Microsoft gets pie in the face for their own SWITCH campaign
Hey folks!
I received my daily subscription of NYTimes Circuits by David Pogue. It was a funny article and want to share it. I don't know how to add the link (never have done that) and you have to subscribe to view the link (though it is a free sub.) or here it is as copy and paste...
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
Thursday, October 17, 2002
Ad Campaign Leaves Pie on Microsoft's Face
People accuse Microsoft of devious tactics all the time. Microsoft generally denies the accusations ? after all, they're flanked by the best lawyers that money can buy.
This week, though, Microsoft gave itself a big, goopy pie in the face. On Oct. 9, the company posted a testimonial on its Web site called "Confessions of a Mac to PC Convert." It was a first-person account by a "freelance writer" about how she had fallen in love with Windows XP. She compared the operating system to a Lexus. "I was up and running in less than one day, Girl Scout's honor," burbled the attractive, 20-something brunette in the photo.
There was only one problem: She doesn't exist.
A with-it member of Slashdot.org, the popular hangout for articulate nerds, happened to notice that the woman's picture actually came from GettyImages.com, a stock-photo agency. Associated Press reporter Ted Bridis took it from there. He tracked authorship of the article to one Valerie Mallinson, a public-relations woman hired by Microsoft to write the story. Microsoft was caught red-handed.
I was dying to find out how this public-relations fiasco came to pass, but Microsoft spokesman Tom Pilla would speak only in Officialese. "The article was mistakenly posted to the Microsoft Web Site," is all he would tell me. "Once we realized that it wasn't part of the Windows XP marketing activities, we pulled it. It's an unfortunate situation, and we take responsibility."
No wonder Microsoft has become a laughingstock online. "Once we realized . . . ?" Hello? Exactly how disconnected are the right and left hands of Microsoft's marketing organization?
And then there's the feebleness of the ad itself. Not only is it a childish attempt to mimic Apple's "Switch" campaign, but Microsoft's bogus customer is hopelessly misinformed. "AppleWorks pales in comparison to Microsoft Office XP. There's no equivalent for the versatility of Microsoft Word, Excel and PowerPoint," she writes, evidently never having heard of Microsoft Word, Excel and PowerPoint for Macintosh.
Then she makes it worse: "Internet Explorer 6 does more for me than Netscape Navigator ever did. . . . I can name and organize my Favorites any way I want." First of all, Internet Explorer is on the Mac, too. Second, had Ms. Fictitious ever, in fact, used Netscape Navigator, she might have realized that it, too, permits naming and organizing bookmarks.
To be sure, the online community is wasting no time in rubbing these gaffes in Microsoft's face. But nobody's mentioning the most disturbing part of all this: That it's part of a longer string of fraudulent Microsoft marketing efforts.
In 1998, the Los Angeles Times reported that Microsoft, during its antitrust trials, hired PR companies to flood newspapers with fake letters of support, bearing ordinary individuals' names but actually written by Microsoft PR staff. Payments were funneled through Microsoft's PR company so that the checks couldn't be traced.
Later, during the antitrust trials, Microsoft attempted to prove the inseparability of Windows and Internet Explorer by showing the judge a video. There was only one problem: The government's lawyer noticed that as the tape rolled on, the number of icons on the desktop kept changing. Microsoft sheepishly admitted to having spliced together footage from different computers to make its point.
And now a phony testimonial illustrated by a photo bought from a stock-art agency.
What does all of this say about a company's corporate psyche that it feels the need to fabricate evidence of the public's love?
Maybe Microsoft is jealous of the genuine affection Mac fans seem to exhibit for their machines. Or could it be that the company somehow feels rejected by the quirky (and as far as anyone can tell, real) people in Apple's "Switch" ads.
But more likely, Microsoft's latest blunder demonstrates neither jealousy nor wounded pride ? it's pure arrogance. The company thinks it can get away with anything. This time, at least, it's wrong.
A screen shot of the original Microsoft ad can be viewed at: <a href="http://www.scripting.com/misc/msSwitchAd/lies.jpg."; target="_blank">http://www.scripting.com/misc/msSwitchAd/lies.jpg.</a>;
Visit David Pogue on the Web at DavidPogue.com <http://www.davidpogue.com> .
I received my daily subscription of NYTimes Circuits by David Pogue. It was a funny article and want to share it. I don't know how to add the link (never have done that) and you have to subscribe to view the link (though it is a free sub.) or here it is as copy and paste...
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
Thursday, October 17, 2002
Ad Campaign Leaves Pie on Microsoft's Face
People accuse Microsoft of devious tactics all the time. Microsoft generally denies the accusations ? after all, they're flanked by the best lawyers that money can buy.
This week, though, Microsoft gave itself a big, goopy pie in the face. On Oct. 9, the company posted a testimonial on its Web site called "Confessions of a Mac to PC Convert." It was a first-person account by a "freelance writer" about how she had fallen in love with Windows XP. She compared the operating system to a Lexus. "I was up and running in less than one day, Girl Scout's honor," burbled the attractive, 20-something brunette in the photo.
There was only one problem: She doesn't exist.
A with-it member of Slashdot.org, the popular hangout for articulate nerds, happened to notice that the woman's picture actually came from GettyImages.com, a stock-photo agency. Associated Press reporter Ted Bridis took it from there. He tracked authorship of the article to one Valerie Mallinson, a public-relations woman hired by Microsoft to write the story. Microsoft was caught red-handed.
I was dying to find out how this public-relations fiasco came to pass, but Microsoft spokesman Tom Pilla would speak only in Officialese. "The article was mistakenly posted to the Microsoft Web Site," is all he would tell me. "Once we realized that it wasn't part of the Windows XP marketing activities, we pulled it. It's an unfortunate situation, and we take responsibility."
No wonder Microsoft has become a laughingstock online. "Once we realized . . . ?" Hello? Exactly how disconnected are the right and left hands of Microsoft's marketing organization?
And then there's the feebleness of the ad itself. Not only is it a childish attempt to mimic Apple's "Switch" campaign, but Microsoft's bogus customer is hopelessly misinformed. "AppleWorks pales in comparison to Microsoft Office XP. There's no equivalent for the versatility of Microsoft Word, Excel and PowerPoint," she writes, evidently never having heard of Microsoft Word, Excel and PowerPoint for Macintosh.
Then she makes it worse: "Internet Explorer 6 does more for me than Netscape Navigator ever did. . . . I can name and organize my Favorites any way I want." First of all, Internet Explorer is on the Mac, too. Second, had Ms. Fictitious ever, in fact, used Netscape Navigator, she might have realized that it, too, permits naming and organizing bookmarks.
To be sure, the online community is wasting no time in rubbing these gaffes in Microsoft's face. But nobody's mentioning the most disturbing part of all this: That it's part of a longer string of fraudulent Microsoft marketing efforts.
In 1998, the Los Angeles Times reported that Microsoft, during its antitrust trials, hired PR companies to flood newspapers with fake letters of support, bearing ordinary individuals' names but actually written by Microsoft PR staff. Payments were funneled through Microsoft's PR company so that the checks couldn't be traced.
Later, during the antitrust trials, Microsoft attempted to prove the inseparability of Windows and Internet Explorer by showing the judge a video. There was only one problem: The government's lawyer noticed that as the tape rolled on, the number of icons on the desktop kept changing. Microsoft sheepishly admitted to having spliced together footage from different computers to make its point.
And now a phony testimonial illustrated by a photo bought from a stock-art agency.
What does all of this say about a company's corporate psyche that it feels the need to fabricate evidence of the public's love?
Maybe Microsoft is jealous of the genuine affection Mac fans seem to exhibit for their machines. Or could it be that the company somehow feels rejected by the quirky (and as far as anyone can tell, real) people in Apple's "Switch" ads.
But more likely, Microsoft's latest blunder demonstrates neither jealousy nor wounded pride ? it's pure arrogance. The company thinks it can get away with anything. This time, at least, it's wrong.
A screen shot of the original Microsoft ad can be viewed at: <a href="http://www.scripting.com/misc/msSwitchAd/lies.jpg."; target="_blank">http://www.scripting.com/misc/msSwitchAd/lies.jpg.</a>;
Visit David Pogue on the Web at DavidPogue.com <http://www.davidpogue.com> .
Comments
After reading my own post and selecting the link, the link was dead so hear is a screenshot provided from NYT article
<a href="http://www.scripting.com/misc/msSwitchAd/lies.jpg"; target="_blank">http://www.scripting.com/misc/msSwitchAd/lies.jpg</a>;
Great post!
Apple is showing the NY story now on their site! Rub in harder Apple! Hah ahgaha haghahahah. Microsoft s*cks!
<a href="http://www.apple.com/hotnews/"; target="_blank">http://www.apple.com/hotnews/</a>;
Looks like the "Switch" campaign is now also moving into "Stop using OS 9, you pesky throwbacks" territory. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
<a href="http://www.apple.com/hotnews/"; target="_blank">http://www.apple.com/hotnews/</a>;
I think this is the first time that I have ever recalled. A publicly traded company MAKING FUN of another publicy traded company at the expense of simply embarrassing them.
Sure we all see other companies showing comparison charts, benchmarks, our burgers taste better, the Pepsi challenge, but does anybody ever recall a company poking fun at another on their website?
CEO always have rattle off about other companies, but to publicly announce it? heheheheheh
ehheheheheh, i love it!
Go gett'em Apple! Thy Gloves Are OFF!
I'd note that 'the gloves are off' only for apple. This webpage and that recent 'can't we all get along' ad didn't bash apple at all. Companies tend to know when microsoft's gloves come off.
<strong>
In 1998, the Los Angeles Times reported that Microsoft, during its antitrust trials, hired PR companies to flood newspapers with fake letters of support, bearing ordinary individuals' names but actually written by Microsoft PR staff.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I know of quite a few companies that have pulled very similar stunts to that. Basically never trust testimonials.
Wow! Feel the awesome power <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
It took me what? 2-3 hours to get OS X "up and running"
Isn't it sad that Apple can gain thousands of new customers by telling the truth, but Microsoft have to lie, and still they get nothing.
Andrew
<strong>Advertisers and PR people have been pulling these sorts of stunts forever: thing is, M$ were stupid enough to get caught...</strong><hr></blockquote>
The part I have never understood and never bothered to chase up is why in such cases the companies aren't fined heavily for fraud, whether it's the advertising company or the company directly.
Ah... Why doesn't everybody have a Tivo?
Still, own goal M$.
Take that! Right in the jegs!!!
I don't see how M$ can get rid of Apple.
Who would they steal 'their' inventions and innovations from?
LEmon BoN BoN
<strong>The part I have never understood and never bothered to chase up is why in such cases the companies aren't fined heavily for fraud, whether it's the advertising company or the company directly.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's not fraud (that's to do with financial misbehaviour, which is heavily regulated), but false advertising. I don't know how it works in the States, but in the UK we have a body called the Advertising Standards Authority, which has the power to fine the miscreants, provided that someone complains.
That said, comparitive advertising is banned here (so you can't say "our product is better than our competitor's"), so I have a suspicion that Switch ads might not be wholly legal in the UK...
I read somewhere that M$ wants to discipline the offender??? What? Like they didn't approve the ad, or know exactly what was going on. Please.