Running Windows on a pc system with twice the capabilities and twice the price gave me half the results. I spent time recovering documents from crashes, compile times are slower, even running multiple IIS DevServ testing complex WCF Services and Interfaces ran smoother.

That said, when I sit down to do something, I will pay the extra $$ to have this stable environment any day. Do I use MACs for everything, No. I have my gaming system, I have my SQL servers and IIS boxes.

My biggest problem with these adds is they do not show the validity of the price difference. Take a few minutes to watch the manufacturing videos on APPLE.COM and explain to me how the price is too High. Its like a Cadillac, they are out there, and not every can have one, but if you want one, or you need one, they are available.

I will own a PC and a MAC to get the broadness they give combined. The newest OS X from MAC will support many Microsoft applications such as Exchange.

To sum up, I just purchased a top of the line MACBook Pro, not because its MAC, not because it was Expensive, but because it is a finely tuned processing machine. One that will be guaranteed to run smoothly and reliably when I open it to use it. If these are not your needs, don't feel bad when buying a PC.

The only reason I bought one is because the place where I work at offered to pay a portion of my Mac so I can learn how to fix them. For some reason they get really hot with incompatible programs? Other than that they are ok. For some reason I think my Macbook runs better under Windows 7. Maybe that's just me though.

People should get over this whole PC vs. Mac. They're just computers…

For example, you could use your Apple laptop as a Mac for all of your personal and creative needs and Windows for business and for games which are not available for the Mac.

If you are a Windows user switching to a Mac, you can still use the PC software you already own, with the option of buying PC or Mac software in the future.

I don't know why Apple does not promote this obvious advantage. Anyone who buys an Intel based Apple computer does not have to choose a side because he or she is a Mac AND a PC.

And of course ALL of this goes w/o saying that Apple is going to have to do something to counter the Netbook era which is just about to kick into high gear.

He argues that the ads leave Microsoft vulnerable counterattack from "rabid" Macintosh fans. Macintosh fans like that will alway be critical, usually nonsensically. Plus it's not like Apple itself isn't the technology company most guilty of logical impropriety over the years in it's claims and ads, for which they also have recieved plenty of (less visible) critisism.

Glossing over the price difference is a pretty glaring fault in Neil's argument. Probably the most poignant statement in the laptop hunter ads is right at the end where Lauren says, "I'm a PC, and I got just what I wanted"— which is really the main attraction of the Windows Hardware. You want certain exact features? you can likely find them from multiple vendors. Apple, however, with it's limited lineup and configurations is an agressive upseller: you want a decent gaming card like the NVidia GT? You're looking at a $2500 Apple computer equipped with the expensive Nehlem processor. On the PC side however, you can make cost-effective compromises and settle for a good Core2 or Phenom system that can also make good use of the same video hardware for high detail gaming for under a thousand.

I'm an Apple user myself and enjoy Apple products (If you check your website stats you can see I'm using Safari on MacOSX) but what the "Hunters" ad say is true – Macs are indeed expensive and Apple's prices need to be lowered a bit to reflect the sagging economy.

Then again, Apple, unlike other computer companies, is doing fine despite of the recession so attacks on their pricing scheme is probably no skin off their nose. Apple wins. However, we the consumers lose because we are forced to pay a higher price for the privilege to own a Mac.

I do hope that M$ through Windows 7 and a more effective marketing effort (Laptop Hunter is a start) would force Apple's hand in lowering their prices a bit more in the future.

Most ads prey on folk's ignorance, because folks won't research the products thouroughly and simply believe everything the ad says. In other words, good marketing means making the ad just believable enough to get people NOT to check the sources.

Anyways, most of the ads, including the classic 1984 Macintosh ad are stupid. If you want to show relevance of your OS and/or computer, show what people can DO with it — not this "mine is better than yours" junk. The Big Three Auto companies learned a thing or two about that. By GM comparing itself to Toyota, etc. it legitimized the competitor in the minds of folks who are ignorant and won't do the research. Why expose your competitor to EQUAL press as you?!?

If Microsoft really wanted to show that they are better, how about an ad about the REPAIR costs and the proprietary nature of Apple products (iPhone, iPod, Macs, etc.) If Apple wanted to appeal to the PC/Corporate folks, how about their inexpensive XServe products or their FREE recycling program. Either one of these would sit better in the conscious of viewers than the current ads.

But I think this article is a little off base. False premise? Apple IS overpriced. I made the mistake of purchasing a $3k desktop once, which ended its life as a doorstop. Never again! Buying used is best with Mac purchases (check out Other World Computing or Ebay). I think a lot of Mac users are really drinking the kool-aid on this one. Yes the operating system is very nice, and so far OSX has been rock solid for me. But the cost is really out of whack.

When I saw the laptop hunter ads, I thought they were pretty successful at making the point that a PC purchase is a lot more cost effective for most users. And the "I'm a PC" ads showing the diversity of PC users were a great answer to those annoying "I'm a Mac" ads. When I see those, btw, I'd like to smack the smug look off the Mac guys face.