You are suggesting there is 'Truth in Advertising' in the USA? I take your point but ...
BTW has Microsoft ever made a good ad? ... I am trying to remember one.
I liked some on the Win7 Phone ads, where goobers had their heads buried in their phones instead of enjoying life around them. There's one where a baseball bounces off a dad's head. The best one has to be where there's a guy in bed messing with his phone and a hot brunette in a teddy looking at him with this 'uh, hello!' look as she shows it off for him. The theme was to get off your phone and back to your life.
Those ads resonated with me after seeing so many people living in their phones at the time.
Edit: Corrected from Kin to Win7 Phone! Here's the one I was thinking of-
I don't understand how you're using the paragraph headings. For example:
Quote:
If ads 'were easy, Microsoft could just write a check'
This heading quotes someone, but neither the source or the quote are mentioned anywhere in the paragraph. But what do I know? As your troll account suggests, "Brilliant are people dyslexic often quite"
I don't understand how you're using the paragraph headings. For example:
This heading quotes someone, but neither the source or the quote are mentioned anywhere in the paragraph. But what do I know? As your troll account suggests, "Brilliant are people dyslexic often quite"
It’s an allusion to something Steve Jobs once said. It’s okay if you don’t get the jokes, they’re not for everyone.
Microsoft has a long history of unbelievably horrible commercials. I think the worse was the vomit commercial for Internet Explorer. Dean Caine killed any career he had left by agreeing to be seen in this foolishness.
Ok, enough about the Excel 'error' already. It obviously was someone entering a value but not saving it yet. Does it look bad in an ad, sure, but let it go already it's not an Excel bug. I love AI but often your bias is taken to new levels of hubris
That was exactly it, they hadn't yet hit 'enter'. Pretty bad mistake though for a major PR / ad company. Unless of course the culprit was an Apple sleeper ...
while i agree that's enough of it, you're both wrong in that they had just not yet hit enter.
the placement of the text in the cell is on the right, which indicates enter has been pressed. and the presence of the dollar sign likely indicates formatting has already been applied, which only happens after enter is pressed.
In my opinion Microsoft got it all wrong. I mean seriously. Essentially they're trying to sell work devices to consumers, or at least advertise it like that. Obviously no one is taking them seriously and unless they address this issue and actually start showing people how those devices enrich their lives, it won't sell any better. I mean, who's gonna buy someone a Surface for christmas for the reason of getting work done or running
Microsoft Excel on it? Sorry, that's not a selling point for the regular consumer - not at all. That's like selling refrigerators in Antarctica.
However, let's not blame Microsoft. They have simply lost their way and mistakes such as these are not really their fault. I mean, consumer is not really in Microsofts DNA. That's not what they're good at and that's not what they ever understood. They got their business tools, platforms, servers, programs and whatnot and huge third party networks around those products. Better stick to those things.
Ventures such as XBOX (although successful), Zune, WP (for consumers) just don't suit them. Putting your old faces into colourful pastel polo shirts in front of tasteless block colour backgrounds and playing cheesy music on stage doesn't change this fact and certainly doesn't make them suddenly appear "cool". That's the whole problem. I do not know a single person who actually thinks that Microsoft is "cool". I also don't know a single person who actually associates the "Windows" brand with anything cool, yet alone anything positive.
Microsoft, let's face it, the times where people could walk into computers are over. Consumers have used your products, because that's how computers were for a long time. There was little alternative. People had to lern them, people had to read the manual and even if all they ever wanted to do is print a letter and visit a website. Times have changed, though and Microsoft has never come up with any interesting offering for Joe Average. All they can think of is ugly products and their office suite. Well, guess what. Turns out all those customers were never really your customers due to choice.
What do you mean what was my point? My point is that the article said it was a $900,000 (nine hundred thousand) write-off when, in fact, it was a $900,000,000 (nine hundred million) dollar write-off. It has since been corrected.
In nature, an animal caught by its throat wiggles a bit, rolls its eyes and then lets its tongue hang out in tacit acceptance of its fate. It is time for Microsoft to do likewise.
while i agree that's enough of it, you're both wrong in that they had just not yet hit enter.
the placement of the text in the cell is on the right, which indicates enter has been pressed. and the presence of the dollar sign likely indicates formatting has already been applied, which only happens after enter is pressed.
That sounds more like a desperation plea than an effective ad slogan. How pathetic.
What about "buy me, please? "
If one reason to buy these hybrids is the hard keyboard, Apple should mention iPad works with a plethora of Bluetooth keyboards. No dancing or "clicking" necessary.
Microsoft Excel on it? Sorry, that's not a selling point for the regular consumer - not at all. That's like selling refrigerators in Antarctica.
Ironically, if Microsoft had released a "real" version of Excel for iOS after iPad 1 was released, they would have made a few billion off it by now (certainly more net profit than they've made off of the Windows 8 'ecosystem' to date), and Mobile Excel would now be the standard for mobile spreadsheets.
Instead, the market for such an application is still wide open, so Numbers or Google Apps still has the potential to snatch the crown from the king's head.
The stronger someone stresses their honesty, the more likely it is that they're lying. You see that in the "honestly" of the ad above. Whoever created the ad must have known "it works for work" was a real whopper.
Listen to speeches by Nixon, Clinton or Obama and, even if you know nothing else, you can spot their lies just by looking for what they emphasize. Repetition is another truth tester. In long, drawn out political debates (i.e. the Vietnam and Iraqi wars), those who're honest soon tire of repeating what to them the equivalent of saying 2 2 4 over and over again. In contrast, those who's lying will continue to try to shout down the last dissenting voice.
Details are another truth tester, particularly in personal conversations. If some stranger says they work for a PR firm in Chicago, they're probably telling the truth. If they go into great detail about their firm and the clients it has, perhaps puffing their importance at it, they're probably lying. Again, as with repetition, they're trying to smother their lies with words.
Promises work much the same way. The more often a person promises something, the more likely he knows he's not going to do it, i.e. Obama's "you can keep your plan... your doctor." The entire premise of Obamacare was to force you off a plan you like. That fact had to be driven underground until after last year's elections. Never forget, most lies have reasons.
Just keep in mind that this doesn't mean that every politicians lies. Some are honest. Nor does it mean that even a grossly dishonest one always lies. I'm old enough to remember 1968, when LBJ announced that he wouldn't seek a second term. Perhaps because I knew the guy was liar, I refused to believe him. But another factor was his emphasis, "I will not seek, nor will I accept..." I read that as saying, "OK, if you push me a little, I'll run." In that case, I was wrong.
LBJ illustrates how I respond to liars. I make a point of never trusting them again--a habit I picked up working with drug addicts, who often lie for no discernible reason. But that also means that, on the rare occasion when someone like LBJ needs to be honest about something important, he's not believed. Serves him right.
I'll add another comment. How do you hype something without being dishonest? Do what Steve Jobs did and invent some form of praise that sounds impressive but is devoid of real content--"funtastic." Give facts like "twice as fast," and the tech-press is likely to squabble over some detail.
"Works for work" is like that. I doesn't give any statistic about how many people are using Windows 8.1 on the job. An honest statistic wouldn't impress. A dishonest statistic would draw fire. Better to be vague.
Quote-"Asus has struggled to sell tablets of any kind, whether running Windows or Android; the company also builds Google's Nexus 7 tablet. This summer, the company pared back its production plans for both tablets and notebooks[B] while doubling down on a hybrid device that runs both platforms[/B]."
Comments
You are suggesting there is 'Truth in Advertising' in the USA? I take your point but ...
BTW has Microsoft ever made a good ad? ... I am trying to remember one.
I liked some on the Win7 Phone ads, where goobers had their heads buried in their phones instead of enjoying life around them. There's one where a baseball bounces off a dad's head. The best one has to be where there's a guy in bed messing with his phone and a hot brunette in a teddy looking at him with this 'uh, hello!' look as she shows it off for him. The theme was to get off your phone and back to your life.
Those ads resonated with me after seeing so many people living in their phones at the time.
Edit: Corrected from Kin to Win7 Phone! Here's the one I was thinking of-
Make fun of Microsoft's ad campaign all you want, that mid-range T100 for $349 is a killer device.
I don't understand how you're using the paragraph headings. For example:
This heading quotes someone, but neither the source or the quote are mentioned anywhere in the paragraph. But what do I know? As your troll account suggests, "Brilliant are people dyslexic often quite"
I don't understand how you're using the paragraph headings. For example:
This heading quotes someone, but neither the source or the quote are mentioned anywhere in the paragraph. But what do I know? As your troll account suggests, "Brilliant are people dyslexic often quite"
It’s an allusion to something Steve Jobs once said. It’s okay if you don’t get the jokes, they’re not for everyone.
while i agree that's enough of it, you're both wrong in that they had just not yet hit enter.
the placement of the text in the cell is on the right, which indicates enter has been pressed. and the presence of the dollar sign likely indicates formatting has already been applied, which only happens after enter is pressed.
Obviously no one is taking them seriously and unless they address this issue and actually start showing people how those devices enrich their lives, it won't sell any better. I mean, who's gonna buy someone a Surface for christmas for the reason of getting work done or running
Microsoft Excel on it? Sorry, that's not a selling point for the regular consumer - not at all. That's like selling refrigerators in Antarctica.
However, let's not blame Microsoft. They have simply lost their way and mistakes such as these are not really their fault. I mean, consumer is not really in Microsofts DNA. That's not what they're good at and that's not what they ever understood. They got their business tools, platforms, servers, programs and whatnot and huge third party networks around those products. Better stick to those things.
Ventures such as XBOX (although successful), Zune, WP (for consumers) just don't suit them. Putting your old faces into colourful pastel polo shirts in front of tasteless block colour backgrounds and playing cheesy music on stage doesn't change this fact and certainly doesn't make them suddenly appear "cool". That's the whole problem. I do not know a single person who actually thinks that Microsoft is "cool". I also don't know a single person who actually associates the "Windows" brand with anything cool, yet alone anything positive.
Microsoft, let's face it, the times where people could walk into computers are over. Consumers have used your products, because that's how computers were for a long time. There was little alternative. People had to lern them, people had to read the manual and even if all they ever wanted to do is print a letter and visit a website. Times have changed, though and Microsoft has never come up with any interesting offering for Joe Average. All they can think of is ugly products and their office suite. Well, guess what. Turns out all those customers were never really your customers due to choice.
So, uh, what was your point again?
What do you mean what was my point? My point is that the article said it was a $900,000 (nine hundred thousand) write-off when, in fact, it was a $900,000,000 (nine hundred million) dollar write-off. It has since been corrected."Honestly, it works for work" ?
That sounds more like a desperation plea than an effective ad slogan. How pathetic.
Likely that they missed the amount by 1000x?
In fact, it’s the entire point of an ad: to not misrepresent a product. Your argument is moot.
Surely the point of an ad is to misrepresent a product as much as legally possible to make it desirable?
Killer of the Surface2
MS Excuse #6: auto calculation was turned off.
What about "buy me, please? "
If one reason to buy these hybrids is the hard keyboard, Apple should mention iPad works with a plethora of Bluetooth keyboards. No dancing or "clicking" necessary.
Microsoft Excel on it? Sorry, that's not a selling point for the regular consumer - not at all. That's like selling refrigerators in Antarctica.
Ironically, if Microsoft had released a "real" version of Excel for iOS after iPad 1 was released, they would have made a few billion off it by now (certainly more net profit than they've made off of the Windows 8 'ecosystem' to date), and Mobile Excel would now be the standard for mobile spreadsheets.
Instead, the market for such an application is still wide open, so Numbers or Google Apps still has the potential to snatch the crown from the king's head.
No.
The stronger someone stresses their honesty, the more likely it is that they're lying. You see that in the "honestly" of the ad above. Whoever created the ad must have known "it works for work" was a real whopper.
Listen to speeches by Nixon, Clinton or Obama and, even if you know nothing else, you can spot their lies just by looking for what they emphasize. Repetition is another truth tester. In long, drawn out political debates (i.e. the Vietnam and Iraqi wars), those who're honest soon tire of repeating what to them the equivalent of saying 2 2 4 over and over again. In contrast, those who's lying will continue to try to shout down the last dissenting voice.
Details are another truth tester, particularly in personal conversations. If some stranger says they work for a PR firm in Chicago, they're probably telling the truth. If they go into great detail about their firm and the clients it has, perhaps puffing their importance at it, they're probably lying. Again, as with repetition, they're trying to smother their lies with words.
Promises work much the same way. The more often a person promises something, the more likely he knows he's not going to do it, i.e. Obama's "you can keep your plan... your doctor." The entire premise of Obamacare was to force you off a plan you like. That fact had to be driven underground until after last year's elections. Never forget, most lies have reasons.
Just keep in mind that this doesn't mean that every politicians lies. Some are honest. Nor does it mean that even a grossly dishonest one always lies. I'm old enough to remember 1968, when LBJ announced that he wouldn't seek a second term. Perhaps because I knew the guy was liar, I refused to believe him. But another factor was his emphasis, "I will not seek, nor will I accept..." I read that as saying, "OK, if you push me a little, I'll run." In that case, I was wrong.
LBJ illustrates how I respond to liars. I make a point of never trusting them again--a habit I picked up working with drug addicts, who often lie for no discernible reason. But that also means that, on the rare occasion when someone like LBJ needs to be honest about something important, he's not believed. Serves him right.
I'll add another comment. How do you hype something without being dishonest? Do what Steve Jobs did and invent some form of praise that sounds impressive but is devoid of real content--"funtastic." Give facts like "twice as fast," and the tech-press is likely to squabble over some detail.
"Works for work" is like that. I doesn't give any statistic about how many people are using Windows 8.1 on the job. An honest statistic wouldn't impress. A dishonest statistic would draw fire. Better to be vague.
Go home Asus, you're drunk.