Ostensibly this ad campaign is about "Nothing". But try selling that to the board or stockholders: "Hey guys, we're planning to spend $300 million on nothing..." Yeah right. Your next paycheck would also contain "Nothing".
There are many ways to say "Nothing" and all of them mean "Something". "Hi Honey I'm home... why is my bedding out on the sofa? What's wrong?"
"NOTHING!"
So what's this "Nothing" that MS is trying to sell?
A study a few months back showed that statistically Apple has over 60% of the US PC market if you exclude everything under $US 1,000, but only 4-8% if you consider the whole market. This tells you that the vast majority of PC's are sub $ 1,000 machines and that this is where MS makes most of its money.
Apple targets the much more profitable niche just above this. Any significant market-drift to Apple from MS is going to be upward from this sub $1,000 segment. So that's who MS is seeking to target and flatter.
MS's goal with this advertising is to keep the lid on this demographic. The object of the ad's is quite honestly to get them to do "Nothing". MS isn't trying to gain market-share like Apple, it's trying to prevent its loss to Apple. That is why MS wants "Nothing" to change. It is trying to use Cognitive Lock-in by using Cognitive Lock-out: just smile and be entertained and see us as your friends - and then don't abandon us.
MS can't appeal to the facts, because that would do the reverse of what it wants, so these ad's aim at the EQ component - the very same as Apple's advertising targets - except that Apple has facts underpinning its ads' content. In this way MS is effectively fighting fire with fire, but trying to appear as unaggressive as possible. Facts are so incriminatingly judgmental, so let's use a completely different arena. This is another level of "Nothing", because it can't draw attention to the "Something" of facts.
These ads are a very clever suck-in to make Apple and Mac's look elitist, by capitalising on the anti-elitist sentiment of that sub $1,000 market segment. The ad's use two elites who have come in from the cold: the king and his jester. They just don't mention the long-term misery and frustration of going dirt-cheap with computers. There's those annoying facts again!
Meanwhile we all wait for the next episode and so demonstrate we've been hooked. What a soap-suds, suck-in!
...
My take: life for you guys is frustrating, cost-cutting and tough. We understand your pain, we give you the computing experience you expect.
The implicit message: Aspire for nothing better, because it's elitist. Everything is hard, including computers. There's no easy road, so let's just dream about the nebulous future while we all put up with the present together. We connect with you, we're not [insular, cool] elites.
This is trending towards a dictionary definition of an "ideology": and as Marx observed about ideologies (a term he coined from the French): Ideologies "keep prisoners in their cells without a need for bars". The irony is of course that any bars are usually on the Windows.
Or that for every OEM copy of Windows sold they get $40 and for every Mac sold Apple gets an average of $1500 which puts Apple's profit at 10:1 for each pre-installed copy of the OS.
Well, no...
Software is far more profitable than hardware. MS's margins are around 80% vs Apple's 34%.
What keeps MS from being even more profitable than they are, is their hardware. While they do make money on their keyboards, mice etc, they lose big in their entertainment division which produces the XBox and Zune lines.
If it weren't for that, MS's $15 billion in profits last year could have been upped by another $2 billion.
Software is far more profitable than hardware. MS's margins are around 80% vs Apple's 34%.
What keeps MS from being even more profitable than they are, is their hardware. While they do make money on their keyboards, mice etc, they lose big in their entertainment division which produces the XBox and Zune lines.
If it weren't for that, MS's $15 billion in profits last year could have been upped by another $2 billion.
I accounted for that. Actually, for argument's sake I made MS' profit 100% and Apple's a little more than 25%, hence my 10:1. Unless you think they get more than $40 for an OEM copy of Windows. I thought that was a little high, but I have no proof of the amount.
I accounted for that. Actually, for argument's sake I made MS' profit 100% and Apple's a little more than 25%, hence my 10:1. Unless you think they get more than $40 for an OEM copy of Windows. I thought that was a little high, but I have no proof of the amount.
They get as much as $70 for Ultimate.
But you have to know how this is done.
MS gives the OEM a few copies of the OS and electronic versions manuals, and the OEM has the responsibility of making all the copies. That really cuts MS's costs down.
Profits and margins are different. MS's profits are about 35%, and Apple's are about 12%.
And I had old numbers, without looking first. Actually, MS's profits for the year will be around $17.5 billion, net, for 2008.
MS gives the OEM a few copies of the OS and electronic versions manuals, and the OEM has the responsibility of making all the copies. That really cuts MS's costs down.
Profits and margins are different. MS's profits are about 35%, and Apple's are about 12%.
And I had old numbers, without looking first. Actually, MS's profits for the year will be around $17.5 billion, net, for 2008.
Coming at it from another angle: How many copies of OS X on a Mac clone would have to be sold to equal the profit from the loss of the average Mac sale?
Coming at it from another angle: How many copies of OS X on a Mac clone would have to be sold to equal the profit from the loss of the average Mac sale?
Probably about four. But could Apple get as much? That's the question. MS charges a much higher average for the OS at retail, therfore, they can charge much more on average to the OEM as well.
Apple's price is little more than Home Basic, or whatever its called for the cheapest version, so it won't get as much for the OEM versions. I suppose one could try to say that Apple could charge more, because the OS is worth more. But it isn't worth more, because Apple charges so much less, and that's all that matters. The OEM's would have to make their decent profits as well, and would be competing against PC's.
PC manufacturers make all, or almost all their profits on their cheap machines from fees they get from software companies when they put their software on their machines. You know, the "junk" that so many complain about, but many use and buy anyway (otherwise the companies wouldn't be so willing to pay to have their stuff installed).
The clones would have to do the same thing, and as that just isn't considered acceptable on a Mac, it might not be acceptable on a clone either.
With clones, price is the only reason for existing.
let me start by saying i live in australia, and i've just watched there so called ads via internet... and believe me what a load of shit! i'm only posting in this forum to let you know how all you fools sound like...
to me, those ads are an absolute slap in the face from rich prick moguls who are in fact acting out how they look upon and treat the majority of consumers, both in your beloved country and here overseas! they don't give a shit! just look how they came in to that house, gave nothing, contributed nothing and just left after being told to leave... BECAUSE THIS IS EXACTLY HOW M$ and THEIR PRODUCTS IS TOLD IN THE END... PISS OFF!
you guys speak of how intriguing it was, funny, and how you guys like.. GET A LIFE!
that ad just smacks of utter contempt and i'm fucking glad i use a Mac...
I doubt that you are sorry and yes, you did offend. I am from Australia too and apart from being offended by your aggression, I am offended by your poor grammar.
I am I the only one who think the commercial was extremely boring? I was thinking about stop watching after like 30 sec.
In my opinion, the commercial is long, laugh-less and I sometimes I don't understand what the heck is going on in it.
What people are they staying with?
Why are they staying there?
Why do they think I would care about the other people who's living there when there's two (or at least one; Seinfeld) very interesting person who are present?
Who should I respect more? Seinfeld or Gates? Gates seems eccentric and is presented as the most impressive guy, while Seinfeld actually are far more beloved by the public then Gates can ever ever dream to be.
Sorry if I seem a little angry, arrogant and even ignorant. I'm just curious about the average individuals response to this ad'.
They spend so much money on the commercial and _this_ is (part of) the result?
I think the commercial is way too long and focus way to little on Seinfeld, who, after all, is the "star" of the ad'.
I also think the ad' barely affect the appeal of microsoft and certainly not their products.
However there seem to be a lot of people who like them. I'd love to know why!
Seinfeld tells Gates they need to connect with "ordinary people", yet fail to do so miserably to the point where they are kicked out the house. The ad makes fun of both Gates/Seinfeld and the somewhat crazy family they are staying with. The fact that Seinfeld is in the ad means that it's supposed to be funny, regardless whether or not it appeals to the viewer.
So they're trying to make a funny ad that is memorable and builds brand awareness perhaps. So why make Gates & Seinfeld look like a pair of rich, out-of-touch jerks? Maybe because that's the stereotype people have of Microsoft.
I think idea here is that Microsoft is showing humility and showing that they are trying to change. They need to make fun of themselves first before they can begin telling people how great they are. That's why the ads have been kinda humble and low-key, rather than screaming: "GO BUY WINDOWS BECAUSE IT ROCKS!!"
I agree with melgross that the ad is a failure if you have to try and figure out the hidden meaning behind everything, so I'm guessing that was not the point of the ad. That's not to say there aren't any hidden messages - just that they're not supposed to be important.
The real message is far more simple, and it comes right at the end of the ad: regardless of how awful, or out of touch Microsoft are, their product (Windows) helps connect billions of people every day.
Or to paraphrase: "Yeah, we know you all hate us now, but you have to admit, we are kinda awesome..."
At least that's the impression I get from seeing this ad. Not that I agree with their message
well... the only thing I can really say about that ad is this: FAIL.
You can't change someone's perception by telling them the opposite of what they already know. you can't sell a blue car by calling it red. That has to be the worst waste of money I've ever seen. Seriously, MS shareholders should overthrow Balmer and Gates.
To this end, Microsoft said it plans to deploy Gurus -- essentially clones of Apple Geniuses -- to approximately 155 Best Buy and Circuit City retails by the end of the year.
It will be interesting to see what happens when you put both Apple and Microsoft employees in the same store.
well... the only thing I can really say about that ad is this: FAIL.
You can't change someone's perception by telling them the opposite of what they already know. you can't sell a blue car by calling it red. That has to be the worst waste of money I've ever seen. Seriously, MS shareholders should overthrow Balmer and Gates.
C
The Republicans are successfully selling a red car and calling it blue. Clever marketing and packaging can make a big difference.
"Hi, I am a Sienfeld" , "And I'm a Bill Gates" Lets see-one young guy, dark haired smart ass comedian, who dresses very causual. One semi pudgey guy with glasses-who looks a lot like (and is!) Bill Gates. The only difference between the Mac ads we've been laughing with for several years and these "new" Microsoft ads, is that they are boring, senseless, they are not shot on a white sound stage cyc, and they don't address any PC/Mac issues! Another ripoff-blatant as the whole Windows interface!!! ARE YOU KIDDING ME??? Oh yah, I forgot, the background music is different, or not there.
This isn't the first time that MS used a comedian. There are two MS trainign videos starring Ricky Gervais from the original BBC The Office and Extras TV Shows.
edit: The video links are no longer available. I guess you'll have to find other means if you want to see them.
I get why people are split on this advert, it really depends what kind of humor you like so not everyone is going to like it or see the point.
What I don't get though is some peoples perception that all Apple ads are great. For example in the UK at the moment we have an iPhone ad running that goes something like "So what's so great about 3G..." and then goes on about the speed. To which we all go, yeah we know are phones had 3G for years, that why when the first one came out we all went why no 3G?!!!
Then there's the other ads they've done mentioning email, calendar, maps, music, and you just go so what? The phone I got for free made by Motorola has all of that on it and gets better reception, admittedly some of the stuff isn't as good but a calendar is just a calendar, its not revolutionary.
Apple seem to have got into this habit of taking something really basic and demonstrating it in an ad. It works on some people but not on others (i.e. the Japanese who seem to see it as an inferior product) and in the same way some people will like the new Microsoft ads and some wont see the point.
After seeing the entire 2nd ad on MS's site, and thinking it funny (sorry guys, but it really is), I just saw the short "real" Ad version on Tv tonight.
I have to say that the real Ad makes no sense at all. Unless they are going to take the long one, and break it into two or more parts (we used to do that all the time, but would simply edit parts out while leaving enough of the beginning and end so that the Ad still made sense), I can't understand it at all. It doesn't even have the ending, just the thoughts that Gates and Seinfeld don't understand ordinary people, and may be thieves.
After seeing the entire 2nd ad on MS's site, and thinking it funny (sorry guys, but it really is), I just saw the short "real" Ad version on Tv tonight.
These ads are well-produced and quite funny.
But I can't help feel they don't accurately reflect the Microsoft experience.
This would be more like it.....
INT. LOUNGE
The family and Jerry are watching a comedy show. Bill enters and changes the channel to the News.
FAMILY
Hey we were watching that!
BILL
The news in important. You have to watch the news.
FAMILY
Can't we watch it later? We were in the middle of the show!
BILL
The news is important. You have to watch the news.
JERRY
Bill, aren't you being just err..a little rude? How come you get to pick?
Comments
There are many ways to say "Nothing" and all of them mean "Something". "Hi Honey I'm home... why is my bedding out on the sofa? What's wrong?"
"NOTHING!"
So what's this "Nothing" that MS is trying to sell?
A study a few months back showed that statistically Apple has over 60% of the US PC market if you exclude everything under $US 1,000, but only 4-8% if you consider the whole market. This tells you that the vast majority of PC's are sub $ 1,000 machines and that this is where MS makes most of its money.
Apple targets the much more profitable niche just above this. Any significant market-drift to Apple from MS is going to be upward from this sub $1,000 segment. So that's who MS is seeking to target and flatter.
MS's goal with this advertising is to keep the lid on this demographic. The object of the ad's is quite honestly to get them to do "Nothing". MS isn't trying to gain market-share like Apple, it's trying to prevent its loss to Apple. That is why MS wants "Nothing" to change. It is trying to use Cognitive Lock-in by using Cognitive Lock-out: just smile and be entertained and see us as your friends - and then don't abandon us.
MS can't appeal to the facts, because that would do the reverse of what it wants, so these ad's aim at the EQ component - the very same as Apple's advertising targets - except that Apple has facts underpinning its ads' content. In this way MS is effectively fighting fire with fire, but trying to appear as unaggressive as possible. Facts are so incriminatingly judgmental, so let's use a completely different arena. This is another level of "Nothing", because it can't draw attention to the "Something" of facts.
These ads are a very clever suck-in to make Apple and Mac's look elitist, by capitalising on the anti-elitist sentiment of that sub $1,000 market segment. The ad's use two elites who have come in from the cold: the king and his jester. They just don't mention the long-term misery and frustration of going dirt-cheap with computers. There's those annoying facts again!
Meanwhile we all wait for the next episode and so demonstrate we've been hooked. What a soap-suds, suck-in!
...
My take: life for you guys is frustrating, cost-cutting and tough. We understand your pain, we give you the computing experience you expect.
The implicit message: Aspire for nothing better, because it's elitist. Everything is hard, including computers. There's no easy road, so let's just dream about the nebulous future while we all put up with the present together. We connect with you, we're not [insular, cool] elites.
This is trending towards a dictionary definition of an "ideology": and as Marx observed about ideologies (a term he coined from the French): Ideologies "keep prisoners in their cells without a need for bars". The irony is of course that any bars are usually on the Windows.
Or that for every OEM copy of Windows sold they get $40 and for every Mac sold Apple gets an average of $1500 which puts Apple's profit at 10:1 for each pre-installed copy of the OS.
Well, no...
Software is far more profitable than hardware. MS's margins are around 80% vs Apple's 34%.
What keeps MS from being even more profitable than they are, is their hardware. While they do make money on their keyboards, mice etc, they lose big in their entertainment division which produces the XBox and Zune lines.
If it weren't for that, MS's $15 billion in profits last year could have been upped by another $2 billion.
Well, no...
Software is far more profitable than hardware. MS's margins are around 80% vs Apple's 34%.
What keeps MS from being even more profitable than they are, is their hardware. While they do make money on their keyboards, mice etc, they lose big in their entertainment division which produces the XBox and Zune lines.
If it weren't for that, MS's $15 billion in profits last year could have been upped by another $2 billion.
I accounted for that. Actually, for argument's sake I made MS' profit 100% and Apple's a little more than 25%, hence my 10:1. Unless you think they get more than $40 for an OEM copy of Windows. I thought that was a little high, but I have no proof of the amount.
I accounted for that. Actually, for argument's sake I made MS' profit 100% and Apple's a little more than 25%, hence my 10:1. Unless you think they get more than $40 for an OEM copy of Windows. I thought that was a little high, but I have no proof of the amount.
They get as much as $70 for Ultimate.
But you have to know how this is done.
MS gives the OEM a few copies of the OS and electronic versions manuals, and the OEM has the responsibility of making all the copies. That really cuts MS's costs down.
Profits and margins are different. MS's profits are about 35%, and Apple's are about 12%.
And I had old numbers, without looking first. Actually, MS's profits for the year will be around $17.5 billion, net, for 2008.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=msft
They get as much as $70 for Ultimate.
But you have to know how this is done.
MS gives the OEM a few copies of the OS and electronic versions manuals, and the OEM has the responsibility of making all the copies. That really cuts MS's costs down.
Profits and margins are different. MS's profits are about 35%, and Apple's are about 12%.
And I had old numbers, without looking first. Actually, MS's profits for the year will be around $17.5 billion, net, for 2008.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=msft
Coming at it from another angle: How many copies of OS X on a Mac clone would have to be sold to equal the profit from the loss of the average Mac sale?
Coming at it from another angle: How many copies of OS X on a Mac clone would have to be sold to equal the profit from the loss of the average Mac sale?
Probably about four. But could Apple get as much? That's the question. MS charges a much higher average for the OS at retail, therfore, they can charge much more on average to the OEM as well.
Apple's price is little more than Home Basic, or whatever its called for the cheapest version, so it won't get as much for the OEM versions. I suppose one could try to say that Apple could charge more, because the OS is worth more. But it isn't worth more, because Apple charges so much less, and that's all that matters. The OEM's would have to make their decent profits as well, and would be competing against PC's.
PC manufacturers make all, or almost all their profits on their cheap machines from fees they get from software companies when they put their software on their machines. You know, the "junk" that so many complain about, but many use and buy anyway (otherwise the companies wouldn't be so willing to pay to have their stuff installed).
The clones would have to do the same thing, and as that just isn't considered acceptable on a Mac, it might not be acceptable on a clone either.
With clones, price is the only reason for existing.
let me start by saying i live in australia, and i've just watched there so called ads via internet... and believe me what a load of shit! i'm only posting in this forum to let you know how all you fools sound like...
to me, those ads are an absolute slap in the face from rich prick moguls who are in fact acting out how they look upon and treat the majority of consumers, both in your beloved country and here overseas! they don't give a shit! just look how they came in to that house, gave nothing, contributed nothing and just left after being told to leave... BECAUSE THIS IS EXACTLY HOW M$ and THEIR PRODUCTS IS TOLD IN THE END... PISS OFF!
you guys speak of how intriguing it was, funny, and how you guys like.. GET A LIFE!
that ad just smacks of utter contempt and i'm fucking glad i use a Mac...
oh, yeah i'm an aussie and i like to swear!
sorry if i offend!
sorry if i offend!
I doubt that you are sorry and yes, you did offend. I am from Australia too and apart from being offended by your aggression, I am offended by your poor grammar.
It's not even politics!
In my opinion, the commercial is long, laugh-less and I sometimes I don't understand what the heck is going on in it.
What people are they staying with?
Why are they staying there?
Why do they think I would care about the other people who's living there when there's two (or at least one; Seinfeld) very interesting person who are present?
Who should I respect more? Seinfeld or Gates? Gates seems eccentric and is presented as the most impressive guy, while Seinfeld actually are far more beloved by the public then Gates can ever ever dream to be.
Sorry if I seem a little angry, arrogant and even ignorant. I'm just curious about the average individuals response to this ad'.
They spend so much money on the commercial and _this_ is (part of) the result?
I think the commercial is way too long and focus way to little on Seinfeld, who, after all, is the "star" of the ad'.
I also think the ad' barely affect the appeal of microsoft and certainly not their products.
However there seem to be a lot of people who like them. I'd love to know why!
Seinfeld tells Gates they need to connect with "ordinary people", yet fail to do so miserably to the point where they are kicked out the house. The ad makes fun of both Gates/Seinfeld and the somewhat crazy family they are staying with. The fact that Seinfeld is in the ad means that it's supposed to be funny, regardless whether or not it appeals to the viewer.
So they're trying to make a funny ad that is memorable and builds brand awareness perhaps. So why make Gates & Seinfeld look like a pair of rich, out-of-touch jerks? Maybe because that's the stereotype people have of Microsoft.
I think idea here is that Microsoft is showing humility and showing that they are trying to change. They need to make fun of themselves first before they can begin telling people how great they are. That's why the ads have been kinda humble and low-key, rather than screaming: "GO BUY WINDOWS BECAUSE IT ROCKS!!"
I agree with melgross that the ad is a failure if you have to try and figure out the hidden meaning behind everything, so I'm guessing that was not the point of the ad. That's not to say there aren't any hidden messages - just that they're not supposed to be important.
The real message is far more simple, and it comes right at the end of the ad: regardless of how awful, or out of touch Microsoft are, their product (Windows) helps connect billions of people every day.
Or to paraphrase: "Yeah, we know you all hate us now, but you have to admit, we are kinda awesome..."
At least that's the impression I get from seeing this ad. Not that I agree with their message
You can't change someone's perception by telling them the opposite of what they already know. you can't sell a blue car by calling it red. That has to be the worst waste of money I've ever seen. Seriously, MS shareholders should overthrow Balmer and Gates.
C
To this end, Microsoft said it plans to deploy Gurus -- essentially clones of Apple Geniuses -- to approximately 155 Best Buy and Circuit City retails by the end of the year.
It will be interesting to see what happens when you put both Apple and Microsoft employees in the same store.
well... the only thing I can really say about that ad is this: FAIL.
You can't change someone's perception by telling them the opposite of what they already know. you can't sell a blue car by calling it red. That has to be the worst waste of money I've ever seen. Seriously, MS shareholders should overthrow Balmer and Gates.
C
The Republicans are successfully selling a red car and calling it blue. Clever marketing and packaging can make a big difference.
It will be interesting to see what happens when you put both Apple and Microsoft employees in the same store.
They'll probably walk over to each other, shake hands, and ask how it's going.
Later they will go to lunch together.
That's usually how it works.
The Republicans are successfully selling a red car and calling it blue. Clever marketing and packaging can make a big difference.
That's sad, but true. What Goebbels said, does work, that is, tell a lie often enough, and people will believe it.
It worked with the Swift Boat Ads.
edit: The video links are no longer available. I guess you'll have to find other means if you want to see them.
What I don't get though is some peoples perception that all Apple ads are great. For example in the UK at the moment we have an iPhone ad running that goes something like "So what's so great about 3G..." and then goes on about the speed. To which we all go, yeah we know are phones had 3G for years, that why when the first one came out we all went why no 3G?!!!
Then there's the other ads they've done mentioning email, calendar, maps, music, and you just go so what? The phone I got for free made by Motorola has all of that on it and gets better reception, admittedly some of the stuff isn't as good but a calendar is just a calendar, its not revolutionary.
Apple seem to have got into this habit of taking something really basic and demonstrating it in an ad. It works on some people but not on others (i.e. the Japanese who seem to see it as an inferior product) and in the same way some people will like the new Microsoft ads and some wont see the point.
I have to say that the real Ad makes no sense at all. Unless they are going to take the long one, and break it into two or more parts (we used to do that all the time, but would simply edit parts out while leaving enough of the beginning and end so that the Ad still made sense), I can't understand it at all. It doesn't even have the ending, just the thoughts that Gates and Seinfeld don't understand ordinary people, and may be thieves.
What is that supposed to be telling the audience?
After seeing the entire 2nd ad on MS's site, and thinking it funny (sorry guys, but it really is), I just saw the short "real" Ad version on Tv tonight.
These ads are well-produced and quite funny.
But I can't help feel they don't accurately reflect the Microsoft experience.
This would be more like it.....
INT. LOUNGE
The family and Jerry are watching a comedy show. Bill enters and changes the channel to the News.
FAMILY
Hey we were watching that!
BILL
The news in important. You have to watch the news.
FAMILY
Can't we watch it later? We were in the middle of the show!
BILL
The news is important. You have to watch the news.
JERRY
Bill, aren't you being just err..a little rude? How come you get to pick?
Bill smiles and waves the REMOTE CONTROL.
MS Windows Logo appears.
C.