Apple Demands Microsoft Pull Laptop Hunter Ads

[Unibody5]

I agree with you, even my Mac Pro box I kept hidden away for a year until I decided I didn't really need it and sold it to downsize.

You sold a box?

 

[gunraidan]

OMG ​

Here we go again. As this been confirmed? I trust this rumor just as the one 4 years ago where SUN was going to buy Apple. Man I remembering a lot of people say it was confirmed. Then turns out that neither company were in talks of such a deal.

Who ever started this rumor knew how to get all the fanbois in a up roar.


Hugh

Microsoft to buy Apple am confirmed.

 

[winmacguy]

So yea, have we had any actual confirmation into what was said? Call me a skeptic but I don't believe a MS guy wouldn't put a spin on what was actually said, if apple lawyers are involved i bet it has to do something with falsehoods in the MS ads.

The following quote is from MDN
"The MacBook Pro that Microsoft falsely advertises as retailing for US$1,999.99 in their ad actually costs $1,699 (see it via YouTube here). It's been that way since June 8th, but Microsoft kept running their false advertising anyway. Microsoft's ad also subliminally throws in the $2,499.99 price because Microsoft has nothing but an upside-down and backwards poorly-faked Mac OS running on junky, thick, heavy, cheap hardware, so in order to move their inferior crap, they have to resort to all kinds of tricks. Just like the ones that Mr. Turner performed in his little act yesterday. $1,999.99 vs. $1,699 is a very significant price difference that Microsoft apparently didn't want to bother fixing until they were compelled to by Apple's legal department. That resulted in the greatest single phone call that Microsoft COO Turner has ever taken in his business history, which says quite a bit all by itself.

In addition to falsely advertising the wrong price for the 15-inch MacBook Pro, the ad has always been misleading in that the shot of the Apple product shown before the price tag is of a now-discontinued aluminum 13-inch MacBook, which at the time retailed for $1,299 and has since been replaced by the new 13-inch MacBook Pro starting at $1,199 or $800 less than the 15.4-inch MacBook Pro price card that Microsoft shows in their misleading ad. Not only do they lie in the visuals, but Microsoft lies in the audio, too: In the ad, while showing the 13-inch MacBook, Microsoft's actress states, "This Mac costs $2000" (see it via YouTube here)."
http://www.macdailynews.com/index.p...o_stop_falsely_advertising_macbook_pro_price/

 

[mdriftmeyer]

The following quote is from MDN
"The MacBook Pro that Microsoft falsely advertises as retailing for US$1,999.99 in their ad actually costs $1,699 (see it via YouTube here). It's been that way since June 8th, but Microsoft kept running their false advertising anyway. Microsoft's ad also subliminally throws in the $2,499.99 price because Microsoft has nothing but an upside-down and backwards poorly-faked Mac OS running on junky, thick, heavy, cheap hardware, so in order to move their inferior crap, they have to resort to all kinds of tricks. Just like the ones that Mr. Turner performed in his little act yesterday. $1,999.99 vs. $1,699 is a very significant price difference that Microsoft apparently didn't want to bother fixing until they were compelled to by Apple's legal department. That resulted in the greatest single phone call that Microsoft COO Turner has ever taken in his business history, which says quite a bit all by itself.

In addition to falsely advertising the wrong price for the 15-inch MacBook Pro, the ad has always been misleading in that the shot of the Apple product shown before the price tag is of a now-discontinued aluminum 13-inch MacBook, which at the time retailed for $1,299 and has since been replaced by the new 13-inch MacBook Pro starting at $1,199 or $800 less than the 15.4-inch MacBook Pro price card that Microsoft shows in their misleading ad. Not only do they lie in the visuals, but Microsoft lies in the audio, too: In the ad, while showing the 13-inch MacBook, Microsoft's actress states, "This Mac costs $2000" (see it via YouTube here)."
http://www.macdailynews.com/index.p...o_stop_falsely_advertising_macbook_pro_price/

You're correct.

Basically, the COO spun fraud into a short-lived media frenzy without admitting the fraud by Microsoft.

Microsoft is no longer financially in a position to strong-arm Apple and they know it, so they resort to a mocking retort that in and of itself was filled with half-truths.

 

[Norco]

You sold a box?

Check my signature.

 

[Unibody5]

Check my signature.

Oh I misinterpreted "box".

 

[mdriftmeyer]

As long as my experience with Jesus Christ as my personal savior settles the fact that my God is better than yours.

One of the two here actually experienced reality in person. The other is living vicariously through a myth.

 

[djellison]

"The MacBook Pro that Microsoft falsely advertises as retailing for US$1,999.99 in their ad actually costs $1,699

Wrong. The $1699 is with the Geforce 9400. Apple DOWNGRADED the MBP to make it cheaper (something that is frankly, massively under mentioned in this place).

 

[Hugh]

rumors

Microsoft to buy Apple am confirmed.

Yes there was that rumor too. LOL but I'm sure we all don't need a history lesson.

Hugh

 

[b33k34]

No, that's not accurate at all. Mac's do not require defragmenting - the file system (HFA Journaled) does that.

If you are referring to repairing permissions, that is a repair function roughly equal to chkdsk on the PC - it should only be done if you are having problems.

But permissions are very easy to screw up on the mac and very difficult to fix. Move a file or share a file in the 'wrong' way when you've a couple of machines on a network and suddenly you can't open it. Not easily fixed without resorting to the terminal ime.

 

[YsoSerious]

This is hilarious. If it's true, Apple should just suck it up and move on. I mean they got a fat ugly guy playing "I'm a PC" for how long now? When it comes down to it, he with the most resources ($$$$) will eventually win in the end.

 

[thisday]

I belive the guy 100% until apple says he is lying. Then its 50-50.
The whole price/quality "war" thing is endless but fun
The facts are that apple machines are made in China, have same (sometimes outdated parts inside while pcs update often) and luck some basic bleeding edge stuff. A simple example is the screens that have stucked in 1280x800 while even netbooks have reached that boarder.
Macs look great outside and fit perfect for people that dont want or know to do a reasearch before buying to evaluate what other choices thay have for the money (i dont include profs that need spesific software to work). So its a matter of taste, win/mac/linux.
I will not spend 1200 euro (thats the cost here) for mbp 13. I will give 1000 and get better quality and resolution screen, more ram, more disk, expresscardslot, 5-1 card reader. But that is just me. Whatever makes you happy is the right choice

 

[Mac Kiwi]

The following quote is from MDN
"The MacBook Pro that Microsoft falsely advertises as retailing for US$1,999.99 in their ad actually costs $1,699 (see it via YouTube here). It's been that way since June 8th, but Microsoft kept running their false advertising anyway. Microsoft's ad also subliminally throws in the $2,499.99 price because Microsoft has nothing but an upside-down and backwards poorly-faked Mac OS running on junky, thick, heavy, cheap hardware, so in order to move their inferior crap, they have to resort to all kinds of tricks. Just like the ones that Mr. Turner performed in his little act yesterday. $1,999.99 vs. $1,699 is a very significant price difference that Microsoft apparently didn't want to bother fixing until they were compelled to by Apple's legal department. That resulted in the greatest single phone call that Microsoft COO Turner has ever taken in his business history, which says quite a bit all by itself.

In addition to falsely advertising the wrong price for the 15-inch MacBook Pro, the ad has always been misleading in that the shot of the Apple product shown before the price tag is of a now-discontinued aluminum 13-inch MacBook, which at the time retailed for $1,299 and has since been replaced by the new 13-inch MacBook Pro starting at $1,199 or $800 less than the 15.4-inch MacBook Pro price card that Microsoft shows in their misleading ad. Not only do they lie in the visuals, but Microsoft lies in the audio, too: In the ad, while showing the 13-inch MacBook, Microsoft's actress states, "This Mac costs $2000" (see it via YouTube here)."
http://www.macdailynews.com/index.p...o_stop_falsely_advertising_macbook_pro_price/

If that is the case Apple should have complained to whomever,who takes care of misleading advertising......Complaining direct to MS was not a good move.


I am also thinking they are trying anything to dent Apples cool/trendy marketing image.

 

[kiang]

A PC with a 2.66GHz Quad Core is probably more expensive than a PC with a 1.2 GHz Pentium 4...my point is mac is a higher end machine and the price difference is not that different if you compare it to a higher end windows machine. And again...I dont want to have to defend myself. If you think that you dont have to direct it at me.

My machine:
Phenom II X4 955 (4x3.2GHz)
Arctic Freezer 64Pro (can't even hear it at load)
4GB DDR3-1333
Saphire HD4850 1GB
500GB HDD
DVDRW
n-draft WLAN
total price: €750 = about $1,000

Now get me a Mac with that bang/buck ratio? My point is NOT that macs are too expensive: imo they aren't because, yes, you pay for looks: my midi-tower is far from ugly, but it's no piece of art either. I just wanted to point out that when it's all about specs at a decent price, macs offer a horrible bang/buck ratio.

 

[irobot2003]

My machine:
Phenom II X4 955 (4x3.2GHz)
Arctic Freezer 64Pro (can't even hear it at load)
4GB DDR3-1333
Saphire HD4850 1GB
500GB HDD
DVDRW
n-draft WLAN
total price: €750 = about $1,000

Now get me a Mac with that bang/buck ratio? My point is NOT that macs are too expensive: imo they aren't because, yes, you pay for looks: my midi-tower is far from ugly, but it's no piece of art either. I just wanted to point out that when it's all about specs at a decent price, macs offer a horrible bang/buck ratio.

I priced a dual-processor 2.66 GHz Mac Pro and compared it to a Dell T7500 similarly configured back in June:

Dell T7500: $6062
Dual Quad Core 2.66 GHz Xeon X5550
4 GB 1066 MHz memory (no option for 6GB 1006 MHz mem)
NVIDIA Quadro FX 580, 512 MB VRAM ($175 retail)
1 TB Hard Drive, SATA 3Gb/s, 7200 RPM, 16 MB cache
16x DVD+/-RW Drive

Apple MacPro: $4,999
Dual Quad Core 2.66 GHz Xeon X5550
6 GB 1066 MHz memory
NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 512 MB ($150 retail)
1TB Hard Drive, SATA 3Gb/s, 7200 RPM, 32 MB cache
18x double-layer SuperDrive (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)

the Dell is slightly more scalable, 5 drive bays vs 4, 12 DIMM slots vs 8, and supports faster memory, but I think I'll save that $1k...

 

[kiang]

I priced a dual-processor 2.66 GHz Mac Pro and compared it to a Dell T7500 similarly configured back in June:

Dell T7500: $6062
Dual Quad Core 2.66 GHz Xeon X5550
4 GB 1066 MHz memory (no option for 6GB 1006 MHz mem)
NVIDIA Quadro FX 580, 512 MB VRAM ($175 retail)
1 TB Hard Drive, SATA 3Gb/s, 7200 RPM, 16 MB cache
16x DVD+/-RW Drive

Apple MacPro: $4,999
Dual Quad Core 2.66 GHz Xeon X5550
6 GB 1066 MHz memory
NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 512 MB ($150 retail)
1TB Hard Drive, SATA 3Gb/s, 7200 RPM, 32 MB cache
18x double-layer SuperDrive (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)

the Dell is slightly more scalable, 5 drive bays vs 4, 12 DIMM slots vs 8, and supports faster memory, but I think I'll save that $1k...

I know this comment was coming... I'm talking about consumer products, not workstations...
Plus: you've only shown Dell is more expensive than Apple, which is a stupid point. Workstations are expensive, Dell is expensive, you couldn't pick a more obviously hollow strawmen argument.

 

[bytethese]

There is nothing "higher end" about a mac other than the OS. All mac and PC laptops are using the same intel chips, same ram, same hard drives, and they're all made via slave wages in identical looking factories in China.

PC laptops are always going to be cheaper when comparing hardware. They have the advantage of built in blu ray and other options that Apple doesn't provide. They also have the advantage of multiple competing companies, which drives down costs and encourages innovation.

That said, I might like the new "button less" track pads more than any PC laptop mouse interface. The two finger "right click" was the one thing macs were missing that drove me nuts. The IBM ThinkPad "red button" is the only mouse control in the PC world that I would consider to be as good or possibly better. Dell, HP, and various other companies have tried to emulate it but none of them have.

You might like the look of a macbook pro over a PC laptop, you might strongly prefer OSX, and you might like the new mouse interface macs use. But don't try to convince yourself or anyone else that it's a higher end computer in terms of hardware.

Nothing higher end? Hmm, digital audio out, illuminated keyboard, magnetic power cord, unibody aluminum construction, slot loading optical drive, etc come to mind...

 

[DELLsFan]

... Yup. I also bet that Dell et all wishes it had the ability to differentiate itself from it's competitors, based on something other than price...

It does not need to (wish). It already does differentiate. It's called the DELL Vostro A90. Love it - and OSX is running on it.

 

[BongoBanger]

The following quote is from MDN
"The MacBook Pro that Microsoft falsely advertises as retailing for US$1,999.99 in their ad actually costs $1,699 (see it via YouTube here). It's been that way since June 8th, but Microsoft kept running their false advertising anyway. Microsoft's ad also subliminally throws in the $2,499.99 price because Microsoft has nothing but an upside-down and backwards poorly-faked Mac OS running on junky, thick, heavy, cheap hardware, so in order to move their inferior crap, they have to resort to all kinds of tricks. Just like the ones that Mr. Turner performed in his little act yesterday. $1,999.99 vs. $1,699 is a very significant price difference that Microsoft apparently didn't want to bother fixing until they were compelled to by Apple's legal department. That resulted in the greatest single phone call that Microsoft COO Turner has ever taken in his business history, which says quite a bit all by itself.

In addition to falsely advertising the wrong price for the 15-inch MacBook Pro, the ad has always been misleading in that the shot of the Apple product shown before the price tag is of a now-discontinued aluminum 13-inch MacBook, which at the time retailed for $1,299 and has since been replaced by the new 13-inch MacBook Pro starting at $1,199 or $800 less than the 15.4-inch MacBook Pro price card that Microsoft shows in their misleading ad. Not only do they lie in the visuals, but Microsoft lies in the audio, too: In the ad, while showing the 13-inch MacBook, Microsoft's actress states, "This Mac costs $2000" (see it via YouTube here)."
http://www.macdailynews.com/index.p...o_stop_falsely_advertising_macbook_pro_price/

And this is different to Apple releasing their 'Fix Vista' advert after the release of SP1, hotfixes and driver updates which actually did fix it because...?

Or the references to W7 being another Vista at this year's Macworld?

It's called 'don't start a fight if you can't finish it' so Apple's response - if they make one - will be interesting.

 

[t-oliveira]

Its not anti-Apple , just very direct competition towards apple, you like macosx and no compatibility and crap hardware ? fine . but if you rather have instability and viruses but play games and have the best hardware you need windows .

 

[Gershon]

it's stupid for microsoft to be a cheapo and use such methods to spoil Apple's sales. Just because they cannot do it as well as Apple. Jeez. I bet the next time they're gonna put Ballmer there as "Lauren" , in an ugly wig and a fake Prada handbag, saying Apple is stupid and all should get microsoft.

Jeez. Ballmer sure is retarded.

 

[supmango]

I don't believe for a second that apple legal called MS. Really..... Apple knows if the table was turned they would intensify the ads. I think this is a false, and there are spinsters at work.

I agree this would be a dumb move for Apple, and they most likely would not do it. However, it really does not matter what Apple did or did not do. What matters is that some people believe that they did and Microsoft tries to push the posture of desperation off of themselves and back on to Apple. Whether it happened or not is irrelevant. If Apple would run just one total cost of ownership ad that is well done, it would totally kill this ad campaign. But then again, that would be acknowledging that the competition is having an effect on their market share growth and the numbers don't seem to be showing that.

 

[uberamd]

I belive the guy 100% until apple says he is lying. Then its 50-50.
The whole price/quality "war" thing is endless but fun
The facts are that apple machines are made in China, have same (sometimes outdated parts inside while pcs update often) and luck some basic bleeding edge stuff. A simple example is the screens that have stucked in 1280x800 while even netbooks have reached that boarder.
Macs look great outside and fit perfect for people that dont want or know to do a reasearch before buying to evaluate what other choices thay have for the money (i dont include profs that need spesific software to work). So its a matter of taste, win/mac/linux.
I will not spend 1200 euro (thats the cost here) for mbp 13. I will give 1000 and get better quality and resolution screen, more ram, more disk, expresscardslot, 5-1 card reader. But that is just me. Whatever makes you happy is the right choice

Are you serious here? A vast majority of consumer 15" laptops have 1280x800 displays, rarely do you come across a 1440x900 display in a 15". Having 1280x800 in a 13" is good, and if you tried to pack 1440x900 in there as native, it would simply be too small for a lot of people to see and bumping the resolution down by hand to 1280x800 could result in a less sharp, blurry picture.

Heck, get your facts straight a lot of 17" consumer laptops have 1440x900 as their max resolution and a majority of consumer 19" LCD displays are also 1440x900 max.

 

[Shasterball]

In the end, don't you think people will price out all their options including Mac vs PC and see the price differences themselves? I know I do. Hell, my 63 year old mom does...

This may scare away the really tight-budgeted consumers who may not consider a Mac at all anymore (I can't imagine this is a huge population). But, in the end, they would have probably not gotten a Mac anyway because of $$...

 

[Gershon]

In the end, don't you think people will price out all their options including Mac vs PC and see the price differences themselves? I know I do. Hell, my 63 year old mom does...

This may scare away the really tight-budgeted consumers who may not consider a Mac at all anymore (I can't imagine this is a huge population). But, in the end, they would have probably not gotten a Mac anyway because of $$...

PC people ( not to insult anybody who uses a PC here ) but PC/microsoft fanboys seem to be in a world of their own and just want to hear that ms is the best and that apple is expensive blah blah blah

Moral of story : if you cannot afford it , don't be a freakin sour grape