista - for those that understand it all, it is pretty clear what happened. For everyone else they just get frustrated. That frustration is real. When we show them Vista and how we use it, they get even more upset and ask: "Why the heck hasn't Microsoft shown this?"

The point is, that IF people had known that Vista didn't quite suck as bad as people said, that they probably would not have bought the Mac. The next question is: "Can you put Vista on this (the Mac)?" - which we then do. - which is why they are angry with MS.

#19 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at Wednesday, January 07, 2009 12:33:15 PM

#18: The root cause of the problem in your example lies in proprietary network protocols that everyone except MS must reverse-engineer, and with MS making regular undocumented changes, it's a moving target. It's one of MS's oldest tactics, and it has the added bonus of making uneducated users blame everyone BUT Microsoft for the situation Microsoft created.

The next question is: "Can you put Vista on this (the Mac)?" - which we then do. - which is why they are angry with MS.

So Macs suck because they're not Windows PCs, and MS sucks because they don't advertise enough how awesome they are? I must admit you're certainly consistent with your messages.

#20 By 16797 (65.93.26.31) at Wednesday, January 07, 2009 01:16:38 PM

#19
1. Nobody gives a fuck about root cause. Either it works or it doesn't.
2. MS protocols are available for about $15,000. You have to pay only *once*. Samba team has used this option already (last year or 2007, I think).
3. Commercial entities pay up to 0.4% of their sales to use MS protocols (MS asked for at least 6% I think, EU said 0.4%) and that is ONLY if there are MS patents in those protocols that they want to implement.
4. All protocols are well documented (how do you think MS developers use them?)
5. So, Apple could pay and have all it needs to make it work. (Nothing uncommon. For example, MS paid to Apple to use certain GUI elements.)
6. The problem is not to get protocol information. The problem is that you still have to implement proper behaviour (group policies, for example). But, since Apple developers are busy making all those fancy icons and windows dance all over, I guess they simply don't have time for this. It's not cool at all for average Mac user.

This post was edited by gonzo on Wednesday, January 07, 2009 at 13:19.

#21 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at Wednesday, January 07, 2009 01:47:37 PM

#20: Do you think maybe you could try to express yourself without profanity?

1. Bzzt, wrong.

2. Only $15,000? What a steal. I remember Samba getting a license a couple of years ago, but who knows what's changed since then? Is it a license to get ongoing updated doc or just a snapshot in time? Also, see #6.

4. Hahahaha, that one doesn't pass the laugh test. You've seen this doc, have you? Their doc is so good that it took literally years for them to deliver server protocol API docs under threat of EU antitrust fines and it was still deemed to be crap by the special master that MS themselves chose to evaluate the doc.

6. Having a full SMB API may not necessarily tie in the other things like AD, so it may be impossible to implement without more MS IP and the discriminatory nonsense MS imposes along with it. I don't know those details, but I don't for a second think that Apple devs are so dumb that they can't follow a "well documented" (as you call it) protocol and implement it.

#22 By 16797 (65.93.26.31) at Wednesday, January 07, 2009 02:04:17 PM

Perfect documentation? It doesn't exist. In all these years I've spent working as developer, I've never seen it. It's always either too much or not enough.

Another expert, during EU trial, said that quest for perfect documentation is a quest for holy grail.

EU has reviewed the documentation and approved it. How about that? Yeah, I know, you'll say something else...

But wait, didn't you actually say that: "...everyone except MS must reverse-engineer.."??

And now since that is obviously completely wrong (doc is available, protocols too), you're simply talking about something else and so on and on and on..

Try and get a job in IT. Maybe then you won't look so silly :(

#23 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at Wednesday, January 07, 2009 02:56:48 PM

#22: Perfect documentation? It doesn't exist.

Who said anything about 'perfect doc', Mr. Strawman?

Another expert, during EU trial, said that quest for perfect documentation is a quest for holy grail.

Who said anything about 'perfect doc', Mr. Strawman?

EU has reviewed the documentation and approved it.

I hadn't heard that. Link? All I remember is year after year of the API being completely inadequate. Remember that big fine MS got for their years of foot-dragging?

At any rate, we're getting way off topic, and I have no idea that SMB has even the foggiest relation to the problem Ketchum was talking about.

btw I'm starting to think you're really the old mini-moore. He was also famous for sitting back and offering no opinions at all, but he's right there to snipe from the sidelines like some cowardly nancy-boy. That fits you to a T. Not man enough to go on record with an opinion and debate it. Just snipes. No problem, though. I can take anything you can throw and come back with a cherry on top.

#24 By 16797 (65.93.26.31) at Wednesday, January 07, 2009 03:58:37 PM

Opinions? I could not care less about those, especially when they come from someone like you. Facts matter to me.

See, for example, you said earlier that "Most of what you listed can be easily worked around."

But it is immediately clear to me that you have never even remotely tried to work around those problems yourself. If you did, you'd know that it is *far* from easy. You can say 50 times that it is easily worked around, but you will never explain how exactly it's done easily. That's why your opinion is useless --- it does not stem from your hands-on experience, it is that obvious.

Link? How do you think they (MS) were able to reach an agreement with EU?

"Microsoft's documentation finally gets a oui/ja/yes from Europe"
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061124-8282.html

Enough for me. Get a job, seriously. And see if you can easily introduce Mac/OSX onto Win network :) Good luck.

This post was edited by gonzo on Wednesday, January 07, 2009 at 16:00.

#25 By 15406 (99.240.65.32) at Wednesday, January 07, 2009 09:58:00 PM

#24: Of course you can't run purely native Windows apps on Mac without virtualization, but you can often find workarounds for many of the things you listed that allow to work with the data. There is an AD plugin for Mac. You can develop .NET apps on a Mac using a variety of development IDEs. MySQL runs just fine on a Mac for database development. AFAIK, the other apps you listed can export their data to formats that Mac apps can read. There are ways to interoperate. You can always create scenarios where interoperability is impossible, though.

#26 By 282299 (94.23.244.108) at Saturday, December 19, 2009 04:58:20 PM

Hi guys/Gals

If you ever wanted to give your children and loved one or some one staying far from you, that special surprise christmas gift then here is the chance.

If you are in USA or Canada then Just go to http://bit.ly/4Qbrs2 and you can order custom made gifts delievered to you by Santa :)

Happy Christmas to you all. Have lots of fun. :)

replica watches