Macs: are you just buying the logo?
If Apple was only an overpriced logo, they'd already be out of business. Alex Kidman goes head to head with Steve Ballmer.
As PC Authority reported yesterday, Microsoft's back on the attacking foot against Apple again, with CEO Steve Ballmer stating that the company offers only an "overpriced logo" for the "same hardware". I'll grab his full quote here, so I can dissect it a little, if I may:
"Paying an extra $US500 for a computer in this environment - same piece of hardware - paying $US500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be."
It might surprise you to find out that there are areas where I do agree with Steve.
Undoubtedly, times are tough, and tough economic decisions are being made on a micro and macro level. I wouldn't expect quite as many high-end Mac Pros to be shuffling off the shelves as may have been the case twelve months ago -- but then again, the same is probably true of Dell Adamos.
Equally, there are areas where I think Apple does overcharge for some components -- memory being the classic example -- and some items -- such as the previously discussed iPod Shuffle -- that revolve around being more of a badge of honour than a sensible buying choice.
That having been said, I still think he's wrong, and I think he's being very, very careful with his choice of words there too.
For a start, you've got to notice that he only targets the hardware side of the equation, not the software side. Even if you leave out the "my OS is better than your OS" posturing (which I'll get to in a second), how much do you charge for Vista Ultimate, Steve? It's a bit more than that $500 figure at retail, isn't it?
Even if you take bundling the OS with the hardware into account, MS fudges the figures like crazy -- you can't even get an OEM to agree on how much Windows "costs", because Microsoft won't let them talk, and trying to get a "refund" on unwanted Windows has been a source of consternation for Linux fans for more than a decade now, it's not much of an argument. Apple sells OS X for a single set price
I switched to OS X largely because of OS X, and I know that I'm not the only tech journo to have done so. Without naming names, there's even a rather prominent journalist who's authored books on Windows and all its intricacies, edited Windows magazines and who has decades of experience in all things Microsoft, who does his day to day work... on a Macbook. There's a reason for that.
The whole "this many reasons why Windows is better than OS X" argument falls flat the moment that one works and the other doesn't. Don't confuse that with the often evangelical stance that states that Macs are perfect, because they're not. They still do crash, and things do sometimes go wrong. The thing is, I can count the number of Mac crashes I've had in the past three years on my fingers and still have digits left. A Vista system I installed last week? I'm already out of toes.
But even leaving that kind of thing out -- because frankly those arguments bore me to tears -- there's the hardware argument, and just looking at cost ignores a significant factor, and that's build quality. I find it somewhat ironic that Microsoft is going down the hardware route when its most popular hardware product, the Xbox 360, is known just as well for its litany of hardware failures as anything else. RROD anyone?
OK, that might seem like a cheap and unrelated shot, but I do have a point. Prior to picking up my Macbook, I ran Windows XP on a Dell Inspiron 6000 for a couple of years. A nice enough machine, to be sure, but after a couple of years (and there's no nice way to put this) bits started falling off and failing. I never took to it with a hammer or anything, but it began to fail regardless. It was well out of warranty, and I didn't feel like stumping up big cash for keyboard keys, a replacement card reader or new USB ports. That's a function both of the original design and the specifications for build quality at play.
Three years in with the Macbook, and even more travel and arguably tougher handling, and the keys are all still there. The ports still work. It's a little grubby in places, but that's more a function of my four year old getting hold of it with grubby fingers, and a bit of careful Windex application will put paid to that.
Again, I don't want anyone to think I'm progressing the "Macs are perfect" argument, because Apple certainly does have its share of "version 1.0" problems with some hardware products. It's more a matter of good design and quality control having a part to play in how well a product both works and lasts.
There are undoubtedly areas where you can make savings on computer equipment, depending on your needs. I wouldn't buy memory from Apple, and I'm not that fond of their keyboards and mice. Actually, I'm typing this on a Microsoft keyboard, because it's robust, and in the words of a certain computer company, "it just works". Still, economising to buy a cheaper product just because it's on-paper-cheaper can be a false economy.
Other Blog Entries written by Alex Kidman:
Thoughts on this article? Add a comment below.
Comments: 2
|
kevin_watters
Apr 4, 2009 11:29 AM
|
I am very happy with my MAC. I used to be a PC 'guy'... in fact I have my A+, Network+, Security+, MCP, MCSE, MCT, CCNA certs... so I've worked on a lot of PCs. There are some great PCs to be had. And some really lousy ones.
I bought my first MAC around 14 months ago and have not looked back since. Yes, I paid way too much for it... and the superdrive died during a marathon import of music into iTunes... and 6 weeks later was fixed finally. On a PC I would have just gone down to my local computer shop, bought a new drive for $49 and replaced it myself. I DID see a copy of the 'repair' bill that went from the repairer of my MAC back to Apple... the cost of that replacement superdrive ?? $749 In...friggin...sane !
BUT, non the less... I do ALL of my important work on my MAC and use my Dell laptop to do my network management (good ol ActiveX in IE) when I cant physically be on the network. I also play a few games on my PC... but buy games on my consoles more commonly.
I refuse to use Vista. Anybody who stands in front of me and says its a good product is likely to get a black eye. So I use XP. A PC with XP is a great combo and is on a level(ish) field to a MAC in terms of reliability. A PC with Vista, forget it. No comparison. The MAC is FAR FAR superior. AND I would gladly pay three times the price for a MAC before I would buy a Vista PC.
I would have to say that Vista is solely responsible for the MACs popularity of recent years. Vista is just such a dog of a bad product that, yes, people are willing to pay a LOT more to get a MAC. OS X just works.
|
|
Jo
Apr 10, 2009 2:32 AM
|
Apple keyboards & mice work great for me |