These laptop hunter ads really have the people just casually looking at the macs, and dismissing that option entirely, with just a "that's too small" or "too expensive" and walking away. They aren't investigating any of the choices, including the windows pc's, any further than just the specs and price listed on the sign in front of the machine. So seemingly these ads are targeting people who just walk into a store and pick out a machine based on no research and shallow impressions of signage in the store. Do people really purchase these costly items like that?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Demands Microsoft Pull Laptop Hunter Ads
- Thread starter WickedRabbit
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Actually, I think MS are being very misleading in what they DON'T mention in the ads.
They're quick to point out the hardware comparisons... funny how MS don't make the hardware by the way.
And don't actually comment on the state of the operating system... which is what they DO make.
If MS believed in their product as much as apple believed in theirs, you'd see a massive feature point on the Windows operating system, and how it's so intuitive, and has all the great easy to use application.
Kind of like what apple do.
I LOL @ MS... again.
They're quick to point out the hardware comparisons... funny how MS don't make the hardware by the way.
And don't actually comment on the state of the operating system... which is what they DO make.
If MS believed in their product as much as apple believed in theirs, you'd see a massive feature point on the Windows operating system, and how it's so intuitive, and has all the great easy to use application.
Kind of like what apple do.
I LOL @ MS... again.
Well, you shouldn't. How about a $1549 laptop with an 11" screen?
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=9247184&type=product&id=1218089759174
Now, look. I realize that your larger point is that you can easily get a $1300 Windows laptop with a dedicated graphics card, and you can't with a Mac. But it's not the black-and-white issue that you tried to make it. That's the point. It's a question of which market segments are being served, not a one-to-one comparison.
Ditto -
what are we expecting?
a 30 minute ad that goes into all of the pros and cons with supporting expert witnesses?
a reality show?
a CNN special report?
I think that the one thing everyone has to realize is that Macs ARE overpriced... I think the best comparison is to Sony Vaios, which are also expensive, with quality build materials and a focus on style.
I just bought a Macbook Pro 13'' 2.53. Being a grad student, I was able to get it for 1399 and getting the free iPod touch (which I've been trying to sell) takes the price down to approximately 1199...
My fiancee got a Vaio FW, 2.53 ghz, 4gb RAM, 320 gb HDD, 16.4 inch screen, 512 MB Mobility Radeon 4650---in other words, all specs the same or better (on the graphics card, substantially better). Granted, her computer weighs 6.5 pounds or so and mine weighs 4.5. I wanted portability.
However, suppose I had looked to Sony (which, again, is considered to be an overpriced PC brand) for something in the same weight class. The SR model weighs 4.1 pounds (less than my macbook pro), and I can give it a 320 gb harddrive, 4 gb RAM, 2.53ghz, Radeon 4750... for 1379. So, technically this is cheaper than the MacBook Pro I got and is SUBSTANTIALLY better (graphics would trounce the abysmal 9400M, and the harddrive is quite a bit larger)... the macbook literally has nothing over it besides multitouch and being a bit thinner? I went for the Macbook Pro mostly because the free iPod Touch brings the price down another 200 bucks or so (assuming I can ever sell the damned thing) and because I wanted to go with OS X after years with Windows.
Also, people seriously need to get over Windows being crappy---it's NOT. It's rock stable, it's secure, it's fast, and it has every bit of productivity that any other OS offers. I personally like some of the things OS X does more than the way Windows does it and also some of the ways Winodws does things over OS X. Nonetheless, there is no way to justify paying a huge excess in price for just OS X.
I think that a big part of this is Apples model scheme: Macbook Pro is more expensive than the Macbook and the models have to scale appropriately within the Pro class: of course the 15 inch is more expensive than the 13 inch, right? But the problem is that Apple charges ridiculous premiums. Unfortunately Apple doesn't seem to NEED to change its pricing. The 13 inch MBP is selling like crazy---I needed a replacement and when I first went in, EVERY STORE IN THE COUNTY was sold out.
I'm relatively happy with my purchase, and it's a beautiful computer. Nonetheless, I really wish Apple would consider offering more competitive price points.
I just bought a Macbook Pro 13'' 2.53. Being a grad student, I was able to get it for 1399 and getting the free iPod touch (which I've been trying to sell) takes the price down to approximately 1199...
My fiancee got a Vaio FW, 2.53 ghz, 4gb RAM, 320 gb HDD, 16.4 inch screen, 512 MB Mobility Radeon 4650---in other words, all specs the same or better (on the graphics card, substantially better). Granted, her computer weighs 6.5 pounds or so and mine weighs 4.5. I wanted portability.
However, suppose I had looked to Sony (which, again, is considered to be an overpriced PC brand) for something in the same weight class. The SR model weighs 4.1 pounds (less than my macbook pro), and I can give it a 320 gb harddrive, 4 gb RAM, 2.53ghz, Radeon 4750... for 1379. So, technically this is cheaper than the MacBook Pro I got and is SUBSTANTIALLY better (graphics would trounce the abysmal 9400M, and the harddrive is quite a bit larger)... the macbook literally has nothing over it besides multitouch and being a bit thinner? I went for the Macbook Pro mostly because the free iPod Touch brings the price down another 200 bucks or so (assuming I can ever sell the damned thing) and because I wanted to go with OS X after years with Windows.
Also, people seriously need to get over Windows being crappy---it's NOT. It's rock stable, it's secure, it's fast, and it has every bit of productivity that any other OS offers. I personally like some of the things OS X does more than the way Windows does it and also some of the ways Winodws does things over OS X. Nonetheless, there is no way to justify paying a huge excess in price for just OS X.
I think that a big part of this is Apples model scheme: Macbook Pro is more expensive than the Macbook and the models have to scale appropriately within the Pro class: of course the 15 inch is more expensive than the 13 inch, right? But the problem is that Apple charges ridiculous premiums. Unfortunately Apple doesn't seem to NEED to change its pricing. The 13 inch MBP is selling like crazy---I needed a replacement and when I first went in, EVERY STORE IN THE COUNTY was sold out.
I'm relatively happy with my purchase, and it's a beautiful computer. Nonetheless, I really wish Apple would consider offering more competitive price points.
Hm.. Sounds like someone who feels ripped off because they bought Mac but doesn't want to use Mac OS X...
Anyone who used OS X would know that's what the extra cost is for.. In addition to the tested hardware combos...
If they don't use OS X they shouldn't buy Mac. Waste of money.
Please, I beg you, send me a link to another system with the UNIQUE Apple hardware features I listed...For example, I have never seen a "Standard" uni-body dell, hp, or Asus laptop...ever. Again, you only show that you know nothing about Apple's offerings and still try to chime in as if you have some form of valid input on the matter. Asinine.
The reason for the call
I presume the laptop add says you can't buy a MacBook Pro for under some figure but this is no longer true because Apple dropped its prices. Therefore the ad is now incorrect. This is why Apple legal called asking MS to pull that bit of false advertising.
I presume the laptop add says you can't buy a MacBook Pro for under some figure but this is no longer true because Apple dropped its prices. Therefore the ad is now incorrect. This is why Apple legal called asking MS to pull that bit of false advertising.
Yeah they really emarassed themselves with this one if this is how it really went down. Although I'm not sure about the part where apple said they powered their prices by $100 because that's beyond lame.
[edit]: nvm. It seems to be that it was the Microsoft guy that gave the $100 number.
Anything that gets Apple to lower their prices is a GOOD thing for Mac users. Apple's hardware is ridiculously overpriced and undervalued, which shouldn't be the case after the move to Intel, but is because they have no direct hardware competition since no one else is allowed to run OS X. Here we have indirect competition (hardware + OS as a package), but even that apparently has an effect. I never thought I'd say something positive about Microsoft, but good show old beans! Apple needs to be brought back down to earth and realize they shouldn't get to charge $2600 for $800 worth of hardware (e.g. Mac Pro versus comparable PC hardware for primary functions). What's scary is how many Mac users voted negatively. I always assumed the illogical one-sided opinion fanatics were a minority in the Mac community, but now I'm not so sure. The majority of Mac users seem to WANT higher prices and less power from their Macs (at a nearly 4 to 1 ratio!) 
This thread should be about the MS COO and his claim about a phone call, and the ads at the core of this discussion. Somehow it degenerated into the "which PC has more value" which is on numerous other threads.
But I'll bite and add my $.02. A few years ago when my kids were younger we bought a Mac which came with iMovie, Garageband, and integrated FireWire, which you couldn't get at the time anywhere else.
Today my son is a professional creative artist, moving on to professional equivalents of those early tools, and the early signs are promising that he will be successful. He may not ever be rich, but it seems a good bet that he will be happy and fulfilled. And it would not have happened without that Mac and all that came with it.
So which is worth more? In my case, the Mac, and the difference has been "priceless".
But I'll bite and add my $.02. A few years ago when my kids were younger we bought a Mac which came with iMovie, Garageband, and integrated FireWire, which you couldn't get at the time anywhere else.
Today my son is a professional creative artist, moving on to professional equivalents of those early tools, and the early signs are promising that he will be successful. He may not ever be rich, but it seems a good bet that he will be happy and fulfilled. And it would not have happened without that Mac and all that came with it.
So which is worth more? In my case, the Mac, and the difference has been "priceless".
I am using OS X. It is the only OS instaled on my 17" MBP.
I also have an iMac which has Leopard 10.5.7 and nothing else.
So far, you are batting 0%.
I've used OS X.
It's not worth an extra $1,500+warranty+tax+$500 to upgrade the hardware ... for the PC comparisons I made earlier in the thread.
Not even close.
OS X = another Unix Distro.
I've been using Unix for 20 years. That's probably longer than the majority of cult members.
Something that Microsoft fails to mention here and it's under-estimated by a lot of people is that besides the cost of the PC, there is also a yearly cost for Antivirus software, Firewall, Anti-Spyware....plus maintenance with Vista, downtime because of virus...etc.
Microsoft is not being truthful about the whole thing, but Apple asking for this is also a bit vague.
Who started pointing fingers about whose product? "Hi I'm a Mac, I'm a PC...and I suck..." Microsoft didn't ask Apple to pull these.
I'm an Apple lover, but this one isn't justified.
Oh well. Let them have at it.
Microsoft is not being truthful about the whole thing, but Apple asking for this is also a bit vague.
Who started pointing fingers about whose product? "Hi I'm a Mac, I'm a PC...and I suck..." Microsoft didn't ask Apple to pull these.
I'm an Apple lover, but this one isn't justified.
Oh well. Let them have at it.
Exactly.
The "Laptop Hunters" ad campaign is entirely irrelevant as Microsoft doesn't make hardware. Sure you can get an $800 PC laptop with the same hardware as a $1200 Mac laptop, but what about the operating system and support? Can you get reliable tech support for all the problems you'll have with Vista? What about when a new virus deletes all of your photos and videos? If you're having a hardware problem, can you take your PC to a "Windows Store" in town and get it fixed the same or next day?
Vista and MS tech support is so bad that Microsoft has resorted to advertising for something that they don't actually produce? [sarcasm]Totally didn't see that coming. [/sarcasm] No wonder MS is releasing Windows 7 for free to Vista users...
Microsoft - not even content with 90% market share. They certainly are greedy I'll give them that.
The difference here is that Microsoft is literally running ads that are completely FALSE!
If Apple gets in trouble for 3G speed claims, then why can Microsoft make comparison of models in completely different classes and show prices that are not even true???
That is FALSE ADVERTISING PERIOD, not to mention how deceptive they are in the first place with all the withheld facts.
If Apple gets in trouble for 3G speed claims, then why can Microsoft make comparison of models in completely different classes and show prices that are not even true???
That is FALSE ADVERTISING PERIOD, not to mention how deceptive they are in the first place with all the withheld facts.
The cult of Apple is showing cracks. IMHO, they may very well have peaked.
I think they will own the MP3 player market for a good, long, time ... but the computer market may be seeing it's best days right now.
$1,299 at Best Buy for an Asus 2.66Ghz I9 with 9GB of Ram, a 1TB Hard Drive and a GTX 260 graphics card.
$2,699 at Best Buy for an Apple 2.66Ghz I9 with 3GB of Ram, 640GB Hard drive and a GT 120 graphics card.
Twice the price, half the hardware.
It's just not making sense anymore, kids.
^^ This
And BTW, thats the average price, there are cheaper systems with even better specs (like GTS250 graphics) from brands like HP and Gateway.
I've been an Apple user for over 15 years and I've NEVER seen the Apple tax as high as it is right now. The switch to Intel was suppose to bring commonality in hardware and cheaper prices but instead we have the same premium for graphics cards that we had with the PPC options or are forced (if we wish to remain in the Mac ecosphere) to choose between hardware that is inadequate for our uses ~imac~ or entirely overkill ~mac pro~.
I get asked a lot for my advice from people looking to upgrade their PC or possibly move to a Mac. It's getting real hard justify the premium that Apple places on their products for many people. I'm not saying there isn't a difference in quality or end user experience mind you, or even total cost of ownership. But IMHO the value proposition is definitely starting to turn back towards MS in many cases, sad to say.
Why would MS mention that, when it is not true? Firewall and anti-spyware are included with OS at no additional cost/maintenance. In addition, there is free Antivirus available from third parties. On top of that, no one is obligated by Microsoft to purchase any additional software with the computer. Plus, if you don't have internet, there is very little justification to purchase anti-virus. If you do use internet, many service providers offer free anti-virus with it.
Apple has the right to ask for them to stop...and they also have the right to ask pigs to fly!
One of the best selling points for Macs is the lack of need for ant-virus software. That's a money saver right there, however, I can understand the immediate perception of a windows machine being a better value when you do a side by side comparison of hardware specs.
Oh one more thing, Turner was wrong, at least one of the ads WAS scripted. The first one I think.
One of the best selling points for Macs is the lack of need for ant-virus software. That's a money saver right there, however, I can understand the immediate perception of a windows machine being a better value when you do a side by side comparison of hardware specs.
Oh one more thing, Turner was wrong, at least one of the ads WAS scripted. The first one I think.
This thread should be about the MS COO and his claim about a phone call, and the ads at the core of this discussion. Somehow it degenerated into the "which PC has more value" which is on numerous other threads.
But I'll bite and add my $.02. A few years ago when my kids were younger we bought a Mac which came with iMovie, Garageband, and integrated FireWire, which you couldn't get at the time anywhere else.
Today my son is a professional creative artist, moving on to professional equivalents of those early tools, and the early signs are promising that he will be successful. He may not ever be rich, but it seems a good bet that he will be happy and fulfilled. And it would not have happened without that Mac and all that came with it.
So which is worth more? In my case, the Mac, and the difference has been "priceless".
Sounds like a Mastercard commercial
Incidentally, how did you pay for your Mac - you could sell your story to Mastercard, they could do some cross-advertising
christ on a pony . . . it's a commercial!
get a grip guys - if apple had any balls they'd launch a counter ad (which i'm sure they will), instead of just calling and asking them to stop.
this is marketing. are you telling me apple can dish it out but shouldn't be expected to take it?
honestly, i'm disapointed that they actually called MS asking them to pull the ads, a bit sophmoric.
get a grip guys - if apple had any balls they'd launch a counter ad (which i'm sure they will), instead of just calling and asking them to stop.
this is marketing. are you telling me apple can dish it out but shouldn't be expected to take it?
honestly, i'm disapointed that they actually called MS asking them to pull the ads, a bit sophmoric.
This seriously needs to stop. Vista had some problems at launch but is in great shape right now. And you know what, OS X was unstable and lacked a lot of critical features when it came out. In my opinion, it wasn't until 10.4 that OS X had the features necessary to make it useful in my workflow. Windows 7 looks like it will be fantastic. And if you REALLY care about a stable operating system with lots of productivity features, get a cheap PC and just use Linux ;-)
Edit: I should mention that I like Leopard and I think that Snow Leopard looks fantastic as well.
The difference here is that Microsoft is literally running ads that are completely FALSE!
If Apple gets in trouble for 3G speed claims, then why can Microsoft make comparison of models in completely different classes and show prices that are not even true???
That is FALSE ADVERTISING PERIOD, not to mention how deceptive they are in the first place with all the withheld facts.
I see. The UK ASA have pinged Apple twice in recent times for, well, lying about the iPhone's capabilities.