With a title like that I’m sure to be walking straight into another load of comments claiming I don’t know what I’m talking about. However after reading an article today on CNET about how Apple are charging significantly more for upgrades I had to post something.

Now you might be thinking it’s because I want to shout from the hilltops “Rip off!” however the thing that’s actually wound me up is the comments from various Apple fanboys after the post.

I agree that not all hardware comparisons are like for like however the ones that are clearly show Apple are charging more to upgrade components within a system than Dell. Do I have issue with this? No not really - businesses will make the most margin they see fit and Apple can charge extra as the type of people that buy Apple are generally able to afford it and won’t question it. If you can get away with it why not? Apple leaning on their brand to get some extra cash isn’t wrong in any way.

However the outrage from Apple fans that such a thing can be reported is unbelievable! Comparisons can now be made now that Macs are on effectively the same hardware platform so why try and deny it?

Apple is a top end manufacturer so why be so worried when someone says they are making a better margin than a competitor?

I can’t in this case say it’s just the Apple fans that have stooped to insults - the PC fans too have decided to bypass sense in some of the comments. Does it help the argument? What do you think?

In the end it seems Apple fans are looking for every single argument to stick back at the PC fans and the fact there is a pretty solid one on price stick in the gullet a bit (this is not to say it wouldn’t be the same if the other way around).

There are bound to be points where people will disagree however on some occasions there should be the ability for a party to accept a point? I thought so but clearly I’m wrong?

Technology is one area where fierce supporters of applications and services seem to be very common. Some companies employ people as evangelists to promote products or some cases people are so passionate about a product or service they will evangelise just for their love of it.

I’ve no problem with people being passionate about things but I really believe that some people are actually damaging the very things they love so much.

It’s all very well following a technology and being enthusiastic about it but there are still lines that shouldn’t be crossed. Without a solid argument about why you are so pleased with the said item just isn’t going to cut it with the people who aren’t as appreciative as yourself. Saying it’s cool just isn’t enough for most people.

Also even with the enthusiasm you have you must not be blinkered but instead be balanced with your arguments. Again saying it’s just better in every way than the competition just doesn’t sound convincing unless you have plenty to back it up. If you actually give credit where it’s due to the competition you can actually make your own argument stronger.

And finally personal attacks are just right out - they just make you look stupid.

This is not to say that all followers don’t follow these rules, on the whole they do, but there seems to be a small minded percentage of evangelists (or is that zealots?) who really give a bad impression.

There are two groups that are particularly vocal and also seem to have a hardcore of extremely vocal, and in my eyes, damaging fans. I’m of course talking about supporters of Open Source software and Apple products.

I’ve personally had a few run-ins with Apple fanboys in the past not least on a previous blog post (although I must admit I did bait them to see the reaction). You expect the odd idiot (there are enough online anyway) but the regularity that they appear when anything even slightly negative about Apple is published has clouded my judgement when it comes to anything Apple (The comments approved on the blog post show some of the better fans). I know damn well that some will comment stating I’m a fool and Apple don’t need my business anyway but I know I’m not the only one that has this reaction. Surely if you love the product so much you want to talk everyone around to your way of thinking? If the product is so good you should be able to argue the merits?

In the end this extreme reaction is actually damaging to Apple, the Apple brand and community and sometimes I wonder if these people just want to keep Apple as an exclusive club or maybe just don’t have the skills to have a discussion. I’d be interested to hear from any Apple fans on their opinion of the fanboys. Is there any split in the community or is it just ignored?

The Open Source movement also has some strong proponents and again some blinkered ones (although generally I’ve found most to be just interested in furthering the cause). If you take a look at Slashdot and wait for anything related to propeiety software (in particular Microsoft) you’ll see a load of people slagging it off without any real reason - just see the insults fly! I’m subscribed to the Slashdot feed but I never even look at the comments anymore as I don’t enjoy adolescent slagging matches.

I use Open Source software where I believe there is an advantage but I don’t believe all companies or individuals should have to tie their colours to one mast. People should respect everyone’s choice even if their views differ. Generally speaking there is an Open Source version of an application but not all are superior to their proprietary counterparts.

The only solution I can see is the communities to these loose cannons claim to be part of push them out themselves. Surely it must get on your nerves too? It makes people tar you with the same brush?

I’ve posted before about anti-competitive behaviour of companies, in particular Microsoft is generally accused of being anti-competitive no matter what they do. In my post I mentioned that I felt often it comes down to the reputation of a company to see how many of these dodgy tactics they get away with.

Apple is one that seems to get away with absolute murder! There have been rumblings about a company called Psystar producing Mac clones which can run OS X. Apple seem to have an EULA that outlaws anyone creating clones of a Mac effectively removing the opportunity for competition.

Way back Apple stopped the original Mac Clones by fixing Macs to the PowerPC platform and then buying the chip company therefore stopping the ability of others to create clones (Correction: Apple renegotiated licenses for Mac clones that the licensees weren’t willing to pay). Now that Macs use Intel (x86) chips again this opens up the market (Apple marketing always said PowerPC provided a much more powerful system than x86 but I digress).

Now OS X can theoretically be installed on other machines than those produced by Apple it seems any support for a legal bought copy installed on a clone is removed. What’s more the Apple’s software update is blocked!

Not much of a fuss is being made but I wonder if the same could be said if another not so loved company did the same?

Google was formulated on the principle “Don’t be evil” and has tried to keep to this throughout their rise. However more recently people are beginning to question this and I really have to disagree.

I don’t think it comes down to being good or evil life just isn’t that black and white. Google is a massive company now and it just comes down to good business. So I disagree that Google is good and I disagree that Google is evil.

In much the same way Microsoft is seen as the evil empire by most people and Apple whiter than white when this is far from the case for both.

All companies have to make money, and as much money as they possibly can. The problem is when a company gets so large or has such a large share of a market then some actions could be seen as anti-competitive. However depending on the company’s reputation it seems these actions that step over the line are treated in different ways.

Take Google for example, with their squeaky clean image they have been appalled by the prospective takeover of Yahoo! by Microsoft. Was this because of the potential damage to the openness of the Internet or because it would put Microhoo! on a more equal footing with Google current strangle hold?

An entry posted on the Google blog by David Drummond titled “Yahoo! and the future of the Internet” certainly raises questions but the same could be asked of Google so what makes them “holier than thou”?

Google’s recent acquisition of DoubleClick has surely got to raise more questions but seems to be more low key maybe because of Google’s good guy reputation even though Google now controls 69% of the online advertising market!

Apple too seems to have this “do no wrong” reputation even though having, in my opinion, just as serious anti-competitive tactics with the iPod - iTunes system as Microsoft has done in the past. Still you’ve got to admire the best marketing in the World bar none as really this hasn’t got the column inches you’d expect!

I believe people should really take a step back and take a long hard look before passing judgement based on image (or in some cases bordering on religious zealotry). These are all huge companies that look after themselves first there is no good or evil it’s just business - get over it.