http://www.thestandard.com/node/132400/comments comments feed. en "Apple tax" report backfires on Microsoft while Mac fans fume http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/15/apple-tax-paper-backfires-microsoft <p> <p> </p> <div style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 2px"> <script type="text/javascript"> digg_url = 'http://digg.com/apple/Apple_tax_claim_burns_Microsoft_but_Mac_fans_see_media_bias'; </script><script src="http://digg.com/tools/diggthis.js" type="text/javascript"> </script></div> <p>Last week, Microsoft began flogging <a href="http://www.ndpta.com/files/AppleTax.pdf">a report</a> by an analyst whom the company had paid to document the "Apple tax" -- the supposed difference in price paid by an all-Apple household versus an all-Microsoft household. The report claimed an all-Apple household's costs would add up to an extra $3,367 over five years, which prompted Mac fans to dissect the report and highlight discrepancies between the two scenarios. <p>But the report has also fallen flat among the technology press outlets Microsoft had surely hoped would carry its message. Instead, tech reporters and columnists have slapped down the findings. A Google News search for "<a href="http://news.google.com/news?um=1&ned=us&cf=all&ncl=1329890453">Apple tax</a>" returns dozens of articles and blog posts deriding Microsoft's claims. The current top result is a <i>PC Magazine</i> column by John C. Dvorak. Instead of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAWDYaWAVQQ">baiting Mac fans</a>, which seems to be his favorite hobby, Dvorak <a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2345199,00.asp">dismisses the report</a> as "propagandistic." </p> <p> Why do I care? Because there's a huge disconnect between Mac fans' perception of the press as a Microsoft "partner" (as described by <a href="http://theappleblog.com/2009/04/14/microsoft-longs-for-the-golden-age-of-fud/">TheAppleBlog</a> writer Tom Reestman) and the reality that the media as a whole has had a <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2127924/">long-running crush on Apple</a>, in part because Apple makes a great underdog story. <p>Take <i>eWeek </i>columnist Joe Wilcox. Reestman sees him as a Microsoft spokesbot, yet Wilcox was one of the first to <a href="http://blogs.eweek.com/applewatch/content/imac/microsoft_report_miscalculates_apple_tax.html">pick apart</a> the report's errors and deem the whole document "purposely inflammatory."</p> <p><i>Fortune</i> writer Philip Elmer-DeWitt <a href="http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2009/04/10/behind-microsofts-apple-tax-gambit/?source=yahoo_quote">was even more blunt</a>: "No one would mistake Roger Kay’s white paper for objective statement of the facts." </p> <p>Maybe what Mac fans are misunderstanding is this: Because around 90 percent of the world uses Windows, Office and other Microsoft software, nearly anything Microsoft releases or writes is newsworthy. But the Apple tax backlash proves that as a whole, the mainstream media aren't Microsoft's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_organ">house organ</a>. Apple partisans should worry more about Microsoft's <a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/10/video-microsofts-latest-anti-apple-ad-sends-bloggers-overdrive">new TV ads</a>, which will have a much bigger effect among a much broader audience. Are the ads unfair? A bit. But they're good. </p> <p><b>More news, commentary, and predictions from <i>The Industry Standard</i>:</b></p> <ul> <li>Paul Boutin: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/10/video-microsofts-latest-anti-apple-ad-sends-bloggers-overdrive">Video: Microsoft's latest anti-Apple ads send Mac bloggers into overdrive</a></b></li> <li>Paul Boutin: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/14/iphones-work-forrester-now-says-yes">iPhones at work? Forrester now says yes</a></b></li> <li>Special Feature: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2008/07/10/iphone-naysayers-one-year-later">The iPhone naysayers, one year later</a></b></li> </ul> http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/15/apple-tax-paper-backfires-microsoft#comments co:Apple co:microsoft Hardware The Industry Standard Wed, 15 Apr 2009 13:43:48 -0400 Paul Boutin 132400 at http://www.thestandard.com "Apple tax" report backfires on Microsoft while Mac fans fume http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/15/apple-tax-paper-backfires-microsoft <p> <p> </p> <div style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 2px"> <script type="text/javascript"> digg_url = 'http://digg.com/apple/Apple_tax_claim_burns_Microsoft_but_Mac_fans_see_media_bias'; </script><script src="http://digg.com/tools/diggthis.js" type="text/javascript"> </script></div> <p>Last week, Microsoft began flogging <a href="http://www.ndpta.com/files/AppleTax.pdf">a report</a> by an analyst whom the company had paid to document the "Apple tax" -- the supposed difference in price paid by an all-Apple household versus an all-Microsoft household. The report claimed an all-Apple household's costs would add up to an extra $3,367 over five years, which prompted Mac fans to dissect the report and highlight discrepancies between the two scenarios. <p>But the report has also fallen flat among the technology press outlets Microsoft had surely hoped would carry its message. Instead, tech reporters and columnists have slapped down the findings. A Google News search for "<a href="http://news.google.com/news?um=1&ned=us&cf=all&ncl=1329890453">Apple tax</a>" returns dozens of articles and blog posts deriding Microsoft's claims. The current top result is a <i>PC Magazine</i> column by John C. Dvorak. Instead of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAWDYaWAVQQ">baiting Mac fans</a>, which seems to be his favorite hobby, Dvorak <a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2345199,00.asp">dismisses the report</a> as "propagandistic." </p> <p> Why do I care? Because there's a huge disconnect between Mac fans' perception of the press as a Microsoft "partner" (as described by <a href="http://theappleblog.com/2009/04/14/microsoft-longs-for-the-golden-age-of-fud/">TheAppleBlog</a> writer Tom Reestman) and the reality that the media as a whole has had a <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2127924/">long-running crush on Apple</a>, in part because Apple makes a great underdog story. <p>Take <i>eWeek </i>columnist Joe Wilcox. Reestman sees him as a Microsoft spokesbot, yet Wilcox was one of the first to <a href="http://blogs.eweek.com/applewatch/content/imac/microsoft_report_miscalculates_apple_tax.html">pick apart</a> the report's errors and deem the whole document "purposely inflammatory."</p> <p><i>Fortune</i> writer Philip Elmer-DeWitt <a href="http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2009/04/10/behind-microsofts-apple-tax-gambit/?source=yahoo_quote">was even more blunt</a>: "No one would mistake Roger Kay’s white paper for objective statement of the facts." </p> <p>Maybe what Mac fans are misunderstanding is this: Because around 90 percent of the world uses Windows, Office and other Microsoft software, nearly anything Microsoft releases or writes is newsworthy. But the Apple tax backlash proves that as a whole, the mainstream media aren't Microsoft's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_organ">house organ</a>. Apple partisans should worry more about Microsoft's <a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/10/video-microsofts-latest-anti-apple-ad-sends-bloggers-overdrive">new TV ads</a>, which will have a much bigger effect among a much broader audience. Are the ads unfair? A bit. But they're good. </p> <p><b>More news, commentary, and predictions from <i>The Industry Standard</i>:</b></p> <ul> <li>Paul Boutin: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/10/video-microsofts-latest-anti-apple-ad-sends-bloggers-overdrive">Video: Microsoft's latest anti-Apple ads send Mac bloggers into overdrive</a></b></li> <li>Paul Boutin: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/14/iphones-work-forrester-now-says-yes">iPhones at work? Forrester now says yes</a></b></li> <li>Special Feature: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2008/07/10/iphone-naysayers-one-year-later">The iPhone naysayers, one year later</a></b></li> </ul> http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/15/apple-tax-paper-backfires-microsoft#comments co:Apple co:microsoft Hardware The Industry Standard Wed, 15 Apr 2009 13:43:48 -0400 Paul Boutin 132400 at http://www.thestandard.com "Apple tax" report backfires on Microsoft while Mac fans fume http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/15/apple-tax-paper-backfires-microsoft <p> <p> </p> <div style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 2px"> <script type="text/javascript"> digg_url = 'http://digg.com/apple/Apple_tax_claim_burns_Microsoft_but_Mac_fans_see_media_bias'; </script><script src="http://digg.com/tools/diggthis.js" type="text/javascript"> </script></div> <p>Last week, Microsoft began flogging <a href="http://www.ndpta.com/files/AppleTax.pdf">a report</a> by an analyst whom the company had paid to document the "Apple tax" -- the supposed difference in price paid by an all-Apple household versus an all-Microsoft household. The report claimed an all-Apple household's costs would add up to an extra $3,367 over five years, which prompted Mac fans to dissect the report and highlight discrepancies between the two scenarios. <p>But the report has also fallen flat among the technology press outlets Microsoft had surely hoped would carry its message. Instead, tech reporters and columnists have slapped down the findings. A Google News search for "<a href="http://news.google.com/news?um=1&ned=us&cf=all&ncl=1329890453">Apple tax</a>" returns dozens of articles and blog posts deriding Microsoft's claims. The current top result is a <i>PC Magazine</i> column by John C. Dvorak. Instead of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAWDYaWAVQQ">baiting Mac fans</a>, which seems to be his favorite hobby, Dvorak <a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2345199,00.asp">dismisses the report</a> as "propagandistic." </p> <p> Why do I care? Because there's a huge disconnect between Mac fans' perception of the press as a Microsoft "partner" (as described by <a href="http://theappleblog.com/2009/04/14/microsoft-longs-for-the-golden-age-of-fud/">TheAppleBlog</a> writer Tom Reestman) and the reality that the media as a whole has had a <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2127924/">long-running crush on Apple</a>, in part because Apple makes a great underdog story. <p>Take <i>eWeek </i>columnist Joe Wilcox. Reestman sees him as a Microsoft spokesbot, yet Wilcox was one of the first to <a href="http://blogs.eweek.com/applewatch/content/imac/microsoft_report_miscalculates_apple_tax.html">pick apart</a> the report's errors and deem the whole document "purposely inflammatory."</p> <p><i>Fortune</i> writer Philip Elmer-DeWitt <a href="http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2009/04/10/behind-microsofts-apple-tax-gambit/?source=yahoo_quote">was even more blunt</a>: "No one would mistake Roger Kay’s white paper for objective statement of the facts." </p> <p>Maybe what Mac fans are misunderstanding is this: Because around 90 percent of the world uses Windows, Office and other Microsoft software, nearly anything Microsoft releases or writes is newsworthy. But the Apple tax backlash proves that as a whole, the mainstream media aren't Microsoft's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_organ">house organ</a>. Apple partisans should worry more about Microsoft's <a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/10/video-microsofts-latest-anti-apple-ad-sends-bloggers-overdrive">new TV ads</a>, which will have a much bigger effect among a much broader audience. Are the ads unfair? A bit. But they're good. </p> <p><b>More news, commentary, and predictions from <i>The Industry Standard</i>:</b></p> <ul> <li>Paul Boutin: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/10/video-microsofts-latest-anti-apple-ad-sends-bloggers-overdrive">Video: Microsoft's latest anti-Apple ads send Mac bloggers into overdrive</a></b></li> <li>Paul Boutin: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/14/iphones-work-forrester-now-says-yes">iPhones at work? Forrester now says yes</a></b></li> <li>Special Feature: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2008/07/10/iphone-naysayers-one-year-later">The iPhone naysayers, one year later</a></b></li> </ul> http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/15/apple-tax-paper-backfires-microsoft#comments co:Apple co:microsoft Hardware The Industry Standard Wed, 15 Apr 2009 13:43:48 -0400 Paul Boutin 132400 at http://www.thestandard.com "Apple tax" report backfires on Microsoft while Mac fans fume http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/15/apple-tax-paper-backfires-microsoft <p> <p> </p> <div style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 2px"> <script type="text/javascript"> digg_url = 'http://digg.com/apple/Apple_tax_claim_burns_Microsoft_but_Mac_fans_see_media_bias'; </script><script src="http://digg.com/tools/diggthis.js" type="text/javascript"> </script></div> <p>Last week, Microsoft began flogging <a href="http://www.ndpta.com/files/AppleTax.pdf">a report</a> by an analyst whom the company had paid to document the "Apple tax" -- the supposed difference in price paid by an all-Apple household versus an all-Microsoft household. The report claimed an all-Apple household's costs would add up to an extra $3,367 over five years, which prompted Mac fans to dissect the report and highlight discrepancies between the two scenarios. <p>But the report has also fallen flat among the technology press outlets Microsoft had surely hoped would carry its message. Instead, tech reporters and columnists have slapped down the findings. A Google News search for "<a href="http://news.google.com/news?um=1&ned=us&cf=all&ncl=1329890453">Apple tax</a>" returns dozens of articles and blog posts deriding Microsoft's claims. The current top result is a <i>PC Magazine</i> column by John C. Dvorak. Instead of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAWDYaWAVQQ">baiting Mac fans</a>, which seems to be his favorite hobby, Dvorak <a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2345199,00.asp">dismisses the report</a> as "propagandistic." </p> <p> Why do I care? Because there's a huge disconnect between Mac fans' perception of the press as a Microsoft "partner" (as described by <a href="http://theappleblog.com/2009/04/14/microsoft-longs-for-the-golden-age-of-fud/">TheAppleBlog</a> writer Tom Reestman) and the reality that the media as a whole has had a <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2127924/">long-running crush on Apple</a>, in part because Apple makes a great underdog story. <p>Take <i>eWeek </i>columnist Joe Wilcox. Reestman sees him as a Microsoft spokesbot, yet Wilcox was one of the first to <a href="http://blogs.eweek.com/applewatch/content/imac/microsoft_report_miscalculates_apple_tax.html">pick apart</a> the report's errors and deem the whole document "purposely inflammatory."</p> <p><i>Fortune</i> writer Philip Elmer-DeWitt <a href="http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2009/04/10/behind-microsofts-apple-tax-gambit/?source=yahoo_quote">was even more blunt</a>: "No one would mistake Roger Kay’s white paper for objective statement of the facts." </p> <p>Maybe what Mac fans are misunderstanding is this: Because around 90 percent of the world uses Windows, Office and other Microsoft software, nearly anything Microsoft releases or writes is newsworthy. But the Apple tax backlash proves that as a whole, the mainstream media aren't Microsoft's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_organ">house organ</a>. Apple partisans should worry more about Microsoft's <a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/10/video-microsofts-latest-anti-apple-ad-sends-bloggers-overdrive">new TV ads</a>, which will have a much bigger effect among a much broader audience. Are the ads unfair? A bit. But they're good. </p> <p><b>More news, commentary, and predictions from <i>The Industry Standard</i>:</b></p> <ul> <li>Paul Boutin: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/10/video-microsofts-latest-anti-apple-ad-sends-bloggers-overdrive">Video: Microsoft's latest anti-Apple ads send Mac bloggers into overdrive</a></b></li> <li>Paul Boutin: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/14/iphones-work-forrester-now-says-yes">iPhones at work? Forrester now says yes</a></b></li> <li>Special Feature: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2008/07/10/iphone-naysayers-one-year-later">The iPhone naysayers, one year later</a></b></li> </ul> http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/15/apple-tax-paper-backfires-microsoft#comments co:Apple co:microsoft Hardware The Industry Standard Wed, 15 Apr 2009 13:43:48 -0400 Paul Boutin 132400 at http://www.thestandard.com "Apple tax" report backfires on Microsoft while Mac fans fume http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/15/apple-tax-paper-backfires-microsoft <p> <p> </p> <div style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 2px"> <script type="text/javascript"> digg_url = 'http://digg.com/apple/Apple_tax_claim_burns_Microsoft_but_Mac_fans_see_media_bias'; </script><script src="http://digg.com/tools/diggthis.js" type="text/javascript"> </script></div> <p>Last week, Microsoft began flogging <a href="http://www.ndpta.com/files/AppleTax.pdf">a report</a> by an analyst whom the company had paid to document the "Apple tax" -- the supposed difference in price paid by an all-Apple household versus an all-Microsoft household. The report claimed an all-Apple household's costs would add up to an extra $3,367 over five years, which prompted Mac fans to dissect the report and highlight discrepancies between the two scenarios. <p>But the report has also fallen flat among the technology press outlets Microsoft had surely hoped would carry its message. Instead, tech reporters and columnists have slapped down the findings. A Google News search for "<a href="http://news.google.com/news?um=1&ned=us&cf=all&ncl=1329890453">Apple tax</a>" returns dozens of articles and blog posts deriding Microsoft's claims. The current top result is a <i>PC Magazine</i> column by John C. Dvorak. Instead of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAWDYaWAVQQ">baiting Mac fans</a>, which seems to be his favorite hobby, Dvorak <a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2345199,00.asp">dismisses the report</a> as "propagandistic." </p> <p> Why do I care? Because there's a huge disconnect between Mac fans' perception of the press as a Microsoft "partner" (as described by <a href="http://theappleblog.com/2009/04/14/microsoft-longs-for-the-golden-age-of-fud/">TheAppleBlog</a> writer Tom Reestman) and the reality that the media as a whole has had a <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2127924/">long-running crush on Apple</a>, in part because Apple makes a great underdog story. <p>Take <i>eWeek </i>columnist Joe Wilcox. Reestman sees him as a Microsoft spokesbot, yet Wilcox was one of the first to <a href="http://blogs.eweek.com/applewatch/content/imac/microsoft_report_miscalculates_apple_tax.html">pick apart</a> the report's errors and deem the whole document "purposely inflammatory."</p> <p><i>Fortune</i> writer Philip Elmer-DeWitt <a href="http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2009/04/10/behind-microsofts-apple-tax-gambit/?source=yahoo_quote">was even more blunt</a>: "No one would mistake Roger Kay’s white paper for objective statement of the facts." </p> <p>Maybe what Mac fans are misunderstanding is this: Because around 90 percent of the world uses Windows, Office and other Microsoft software, nearly anything Microsoft releases or writes is newsworthy. But the Apple tax backlash proves that as a whole, the mainstream media aren't Microsoft's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_organ">house organ</a>. Apple partisans should worry more about Microsoft's <a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/10/video-microsofts-latest-anti-apple-ad-sends-bloggers-overdrive">new TV ads</a>, which will have a much bigger effect among a much broader audience. Are the ads unfair? A bit. But they're good. </p> <p><b>More news, commentary, and predictions from <i>The Industry Standard</i>:</b></p> <ul> <li>Paul Boutin: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/10/video-microsofts-latest-anti-apple-ad-sends-bloggers-overdrive">Video: Microsoft's latest anti-Apple ads send Mac bloggers into overdrive</a></b></li> <li>Paul Boutin: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/14/iphones-work-forrester-now-says-yes">iPhones at work? Forrester now says yes</a></b></li> <li>Special Feature: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2008/07/10/iphone-naysayers-one-year-later">The iPhone naysayers, one year later</a></b></li> </ul> http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/15/apple-tax-paper-backfires-microsoft#comments co:Apple co:microsoft Hardware The Industry Standard Wed, 15 Apr 2009 13:43:48 -0400 Paul Boutin 132400 at http://www.thestandard.com "Apple tax" report backfires on Microsoft while Mac fans fume http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/15/apple-tax-paper-backfires-microsoft <p> <p> </p> <div style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 2px"> <script type="text/javascript"> digg_url = 'http://digg.com/apple/Apple_tax_claim_burns_Microsoft_but_Mac_fans_see_media_bias'; </script><script src="http://digg.com/tools/diggthis.js" type="text/javascript"> </script></div> <p>Last week, Microsoft began flogging <a href="http://www.ndpta.com/files/AppleTax.pdf">a report</a> by an analyst whom the company had paid to document the "Apple tax" -- the supposed difference in price paid by an all-Apple household versus an all-Microsoft household. The report claimed an all-Apple household's costs would add up to an extra $3,367 over five years, which prompted Mac fans to dissect the report and highlight discrepancies between the two scenarios. <p>But the report has also fallen flat among the technology press outlets Microsoft had surely hoped would carry its message. Instead, tech reporters and columnists have slapped down the findings. A Google News search for "<a href="http://news.google.com/news?um=1&ned=us&cf=all&ncl=1329890453">Apple tax</a>" returns dozens of articles and blog posts deriding Microsoft's claims. The current top result is a <i>PC Magazine</i> column by John C. Dvorak. Instead of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAWDYaWAVQQ">baiting Mac fans</a>, which seems to be his favorite hobby, Dvorak <a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2345199,00.asp">dismisses the report</a> as "propagandistic." </p> <p> Why do I care? Because there's a huge disconnect between Mac fans' perception of the press as a Microsoft "partner" (as described by <a href="http://theappleblog.com/2009/04/14/microsoft-longs-for-the-golden-age-of-fud/">TheAppleBlog</a> writer Tom Reestman) and the reality that the media as a whole has had a <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2127924/">long-running crush on Apple</a>, in part because Apple makes a great underdog story. <p>Take <i>eWeek </i>columnist Joe Wilcox. Reestman sees him as a Microsoft spokesbot, yet Wilcox was one of the first to <a href="http://blogs.eweek.com/applewatch/content/imac/microsoft_report_miscalculates_apple_tax.html">pick apart</a> the report's errors and deem the whole document "purposely inflammatory."</p> <p><i>Fortune</i> writer Philip Elmer-DeWitt <a href="http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2009/04/10/behind-microsofts-apple-tax-gambit/?source=yahoo_quote">was even more blunt</a>: "No one would mistake Roger Kay’s white paper for objective statement of the facts." </p> <p>Maybe what Mac fans are misunderstanding is this: Because around 90 percent of the world uses Windows, Office and other Microsoft software, nearly anything Microsoft releases or writes is newsworthy. But the Apple tax backlash proves that as a whole, the mainstream media aren't Microsoft's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_organ">house organ</a>. Apple partisans should worry more about Microsoft's <a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/10/video-microsofts-latest-anti-apple-ad-sends-bloggers-overdrive">new TV ads</a>, which will have a much bigger effect among a much broader audience. Are the ads unfair? A bit. But they're good. </p> <p><b>More news, commentary, and predictions from <i>The Industry Standard</i>:</b></p> <ul> <li>Paul Boutin: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/10/video-microsofts-latest-anti-apple-ad-sends-bloggers-overdrive">Video: Microsoft's latest anti-Apple ads send Mac bloggers into overdrive</a></b></li> <li>Paul Boutin: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/14/iphones-work-forrester-now-says-yes">iPhones at work? Forrester now says yes</a></b></li> <li>Special Feature: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2008/07/10/iphone-naysayers-one-year-later">The iPhone naysayers, one year later</a></b></li> </ul> http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/15/apple-tax-paper-backfires-microsoft#comments co:Apple co:microsoft Hardware The Industry Standard Wed, 15 Apr 2009 13:43:48 -0400 Paul Boutin 132400 at http://www.thestandard.com "Apple tax" report backfires on Microsoft while Mac fans fume http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/15/apple-tax-paper-backfires-microsoft <p> <p> </p> <div style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 2px"> <script type="text/javascript"> digg_url = 'http://digg.com/apple/Apple_tax_claim_burns_Microsoft_but_Mac_fans_see_media_bias'; </script><script src="http://digg.com/tools/diggthis.js" type="text/javascript"> </script></div> <p>Last week, Microsoft began flogging <a href="http://www.ndpta.com/files/AppleTax.pdf">a report</a> by an analyst whom the company had paid to document the "Apple tax" -- the supposed difference in price paid by an all-Apple household versus an all-Microsoft household. The report claimed an all-Apple household's costs would add up to an extra $3,367 over five years, which prompted Mac fans to dissect the report and highlight discrepancies between the two scenarios. <p>But the report has also fallen flat among the technology press outlets Microsoft had surely hoped would carry its message. Instead, tech reporters and columnists have slapped down the findings. A Google News search for "<a href="http://news.google.com/news?um=1&ned=us&cf=all&ncl=1329890453">Apple tax</a>" returns dozens of articles and blog posts deriding Microsoft's claims. The current top result is a <i>PC Magazine</i> column by John C. Dvorak. Instead of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAWDYaWAVQQ">baiting Mac fans</a>, which seems to be his favorite hobby, Dvorak <a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2345199,00.asp">dismisses the report</a> as "propagandistic." </p> <p> Why do I care? Because there's a huge disconnect between Mac fans' perception of the press as a Microsoft "partner" (as described by <a href="http://theappleblog.com/2009/04/14/microsoft-longs-for-the-golden-age-of-fud/">TheAppleBlog</a> writer Tom Reestman) and the reality that the media as a whole has had a <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2127924/">long-running crush on Apple</a>, in part because Apple makes a great underdog story. <p>Take <i>eWeek </i>columnist Joe Wilcox. Reestman sees him as a Microsoft spokesbot, yet Wilcox was one of the first to <a href="http://blogs.eweek.com/applewatch/content/imac/microsoft_report_miscalculates_apple_tax.html">pick apart</a> the report's errors and deem the whole document "purposely inflammatory."</p> <p><i>Fortune</i> writer Philip Elmer-DeWitt <a href="http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2009/04/10/behind-microsofts-apple-tax-gambit/?source=yahoo_quote">was even more blunt</a>: "No one would mistake Roger Kay’s white paper for objective statement of the facts." </p> <p>Maybe what Mac fans are misunderstanding is this: Because around 90 percent of the world uses Windows, Office and other Microsoft software, nearly anything Microsoft releases or writes is newsworthy. But the Apple tax backlash proves that as a whole, the mainstream media aren't Microsoft's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_organ">house organ</a>. Apple partisans should worry more about Microsoft's <a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/10/video-microsofts-latest-anti-apple-ad-sends-bloggers-overdrive">new TV ads</a>, which will have a much bigger effect among a much broader audience. Are the ads unfair? A bit. But they're good. </p> <p><b>More news, commentary, and predictions from <i>The Industry Standard</i>:</b></p> <ul> <li>Paul Boutin: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/10/video-microsofts-latest-anti-apple-ad-sends-bloggers-overdrive">Video: Microsoft's latest anti-Apple ads send Mac bloggers into overdrive</a></b></li> <li>Paul Boutin: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/14/iphones-work-forrester-now-says-yes">iPhones at work? Forrester now says yes</a></b></li> <li>Special Feature: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2008/07/10/iphone-naysayers-one-year-later">The iPhone naysayers, one year later</a></b></li> </ul> http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/15/apple-tax-paper-backfires-microsoft#comments co:Apple co:microsoft Hardware The Industry Standard Wed, 15 Apr 2009 13:43:48 -0400 Paul Boutin 132400 at http://www.thestandard.com "Apple tax" report backfires on Microsoft while Mac fans fume http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/15/apple-tax-paper-backfires-microsoft <p> <p> </p> <div style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 2px"> <script type="text/javascript"> digg_url = 'http://digg.com/apple/Apple_tax_claim_burns_Microsoft_but_Mac_fans_see_media_bias'; </script><script src="http://digg.com/tools/diggthis.js" type="text/javascript"> </script></div> <p>Last week, Microsoft began flogging <a href="http://www.ndpta.com/files/AppleTax.pdf">a report</a> by an analyst whom the company had paid to document the "Apple tax" -- the supposed difference in price paid by an all-Apple household versus an all-Microsoft household. The report claimed an all-Apple household's costs would add up to an extra $3,367 over five years, which prompted Mac fans to dissect the report and highlight discrepancies between the two scenarios. <p>But the report has also fallen flat among the technology press outlets Microsoft had surely hoped would carry its message. Instead, tech reporters and columnists have slapped down the findings. A Google News search for "<a href="http://news.google.com/news?um=1&ned=us&cf=all&ncl=1329890453">Apple tax</a>" returns dozens of articles and blog posts deriding Microsoft's claims. The current top result is a <i>PC Magazine</i> column by John C. Dvorak. Instead of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAWDYaWAVQQ">baiting Mac fans</a>, which seems to be his favorite hobby, Dvorak <a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2345199,00.asp">dismisses the report</a> as "propagandistic." </p> <p> Why do I care? Because there's a huge disconnect between Mac fans' perception of the press as a Microsoft "partner" (as described by <a href="http://theappleblog.com/2009/04/14/microsoft-longs-for-the-golden-age-of-fud/">TheAppleBlog</a> writer Tom Reestman) and the reality that the media as a whole has had a <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2127924/">long-running crush on Apple</a>, in part because Apple makes a great underdog story. <p>Take <i>eWeek </i>columnist Joe Wilcox. Reestman sees him as a Microsoft spokesbot, yet Wilcox was one of the first to <a href="http://blogs.eweek.com/applewatch/content/imac/microsoft_report_miscalculates_apple_tax.html">pick apart</a> the report's errors and deem the whole document "purposely inflammatory."</p> <p><i>Fortune</i> writer Philip Elmer-DeWitt <a href="http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2009/04/10/behind-microsofts-apple-tax-gambit/?source=yahoo_quote">was even more blunt</a>: "No one would mistake Roger Kay’s white paper for objective statement of the facts." </p> <p>Maybe what Mac fans are misunderstanding is this: Because around 90 percent of the world uses Windows, Office and other Microsoft software, nearly anything Microsoft releases or writes is newsworthy. But the Apple tax backlash proves that as a whole, the mainstream media aren't Microsoft's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_organ">house organ</a>. Apple partisans should worry more about Microsoft's <a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/10/video-microsofts-latest-anti-apple-ad-sends-bloggers-overdrive">new TV ads</a>, which will have a much bigger effect among a much broader audience. Are the ads unfair? A bit. But they're good. </p> <p><b>More news, commentary, and predictions from <i>The Industry Standard</i>:</b></p> <ul> <li>Paul Boutin: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/10/video-microsofts-latest-anti-apple-ad-sends-bloggers-overdrive">Video: Microsoft's latest anti-Apple ads send Mac bloggers into overdrive</a></b></li> <li>Paul Boutin: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/14/iphones-work-forrester-now-says-yes">iPhones at work? Forrester now says yes</a></b></li> <li>Special Feature: <b><a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2008/07/10/iphone-naysayers-one-year-later">The iPhone naysayers, one year later</a></b></li> </ul> http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/15/apple-tax-paper-backfires-microsoft#comments co:Apple co:microsoft Hardware The Industry Standard Wed, 15 Apr 2009 13:43:48 -0400 Paul Boutin 132400 at http://www.thestandard.com