Check out this comment at the bottom of the article about the ad:
"I thought it was funny. Regarding iPhone beating Windows Phone, just because something sells a lot does not mean it is the better product of its type out there. An example is all those crappy Louis Vuitton plastic coated canvas bags tons of women tots around. The iPhone is like the LV canvas bag for women and the Rolex watch for men, easy recognizable, immediately says something about you, but in no way the best in class."
Windows fans are now using the old Apple talking points to justify Windows Phone and it's small minority marketshare and implying Windows Phone now represents quality. That's a reality distortion field.
No doubt this would be the same type of person who would recommend Windows because it has 80-90% marketshare. Notice they never suggest what they think is the best in class, it's the same old sentiment that whatever is the best value or the best quality is just out there in the market somewhere and whatever it is, it doesn't have an Apple logo on it. It's this notion of anything except Apple and it's bizarre coming from people who use both Windows and Android because Microsoft has long been at war with the open source crowd. Somehow their intense dislike of Apple has allowed them to ignore the fact that Google and Microsoft are bigger competitors than Google and Apple and every time someone buys an Android phone, they pay Microsoft more money than they pay Google:
Maybe that's why Microsoft's attacking Apple because if they get $8 per Android phone (from the ones they persuaded to license), they make about the same royalty there as they do from their own OS.
Apple is in a unique position with the iPhone because the devices are widely regarded as being best-in-class (most popular music player, most popular for photography, smoothest running OS, best app selection, best hardware designs), hence why they maintain such high average selling prices and they sell more flagship models than any other manufacturer so there's no excuses left. They managed to nail the iPhone design right from the beginning and they haven't compromised quality in order to reach a high volume. This is why the competition can do nothing except make petty weak jabs at them because there's no substantial criticism to make. They did it right and customers are rewarding them for it. The only viable options are to applaud or sulk in the corner.
1984 was aimed at IBM, not MS or Windows. Windows did not yet exist.
You missed the point. We all know the 1984 ad was aimed at IBM. The point was that Apple clearly attacked the people using IBM computers in 1984. Therefore, the argument follows, MS isn't doing anything that Apple hasn't done in the past.
But here's the rest of the story:
The difference is that in 1984, only large multi-national corporations had computers and the market was about to explode for small and medium sized business (law office, accounting, etc.). Steve Jobs didn't care if he alienated the multi-nationals because they were never going to switch anyway. His goal was to prevent the new entrants from joining the lemmings. And succeed he did.
The failure of many people to understand these subtle differences just goes to show how smart Steve was. Microsoft's is so stupid it can't even properly copy Steve.
The MS ad is poorly done and stupid, but I think everyone is over-reacting about the Steve Jobs similarity. They don't make fun of his death or cancer. So what if it's him in the video?
Next up, the Bible has been re-written to say "thou shalt not take the name of Steve Jobs in vain."
Why doesn't Microsoft go after Android users? There's more of them to convert and most of them are current WIndows users. What's their problem.
Ummm, because Google and Android are already their biggest target perhaps and the ones they worry about the most? Microsoft sending a little Apple's way is just a sideshow.
You can check into the web, but you can't check out.....
[/quote]
But where are the other 'ads'?
- A fly on the wall in Cupertino
- A fly on the wall in Cupertino: Colours
- A fly on the wall in Cupertino: Polycarbonate
- A fly on the wall in Cupertino: Innovative materials
- A fly on the wall in Cupertino: The phone for everyone
- A fly on the wall in Cupertino: Fingerprint reader
- A fly on the wall in Cupertino: 8-megapixel camera
Ugh. These ads are just pretty sad and pathetic, but it seems that's all MS campaigns have been lately.... Scroogled.... The gmail thing... Googlighting.... and now this.
Blech. It just makes them look pretty pathetic.
The sad part is I was looking at tablets for my sis and the Windows Pro surfaces with the big screens are actually pretty good (wouldn't touch the RT's) and run the applications she uses most for work. I know its unpopular to say here- but they are actually quite good.
Microsofts products I don't have a problem with (I actually like Windows), but their ads make me want to not touch their offerings with a stick.
Negativity has never been a selling point, even when you point it out with your competitors. When was the last time a guy convinced a girl to go out with him by putting down ALL the other men.
Lead by example, not from behind.
The most frustrating part of all this is that you can clearly see that the high end game of marketing is truly run by a$$holes, at least when it comes to Microsoft and Samsung.
+1. Pathetic, slow and negative Ad from MS.
But I didn't even think the acclaimed I'm a Mac/PC ones were that worthwhile. Don't get me wrong, I loved them. they were brilliantly done, and had me in stitches. And they put some imortant info out. But at the same I wondered how effective it was stereotyping the people you hope to win to your product in a negative light. At least Justin Long avoided looking smug.
Maybe it's a cultural thing - i think advertising is far more aggressive in the USA than in England (partly by law). So I was happy that they weren't shown on uk tv.
Insulting people, even by association with the products they own, use and like (scratch the last for windows) alienates them. Samsung are easily the worst offenders - they ensured in one ad that they are the very last company I'd ever buy a smartphone from.
Did they possible not know, or had forgotten, that SJ is no longer with us? Because I can't believe someone would do that deliberately.
With all the flowers being put there by saddened people at their Stores during that week I cannot think this is actually a possibility. On the other hand, MS keeps on surprising me, time and again.
Show me a video of someone lauding a competitor's product? It rarely happens if it all.
Are you the only poster in this thread defending this video with "but but but lemmings!" And, "but but but all competitors attack each other!" arguments?
Comments
What a truly distasteful advertisement.
Check out this comment at the bottom of the article about the ad:
"I thought it was funny. Regarding iPhone beating Windows Phone, just because something sells a lot does not mean it is the better product of its type out there. An example is all those crappy Louis Vuitton plastic coated canvas bags tons of women tots around. The iPhone is like the LV canvas bag for women and the Rolex watch for men, easy recognizable, immediately says something about you, but in no way the best in class."
Windows fans are now using the old Apple talking points to justify Windows Phone and it's small minority marketshare and implying Windows Phone now represents quality.
No doubt this would be the same type of person who would recommend Windows because it has 80-90% marketshare. Notice they never suggest what they think is the best in class, it's the same old sentiment that whatever is the best value or the best quality is just out there in the market somewhere and whatever it is, it doesn't have an Apple logo on it. It's this notion of anything except Apple and it's bizarre coming from people who use both Windows and Android because Microsoft has long been at war with the open source crowd. Somehow their intense dislike of Apple has allowed them to ignore the fact that Google and Microsoft are bigger competitors than Google and Apple and every time someone buys an Android phone, they pay Microsoft more money than they pay Google:
http://www.zdnet.com/microsofts-most-profitable-mobile-operating-system-android-7000015094/
Maybe that's why Microsoft's attacking Apple because if they get $8 per Android phone (from the ones they persuaded to license), they make about the same royalty there as they do from their own OS.
Apple is in a unique position with the iPhone because the devices are widely regarded as being best-in-class (most popular music player, most popular for photography, smoothest running OS, best app selection, best hardware designs), hence why they maintain such high average selling prices and they sell more flagship models than any other manufacturer so there's no excuses left. They managed to nail the iPhone design right from the beginning and they haven't compromised quality in order to reach a high volume. This is why the competition can do nothing except make petty weak jabs at them because there's no substantial criticism to make. They did it right and customers are rewarding them for it. The only viable options are to applaud or sulk in the corner.
1984 was aimed at IBM, not MS or Windows. Windows did not yet exist.
You missed the point. We all know the 1984 ad was aimed at IBM. The point was that Apple clearly attacked the people using IBM computers in 1984. Therefore, the argument follows, MS isn't doing anything that Apple hasn't done in the past.
But here's the rest of the story:
The difference is that in 1984, only large multi-national corporations had computers and the market was about to explode for small and medium sized business (law office, accounting, etc.). Steve Jobs didn't care if he alienated the multi-nationals because they were never going to switch anyway. His goal was to prevent the new entrants from joining the lemmings. And succeed he did.
The failure of many people to understand these subtle differences just goes to show how smart Steve was. Microsoft's is so stupid it can't even properly copy Steve.
The MS ad is poorly done and stupid, but I think everyone is over-reacting about the Steve Jobs similarity. They don't make fun of his death or cancer. So what if it's him in the video?
Next up, the Bible has been re-written to say "thou shalt not take the name of Steve Jobs in vain."
As a general rule, Ash, depicting dead people in an attempt to sell phones makes you look like a disgusting human being.
And the fact that you don't recognise that says a lot about you.
Ummm, because Google and Android are already their biggest target perhaps and the ones they worry about the most? Microsoft sending a little Apple's way is just a sideshow.
It turns out BusinessInsider did: http://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-video-making-fun-of-the-iphone-5s-and-iphone-5c-2013-9
You can check into the web, but you can't check out.....
[/quote]
But where are the other 'ads'?
- A fly on the wall in Cupertino
- A fly on the wall in Cupertino: Colours
- A fly on the wall in Cupertino: Polycarbonate
- A fly on the wall in Cupertino: Innovative materials
- A fly on the wall in Cupertino: The phone for everyone
- A fly on the wall in Cupertino: Fingerprint reader
- A fly on the wall in Cupertino: 8-megapixel camera
I saw one and pretty much had enough, over a minute long, felt like 10, a demonstration of what its like to have zero talent.
Ugh. These ads are just pretty sad and pathetic, but it seems that's all MS campaigns have been lately.... Scroogled.... The gmail thing... Googlighting.... and now this.
Blech. It just makes them look pretty pathetic.
The sad part is I was looking at tablets for my sis and the Windows Pro surfaces with the big screens are actually pretty good (wouldn't touch the RT's) and run the applications she uses most for work. I know its unpopular to say here- but they are actually quite good.
Microsofts products I don't have a problem with (I actually like Windows), but their ads make me want to not touch their offerings with a stick.
You missed the point.
Except I didn't.
Seems tribalogical didn't (which was my point). He wrote, "Most people used MS/Windows because "everyone else did" and it was "the standard".
+1. Pathetic, slow and negative Ad from MS.
But I didn't even think the acclaimed I'm a Mac/PC ones were that worthwhile. Don't get me wrong, I loved them. they were brilliantly done, and had me in stitches. And they put some imortant info out. But at the same I wondered how effective it was stereotyping the people you hope to win to your product in a negative light. At least Justin Long avoided looking smug.
Maybe it's a cultural thing - i think advertising is far more aggressive in the USA than in England (partly by law). So I was happy that they weren't shown on uk tv.
Insulting people, even by association with the products they own, use and like (scratch the last for windows) alienates them. Samsung are easily the worst offenders - they ensured in one ad that they are the very last company I'd ever buy a smartphone from.
With all the flowers being put there by saddened people at their Stores during that week I cannot think this is actually a possibility. On the other hand, MS keeps on surprising me, time and again.
A whole new level of desperation -- it's called, MSperation
When are you ever going to learn?
Thanks. And it was as unfunny and lame as it gets. #timetofail
To be fair, it doesn't look like Tim. From any angle.
Are you the only poster in this thread defending this video with "but but but lemmings!" And, "but but but all competitors attack each other!" arguments?