Shark Bait

Knowledge Centers

Operating Systems

Networking & Internet

Mobile & Wireless

Security

Storage

Business Intelligence

Servers & Data Center

Computerworld Reports

Industry

See your link here

Preston Gralla

Seeing Through Windows

Do Windows users pay a Microsoft tax?

12 comments

TAGS:Apple, Apple Tax, Linux, Mac, Windows, windows tax
IT TOPICS:Desktops & Servers, Hardware, Laptops & Netbooks, Linux, Macintosh & Apple, Operating Systems, Windows & Microsoft

A few days ago, Steve Ballmer stirred up a hornet's nest when he said that Apple users pay a $500 tax for buying Macs instead of PCs. What he neglected to mention, though, is that plenty of people believe they pay a Microsoft tax for using Windows --- and it's not the price of operating system they're complaining about.

As I wrote in my blog, Ballmer said a few days ago that when people buy a Mac rather than a PC, they're spending $500 just for a logo on the machine. The price is actually between $300 and $500, but he had a valid point.

He neglected to say, though, that many Linux users feel that they are forced to pay a Microsoft tax because there's no simple way to buy a PC without Windows on it --- particularly a laptop. So they have to pay extra for Windows --- between $60 and $100 --- then wipe their disks clean and install Linux. Many Linux users told me on my blog that they aren't particularly pleased to be paying the Microsoft tax.

Preston Gralla's Tax Series:

A few people commented on the blog that even Windows users pay a Microsoft tax, and not for Windows itself. I think they're right.

The first tax Windows users pay is a security tax. Windows is more prone to malware than either Linux or the Mac, and using Windows without extra security software is like walking a high-rise tightrope without a safety net --- blindfolded, on a windy day, with no balancing pole, and carrying a 50-pound weight in one hand.

Buy a new PC, and you generally get a 30-day trial for security software from Symantec, McAfee, or another vendor. These all-in-one security suites generally cost from $60 to $80 per year. And it's a good idea to get an all-in-one suite rather than just anti-virus, because Windows built-in firewall and anti-spyware needs help.

That $60 to $80 per year, though, may not be the worst of it. The bigger tax is a hidden one, and it's more costly than money --- it's your time. Specifically, I'm talking about the "crapware" tax. Buy a new PC, and it's filled with junk and crapware --- trial programs for music software, DVD-burning software, personal finance software, and more. They slow down your system, clog your hard disk, and sometimes conflict with one another. You'll have to either spend time cleaning your system of the junk, or else living with the consequences.

The upshot? One way or another, there is a hidden Microsoft tax you generally pay when you buy a new PC. But there are ways around paying the Microsoft tax. In my blog "Free software for avoiding the Microsoft tax," I show you how to do it.

Email this

Digg this

What People Are Saying

Add new comment

There is no Apple tax!

Submitted by Anonymous on April 1, 2009 - 9:21 A.M.

I'm not exactly a Microsoft fan, but I'm not an Apple fan either. I just like to see fair comparisons, and I don't see anything close to a $300-500 premium for Apple computers in the markets in which Apple participates.

One big cause of the misconception is that Apple doesn't make a mini-tower desktop computer. Mini-towers are the form factor with the cheapest hardware, and Apple hasn't entered that market. It's unfair to compare a Dell or HP mini-tower with a Mac Mini or iMac, which use notebook components. If you look at all-in-ones from Sony or any other vendor, with the same specs as the iMac, you'll find that Apple is very competitive. Same for the Mini. A mini-tower might be a valid replacement for an Mac, and it's Apple's loss for not entering that market, but it's not really the same thing.

Likewise, the Mac Pro always seems to be compared with the Dell XPS Studio mini-tower with an i7 processor. The Dell is a great machine, but it's not in the same class as a Mac Pro which is a real workstation with TWO Xeon processors. A better comparison would be a Dell Precision model, and again Apple is very competitive.

Notebooks might be the one market where Macs seem a little expensive, but surely the solid aluminum body, timeless style, LED screens, battery life, and decent processors make them worth the money to some people.

And that's just looking at hardware. OS X (vs Vista), security (so far), Apple store service (in some areas), and included iLife software add real value and would not be considered a "tax" by most people.

Reply | Report this comment

hmm

Submitted by bpace on March 31, 2009 - 4:08 P.M.

What if you buy Office with your computer? That on top of the security, you might as well buy a mac.
This is coming from someone that hates OSX. (the dock specifically)
I use Linux and generally build my own computers. You have a very valid point. You end up spending that extra 500 anyways

Reply | Report this comment

Who are you and what have you done with Preston Gralla!

Submitted by Anonymous on March 31, 2009 - 12:53 P.M.

You're not Preston Gralla!!! You imposter! Preston would never write anything critical of Microsoft nor praise worthy of Open Source Software! Your ploy has failed. WHAT HAVE YOU DONE WITH PRESTON!!!

Reply | Report this comment

I'd say there is a

Submitted by Anonymous on March 26, 2009 - 8:22 A.M.

I'd say there is a "Microsoft tax" if you are buying a system where only Windows is available. BUT! At least it's not $500 [and that's $500 over the cost of a typical system with Windows on it - more like $700].

While you can buy a copy of Windows and install it on any hardware [even a Mac], you can only use the Mac OS on a Mac.

So while you can choose which make and model you want Windows to go with you can't say the same for the Mac OS.

Reply | Report this comment

Are We Reaching Into the Realm of Mental Masterbation Now?

Submitted by Anon on March 25, 2009 - 11:47 P.M.

Quote:"Linux users feel that they are forced to pay a Microsoft tax because there's no simple way to buy a PC without Windows on it --- particularly a laptop. So they have to pay extra for Windows --- between $60 and $100 --- then wipe their disks clean and install Linux."
In practical, end user purchasing terms, economy of scale makes this $60-$100 extra pure fantasy, even on Laptops. I have never seen a Laptop sold without Windows, or even pre-installed with Linux, that wasn't way more expensive than a comparably equipped Laptop you can pick up locally. Even XP netbooks, though they are maybe $10.00 more, they're available locally, however. That $10.00 is eaten up in shipping the Linux versions. Not to mention the greater hassle and cost if the Linux version needs to be returned.

Crapware Tax? C'mon, do you really think that as time progresses that Dell won't be loading their Linux pre-installed offerings with Linux versions of all of this crapware? Are you seriously going to use the fact that Linux's market share is too small for the crapware companies to bother as a defense to be added to their plus column? If the end user can't do a clean install of the OS themselves, they can just go to the add/remove programs and remove the offending crapware. Then install a Crap-cleaner application to clean out the registry and such.

Security Tax? Security is a bit more difficult to deal with with Windows, that's a given. Primarily because you have to disable Microsoft's so-called security apps prior to installing and using something worthy of the name. An Xp-antispy app will allow you to disable the security center. Then, there are excellent replacements for firewall and virus checking available. All are FREE for personal use. Of particular interest to current users of interactive firewalls on Windows. Linux has no such functionally equivalent firewall application. If you like the various apps having to ask for permission to access the net through your firewall, you're currently out of luck. Arcane Ip tables is the best you're going to get. The so-called firewall GUI front ends don't offer it either.

Time Tax? This is just plain ludicrous. Anyone, and I mean anyone who isn't a serial prevaricator will concede that, with rare exceptions, Linux requires much more of a time commitment to "COMPLETELY" setup and maintain. The Linux usability niggles are still too many to know, much less name.

Working Around the Microsoft Tax? I think you are going to find, all politics/ Microsoft hatred aside, that in practical terms, the cheapest, most convenient option any normal end user has, is to buy a pre-installed Windows PC or Laptop locally and either wipe the drive and put their preferred GNU/ software on it, or just add it as a dual-boot option with any installable GNU/ live CD.

For all you "It's not fair" GNU/Linux zealots, remember that you can pull that affirmative action charade in government and the halls of congress, but in the free market you must wait until you've achieve a baseline (tipping point) market share before you can sit in the front row (retailers shelves)with the big boys.
Until then you Linux developer bucko's, instead of blaming Microsoft for all your problems, try giving your potential end users what they want, instead of following every silly, tangential, navel pondering idea with spinning cubes and eye candy. They want a clean, simple and familiar OS that actually works, that doesn't lack any of the functionality they've become accustomed to on their current OS. The uber geeks don't need your help in making migraine causing, garish, desktop themes.

Reply | Report this comment

Re: Are We Reaching Into the Realm of Mental Masterbation Now?

Submitted by Anonymous on April 5, 2009 - 1:17 A.M.

Mostly bunk:

You might have a point about the pricing, though experience varies on this point,

but except possibly for the (non) existence of Linux "interactive" firewalls (I admit I don't know of any, myself, but I couldn't say for sure), your every factual point about Linux appears to be in error. Your allegation of a "time tax" for using Linux is particularly ludicrous to anyone having practical experience of both operating systems.

Reply | Report this comment

Well Done

Submitted by Lawrence on March 26, 2009 - 4:53 P.M.

This is a very well articulated response. Good job!

Reply | Report this comment

Nice Reply

Submitted by Derrick on March 26, 2009 - 11:18 A.M.

Very nice reply. To compare any of these items to the "Apple Tax" and call them the "Microsoft Tax" is quite a stretch, to say the least.

Reply | Report this comment

Do Linux users buy prebuilt

Submitted by Anonymous on March 25, 2009 - 6:39 P.M.

Do Linux users buy prebuilt computers with windows pre-installed? I always assumed that if any user was going to build their own computer it would be Linux users. Not counting laptops of course.

Reply | Report this comment

Only a small proportion of users are builders

Submitted by Robert Pogson on March 25, 2009 - 7:22 P.M.

I only know one other builder personally and that is my son...

Builders are rare. Consumers are plentiful. They want someone to fix the thing if they get it home and it will not work. They like stickers that say "warranty void if removed". The number of consumers who will install an OS is probably larger than the number of builders but not by much. Some RTFM and learn how to re-install/restore that way.

I have long been a builder because I want to know what is inside and assure myself that no bottle-neck will limit my performance per dollar. Something like that other OS just does not belong on a system I build. I cannot stand wasting resources.

There are some who insist on Free Software and would not buy a machine infected with that other OS but most will see the price of the high-volume/subsidized PCs running that other OS and buy and install on it. I would never do that because there is no free lunch and you are getting something worth less if you pay less for such a system.

For example, in my lab, I have my old PC built in 2004. The lab is full of PCs built in 2004 running XP. My machine can run the whole lab as thin clients and give better performance because I use GNU/Linux which has shared memory, making much better use of RAM and I have a 64bit mobo, gigabit ethernet, and a fast RAID and I do not waste time phoning home/DRM/pre-loading stuff not used/swapping. Users of that other OS cannot believe that 30 people can use the same PC simultaneously with better performance than their single PC with that other OS, but it is true as I have demonstrated many times. I even had one fellow fall of his chair because the speed was so shockingly fast. He was used to tipping his chair back to wait while that other OS booted...

Reply | Report this comment