Until Apple complains about "brand" names and cost. Then again you could can the same thing about Microsoft and even several other companies.

Were the prices lowered because they were mentioned in the adds? If so, put them back in, just adjust them as Apple changes them.

I actually like these commercials. Of course I'm laughing more at the people than anything else.

But they are true, just as much as the I'm a Mac/I'm a PC ads are. PC's do get more viruses, but Macs are generally 2x the price. These commercials though are aimed at the people who don't do research though. The Mac's are smaller and have slightly nicer components, and are stylish, but most people just need that $500 HP that they buy.

Just all depends on what you do with it.

"Good. Now that they've ended the legal quibbling, we can get back to our regular business of impassioned, fruitless debate about which operating system is superior."

Maybe you could just cut and paste all the posts from the original thread on the subject. ;)

"Now that they've ended the legal quibbling, we can get back to our regular business of impassioned, fruitless debate about which operating system is superior."

GREAT. I'll start:

Macs suck because they killed your children.

Don't they give them $1300 or something? They can leave with a MBP for 1199+tax.

The argument of Apple vs. Microsoft is more irritating than Chevy vs. Ford vs. GM, or whatever other misguided and blatantly stupid brand loyalty wars have gone on over the years. If it works for you: great.

Made on a Mac? Assembled on an Asus? Shaped on a Sony? I don't give a fuck. Get a life, nerds.

It's perfectlly OK when apple disses Microsoft but when Microsoft returns fire apple gets it's pretty panties in a bunch.

@wcnghj: I'm pretty sure someone said the paperwork they sign says Macs aren't a "PC" for purposes of the commercial.

But they look at them like they are.

Micro$oft is all lies. I have an iMac and I've never been happier.

@Hate_Brian_Club_I'mNotOnlyThePresidentI'mAClient:
That's what I saw about that as well. I just broke my girlfriend from her Sony Fetish. I showed her a better TV for the same price as the Sony and she finally agreed.

I love when they say they need battery life. Yeah, good luck with that dell/hp/vaio. True 7 hour battery life on a macbook pro at $1100? I'll take it.

@blacketj913: It seems so, even though officially nothing was said either way

Dang, only $1700 now? I STILL can't buy one with the free $1K from Microsoft!

@post_break: I can get 5+ true hours of use on my Toshiba laptop with a 9-cell battery. Laptop was $650.

So it's ok for Apple to point out (and somewhat exaggerate and poke fun at) the flaws in Microsoft's software, but when Microsoft turns around and fires back, it's not ok? Seems kind of like a double standard coming from Apple

@albear: the prices were off by $300 (700 for the lowest MacBook Pro now). you don't think that's worth correcting in national advertising? their issue was with the price, which was being presented inaccurately.

As someone who uses Apple products and likes them, I have to thank Microsoft for the ads. They brought attention to the relatively high price for Apple notebooks and Apple has had to lower their prices. That's great for Apple customers. Apple fanboys on the other hand were completely pissed about the ads because in their mind, Apple can do no wrong.

@wcnghj:
But for $1199 you can generally get a faster or larger Microsoft based laptop. That might be why they (participant) choose them other than for the purpose of the commercial.

BTW I'm not a proponent of either type. Mac is a brand as far as im concerned and is just a small expensive flashy PC.

It's good thing Microsoft took out the prices. It's have been a slippery slope if Microsoft had gotten away with such libel, like Fairsley Foods did with Gibbon's Markets:

I'm gonna stay out of it.

@coren: I think it's mostly because the MS ads don't actually say anything about the computer except that it's too pretty and too expensive with no real comparison of capabilities....at least the Mac vs PC ads pretend to compare real things.

@anonymousmonk: Firstly, there was no legal issue. Apple called Microsoft and whined. Secondly, The new so-called 'MacBook Pro' goes for $1199 and up; not $700.

The 13" 'MacBook Pro' was simply called an Aluminum MacBook back when Apple first announced it. After these ads were running for a while Apple changed that Macbook's name to a MacBook Pro, when there's nothing Pro about it, so they could try to justify this request.

@montusama: Wait what?

@albear: The art of it is in doing it vaguely enough that it makes the other person look bad, AND you cannot prove anything to the contrary.

Apple says windows machines get viruses and freeze. Well, all they have to do is get some examples, and MS cant touch them. If you say something sells for 2000 and it sells for 1700, the claim can be proven to be false (does not matter if you are just splitting hairs there).

Macs may be twice the price, but that is the price you pay for a stable operating system.

@karan1003: Atleast unlike windows, they do not BBQ them with tartar sauce.

@AreYouConfusedYet?HowAboutNow?:

Really? You're using "$" for S. How juvenile. It's not like you own or work for Apple. Why delude yourself into thinking they're some morally superior underdog?

@anonymousmonk: I mean, they were correct for the first month they were on the air. Still, it's worth correcting, but doesn't change the point that with the budget of the characters in the commercial, the Macs were not legitimate options.

@legotech: I think it's that Microsoft still has stock in apple.

@Ratty: I feel so dumb for allowing myself to be lured into this by a stupid comment but really? Battery life? You'll find many people who will have disparate experiences with the battery life on your same computer. That's not even going into the fact that you'll find that many pcs will give you the same battery life.

I feel so silly for taking part in this.

@legotech: Well from the commercials I've seen, it's not about capabilities and more about cost - in which case a PC beats a mac every time.

@I Love New Jersey: Oh, I'll just give up.

@socalrob: The real difference is the OS. I'll take UNIX/Linux over Windows any day. The architecture is better, and inherently more stable.

And Mac OS has much more reasonable system requirements than Vista and 7.

@MostlyHarmless: And now the obligatory "Can't everyone just use free software? I mean, I compiled my own OS at home and it's 10x better!"

@MostlyHarmless: Now I know why Macs lack that smoky flavor I so desire. Ipods, on the other hand...[consumerist.com]

@I Love New Jersey:
Linux is stable and it's free....

I guess if you're going to throw money away, you've got to mentally justify doing so in order to avoid any psychological dissonance.

@I Love New Jersey: Someone's obviously never used Ubuntu. Which is free.

@I Love New Jersey: And isn't OS whatever a hundred bucks anyway? Why would you pay twice the price of a several hundred dollar laptop to get an OS that costs a fraction of that?

"A powerful cause of dissonance is an idea in conflict with a fundamental element of the self-concept, such as "I am a good person" or "I made the right decision." The anxiety that comes with the possibility of having made a bad decision can lead to rationalization, the tendency to create additional reasons or justifications to support one's choices. A person who just spent too much money on a new car might decide that the new vehicle is much less likely to break down than his or her old car. This belief may or may not be true, but it would likely reduce dissonance and make the person feel better. Dissonance can also lead to confirmation bias, the denial of disconfirming evidence, and other ego defense mechanisms."

@karan1003: But both offer the indignation that stems from stealing your wife in the process.

Macs use the same hardware every other computer does. There's really NOTHING special about them and NO reason for them to be so overpriced. Unless you think not getting viruses is worth paying 2 grand for. You really are just paying for a name, kinda like a Chanel purse or a Lexus.

@blacketj913:
Put them back in, but don't adjust them...
Just put a disclaimer on the commercial in fine print saying
"All prices were valid and accurate at time of filming, and reflected retail pricing of the specific store not necessarily current MSRP."

Or you could get an abacus for fifty bucks on eBay and save LOTS of money. Hard to chat or tweet, though.

@MostlyHarmless: "they do not BBQ them with tartar sauce."

Ewwww tartar sauce on barbecue?
-Do not want!-

Macs are expensive as hell, especially considering you can break most of them over your knee, and have high defect rates. Plus, their owners have zero sense of depreciation. I'm surprised a used Mac doesn't actually cost more than a new one, but I guess reality must set in a little, even in the Cult of the Apple. Hail Eris, I mean Jobs.

@I Love New Jersey:

I use windows, and I've never had any stability issues. But then again, I'm not a moron who downloads "free porn!" and cutesy cursors & clicks on every flashy ad. I use free antivirus & antispyware software & I've never had any issues.

Anyone can keep Windows running optimally with very simple measures. It's not that hard. You don't need to spend thousands of dollars to have a stable computer.

@socalrob: Sharp? Toshiba? And "better"? How?

It wasn't misleading when they filmed the ad. They lowered the price AFTER the ad ran. I see no problem. Microsoft should not have changed it.