After reading the hundreds of responses here, I decided to repost. This post is dedicated to questioning the article Author's assertions about the state of the computer industry - whether he be referring to PC equipment or Macs.
"Up until the last few years, Apple has been an extremely small annoying sliver in Microsoft's side. At that point in time, Apple's products were indeed quite mediocre, and seriously slow compared to other machines at the time. But these days, times have changed. Apple is now a big force in the tech industry, and in many tech sectors."
They are *still* just an annoying sliver in Microsoft's side. Their market share has gone up from about 5% to about 10%. Where is the proof that they are now such a power house. It is actually incorrect to say Mac's hardware was mediocre a few years ago. The $4000 Power Mac tower that my Mac loving friend bought in 2003 was fast and well designed. It was durable, the tower inside was well organised, and the tower was thermally well engineered. It just cost atleast $1000 more than the same equivalent PC - except it had the odd slightly advantageous feature (e.g. firewire).
"To look back at some of the comments posted in Mac-related Tom's Hardware articles, I can summarize them into the following:
- "Apple sucks."
- "Apple products are for stupid people who don't know what they're doing."
- "Apple products are for people who believe the Apple brainwashing."
- "Macs are for losers."
- "Macs are for people with too much money."
- "Macs are for people who want to look cool."
- "Macs are for idiots."
- "OS X sucks."
- "OS X is garbage."
- "Why is Tom's Hardware posting this Apple garbage?"
- "Apple news does not belong on Tom's Hardware."
- "Tom's Hardware gets paid by Apple."
- "Author X got paid to write Apple garbage."
- "Author X is an Apple fanboy/girl."
- "Author X is an Apple employee.""
As someone has pointed out on this thread, you have only summarized what are mostly the flame responses to apple articles. You have failed to mention the dozens of critically composed responses pointing out why PCs offer a better prospect to many people and why your articles are incomplete (that is to say biased and unproven given unacceptable testing and evaluation)
"I understand everyone is entitled to an opinion--that's fine. But the point is, there's a line when people are talking about merits based on facts or commenting out of personal hate or grudge. That's fine if you don't like what Apple makes, but there's no reason to attack an author of an article. The fact of the matter is, my team is doing their job, covering as much news as they can within the scope of a day and do that with a neutral stance."
As has been expressed by others here, you are covering an inordinate amount of Apple articles and are neglecting other manufacturers who make similar computers or products. You have also lessened the amount of the "sort after enthusiast articles" that bought people to Tom's hardware in the first place. These articles included rigorous benchmarking, testing and comparison using scientific measures with minimal subjective opinion. You claim to present a neutral stance, but fail to qualify your statements with data in support of your claims.
"Let me go on the record here and be absolutely clear: Apple does not pay us, or our authors, even a single cent to write anything about Macs, iPhones, the App Store, iTunes, OS X, and Steve Jobs"
I believe you and I believe most of Tom's enthusiasts do also. It may be uncalled for to make the accusation, but your bias lends itself to the creation of such theories.
"The Age Old Debate that Indeed is Getting Old
Where does this intense hate come from? The age-old PC/Apple debate is no longer relevant in the way that it was a decade ago, when it was clear that the "PC" side was producing clearly superior products. But the word PC is essentially a misnomer today. A Mac is a computer, simple as that. Like a ThinkPad is a laptop, and a Dell XPS is an XPS, like an Alienware Area 52 is a gaming machine, like an EeePC is a netbook. They're all computing tools."
PC's are still superior products because they provide a better price performance ratio for the same hardware. E.g. There are higher end ASUS notebooks with things like leather casings and other companies products with back-lit keyboards. There are many "premium" products that are considerable cheaper than Macbook Pros. Admittedly, there are also more expensive premium PC products than Macbook Pros. These more expensive models more often than not do more than Mac book pros for their higher price - usually much more, and are therefore irrelevant to the premise of this point.
"They're all also priced differently. Some are priced based on premiums while others are priced based on price-competition. Some other companies will price their products based on a pricing war. Other products are made well and are priced to reflect that. I recall when boutique companies like Alienware, Falcon Northwest, Voodoo PC first came out. Their machines commanded a hefty premium because they differentiated themselves. Alienware included customized manuals, benchmarks of each machine, hand-build rigs that were clean inside out, and pre-installed games of the customer's choice. Other's like Voodoo PC, even offered customized paint using high-quality automotive paint. The end product is a luxury product more so than a tool. And we all know that these boutique companies went from small no-namers to big-time players in the gaming industry."
True, different products are made for different markets. But with some exceptions, Apple products aimed at a particular market are almost always more expensive in that market so in the vast majority of instances, the point that PCs are still better value in any given particular market still stands. Please provide objective market data to debunk this assertion. As for boutique PC companies, sure they have there place. I would still contend that a custom built rig by a well informed enthusiast can accomplish almost any boutique companies offers -whether it be advanced water cooling or a neat and tidy build quality. But sure, it may be more of a challenge to achieve exacting lighting effects etc showcased by custom cases or have automotive quality paint, but even on this point, a lot of boutique company's effects can be exactly replicated (given the fact that many customisations can be bought separately, as a lot of these companies use available off the self customisations), but admittedly not all. In the later case a lot of customizations can still be closely matched. To achieve a lot of Apple's effects might be a challenge, but I bet it can be done with equal quality and *still* much cheaper than Apple.
"The Rage, Hate, and Obsession
Some would say that a customer spending a lot of money on custom manuals, benchmarks, and paint, is an idiot. First of all, that's rude, uncalled for, and outright lame. If someone buys something that gives them a sense of joy, pleasure or pleasant feeling, good for them. There is no reason to hate on, flame, or call them out."
I believe that most enthusiasts' do not believe all custom equipment is stupid. But I do think that the real point of most enthusiasts is that custom paint jobs do not make your computer a better system. In that vein, Apple's aluminium, while perhaps adding durability to a system, does not justify a 50% price increase. Even when taking into consideration some of the other customizations, I believe, most enthusiasts do not accept they make an Apple worth as much extra to make the asking price. Sure, a Ferrari may be highly priced, but in addition to better panels and paint and leather seats, they are significantly better on the inside, where it counts, Apples are not. Yet they seem to erroneously make this assertion in their advertising, especially when comparing themselves to PCs.
"There seems to be an intense amount of hate from some commenters who choose to bash in some of the articles. These commenters use any argument they can come up with to put down another person, the author, or the website."
Sure, bashing is not very becoming of the poster and not well received by the recipient. Have the arguments I have made so far, constituted bashing? I think not. As others have commented about here, you have people from many walks of life on the site, some young, some experienced, some both etc. Im sure many readers take from these comments what they wish and will make up their own mind as to what is a valid argument. I would consider that constructive criticism from your audience is not bashing the author or the website.
"What everyone must remember though, is competition is good and healthy for everyone! Whether you use a Windows computer or a Mac, you will benefit from the other side being successful or releasing a great new product. Allow me, if you will, some words for an example.
Because of the way Apple now manufactures its notebooks, other companies have taken notice and consequently improved on product design and manufacturing. If I am a fan of Asus or Sony laptops for example, of course I will be happy if Apple releases a killer notebook. That just means that Asus or Sony will have to compete and produce a better product. Everyone wins"
This has a ring of truth to it. It is the idea of competition in a capitalist market place causing innovation. Sure, some Mac ideas have led to adoption by PCs. The opposite is also true. But I would contend that it is primarily PC companies like Asus that make the innovations, and others follow. Please provide objective market data that proves Apple has led to more innovation than most, or even a significant percentage more innovation than other companies.
"Some say that Apple customers are brainwashed and obsessed. If you look through the comments, you may see that the obsessed one's are the people that continually come back time after time to flame and bash Apple, or us for posting Apple news. If they see an Apple related story, their hate meter automatically blows up and they start flaming.
My biggest gripe is the commenters who come back continuously to bash and talk trash about a Mac user or me and my team for posting Apple-related news."
The adoption of and use of a Mac is in some cases a concise choice by an enthusiast. e.g. I like BSD, and therefore like the idea of a Mac being based on that so I will use it. Or Mac do graphic art/multimedia better than PCs so I will use them. Or, perhaps, I am upset at the state of affairs with Microsoft and think Apple do things better so I will support them. While this may be a distinct choice with some users, many users, as I stated earlier have an evangelical view of Macs. It is my contention that, for the most part, Mac users are recruited by evangelical users and Apple "mystique" (hype) into believing that Mac is the most sensible choice, because they are fed misinformation and propaganda by Apple and recruiters, because they instil in potential users a sense of belonging to a special group, and that, they are most assuredly receiving better value for money or a better product for the money, and other myths, such as, Macs are more stable than PCs. There is more, but I will stop here. In some circles, Mac is the righteous choice (when considering how "evil" Microsoft is etc) and much more socially responsible as Apple is a "better Corporate citizen" etc etc and will not let you down like the evil PC corporations. It is this sort of indoctrination that I think some PC enthusiasts' see in Mac people. Granted, this is not true of the entire user base. But just today, my own, fairly old, and very experienced in management Father, when I asked him about Macs said almost immediately, something to the effect of: "Most Mac users seem to be rabid supporters of their computers, and will very quickly try to convert you to their "superior" platform with great vigour and excitement." He went on to indicate that Mac users bash PCs as inferior for many of the reasons posted here. So it works both ways. I guess Macs seem to have something of cult following, however, I use the term "cult" loosely. Please provide citations and references that debunk this theory and try to convince your readers that Apple hasn't played a hand in creating this atmosphere amongst it users. (While this certainly isn't brainwashing, it tries to explain the reason why some enthusiasts' view Mac people in this vein)
"If you don't like the headline, read something else. No one's forcing anyone to take a bite. Besides, we do this as a service to technology-enthusiasts, not just "Windows-PC-Only-Enthusiast."
This is fine, but as stated, you seemed determined to produce an inordinate amount of Mac articles, at possibly the expense of PC coverage (which is what most Tom's readers want, unless you have survey data that says otherwise). These articles, for the reason's already outlined, seem to lack rigorous scientific inquiry before posting.
"Marketing Clarity
Apple does a lot of marketing to sell products. So does Microsoft, Dell, AT&T, Verizon, McDonald's, etc. Every company wants to move product and make a profit. If you have a business, you'd know this first hand. Some say that Apple's ads are full of fud, lies and bogues claims. I would say that some of Apple's ads are extremely stretched, but to me, even as I use a Windows 7 PC right now, simply laugh at the ads. I know they're just Apple's marketing department poking fun of PCs and putting their computers in spotlight. Microsoft does the same. It's normal competition.
Instead of getting angry at an ad, know it's an ad, and then make your buying decision based on research, study and your own needs. I know what's true and what's not when I see an ad."
Unfortunately not everybody is in the position to research a computer purchase, because they lack sufficient knowledge to make sense of all the data. e.g. the elderly or older non-technical people. Sure, they can go to different computer outlets, be they chain-stores or the more competitive, but smaller oem chains, but even this is a tall order for some. It still comes down to what many have said. Apple creates a brand that promises to be something better than your everyday offering, when really they are selling propriety hamstrung PC equipment and ICs at a far greater premium for something (but really for very little) extra in the unit on offer. As I have posted before, granted, Microsoft have been guilty of predatory corporate behaviour and have probably been anti-competitive in the industry, but I would argue they are not nearly as proprietary as Apple. They supports tens of thousands of hardware items that are competitively created spurring innovation and price competitiveness. The competitive hardware market allows millions of technicians to work on your PC and not just only those who are licensed to service your equipment, as is the case with Apple. The quality of Asus and similar companies is surely a match for the quality of Apple (the "we're a hardware company") It is this "promise" of something more for your money that many enthusiasts object to, when in reality, what you are paying for is the brand. You are not getting a competitively market driven priced product. In fact, you are almost always getting less for your dollar or euro etc. Sure, Microsoft charge a lot for retail Windows, but I believe that, given the hardware support of Windows it is worth more than OSX. In any case, a new system purchase can come pre-installed with oem versions of Windows that are very reasonably priced when compared to OSX on a new Mac. Please provide references and market data that debunks these assertions.
"The Apple Tax"
Apple's prices don't affect you if you don't want to buy an Apple product anyway. Period.
Again, buy based on a combination of what you need and want. There is a big ocean of choices. No need to get pissed off at a pond.
The ironic thing is that the same people are angry because they feel Apple hardware is just the same thing for more money and often times have never used an Apple product themselves. Everyone has something they would and wouldn't pay for. It doesn't make them dumb, or an idiot."
I will repeat what I just said, "You are not getting a competitively market driven priced product. In fact, you are almost always getting less for your dollar or euro etc." When you pay 50% extra for, in some cases, the exact same hardware, or hardware with the same ICs, the extra money paid gains you nothing or very little. This is often times a brand re-badging surcharge, and can quite sensibly be likened to a tax. This may make some Apple proponents seem quite silly for insisting they are getting great value for the extra 50%. Other people are not aware that they are paying such a price for the Mac / Apple franchise. I am not saying this doesn't happen in other companies or in other industries, but it does bode well for Apple proponents claiming there is extra value and therefore no "tax". Please provide market data to debunk this theory.
"
The Apple Superiority
Everyone has a superiority complex on all camps. Linux-fans, Mac-fans, PC-fans, Xbox-fans, PS3-fans, Wii-fans, sports-fans. You name it. Apple says it's products are better. Microsoft said it's products are more advanced. Sony says its products are cooler. Dell says its products are the best.
Who cares? It's marketing.
Do research, tests, etc. Come to your own conclusions."
Again, I will quote what I said earlier:
" But just today, my own, fairly old, and very experienced in management Father, when I asked him about Macs said almost immediately, something to the effect of: "Most Mac users seem to be rabid supporters of their computers, and will very quickly try to convert you to their "superior" platform with great vigour and excitement." He went on to indicate that Mac users bash PCs as inferior for many of the reasons posted here."
Some of the things already mentioned seem to indicate a denial of reality by some of the Superior thinking Mac users when comparing their units and their platform to PCs. E.g. Some Mac users believe they are getting better value and quality for their money when they are really buying rebadged PC parts for 50% extra with perhaps a few little extra features or a slight advantage to the design of a unit or housing. To some PC enthusiasts', this attitude and stance may seem almost delusional. I suppose that's strong language to be using, but some seem utterly convinced that they are definitely paying extra for something special, when it the majority of cases it is simply an indefensible position to have. Please supply market data that debunks this assertion.
I am not saying this doesn't happen in other industries or even elsewhere within the computing industry, but it does not bode well for the position of Mac "fanboys".
"Where Tom's Hardware Stands
Let me make it clear again for those in doubt: We do not get paid by Apple or any agency representing Apple, to post Apple news/reviews/articles. Apple doesn't send us any hardware, and won't, even if we ask for samples. Consequently, it is difficult to do a side-by-side comparison because of this.
Tom's Hardware covers the technology industry. That's why we attend shows like CES, Computex, CeBit, E3, etc. We cover all things technology. Some commenters yell "Apple crap doesn't belong on Tom's Hardware!"
I say, it sure does! It's technology!"
That's a fine attitude to have. It is great that Toms hardware wishes to be an all inclusive technology adviser and I applaud the sentiment behind it. As I have said, I don't think most hardware enthusiasts believe you are being paid by Apple.
But I will make the following points:
1. When you do include Apple in a comparison or post, please use scientifically backed methods to back up your claims about Apple's or Mac's performance. This is especially of interest to your constituents', that is your predominately PC oriented client base of readers and contributors, when the Apple technology purports to be better than PC equivalents. You have failed to suitably demonstrate your assertions on many occasions in this regard. Please try to develop more conclusive tests to back your findings, and Toms readers will take the information on board rather than dismiss it as based on flawed testing.
2. If your assertions are based on rigorous and robust testing, your readers will not be inclined to think that your seemingly one sided findings represent bias on behalf of the staff.
"Like I mentioned above, all of these tech companies including Apple, are part of the overall tech ecosystem. That's what drives innovation and competition forward. We enjoy technology. We relish in it and relentlessly pursue the next great thing. Where it comes from doesn't nearly matter as what it is.
Likewise, if there are any Mac fans here who feel the need to always bash a Windows-PC user, the same applies to you.
We're all technology enthusiasts. Stop the hate."
I agree that senseless negative posting is not constructive, and contributors need to construct their opinions to help others. It doesn't matter if they are presenting something new or are bolstering the points of view of others or by disagreeing with other opinions on the board - what matters is that they are well presented and respectful of others and that they contribute to the community. If a Contributor's advice is given factually, then it should be backed by credible evidence. If it is more of an opinion, then there should be a rational argument for the point of view.
Well said and well played and I couldn't agree more. If someone doesn't like an apple then don't take a bite... harrr
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram