This is a stupid story and it makes everyone who plays into look just and un-informed.
Anyone who knows anything about anything knows that large corporations including Apple have their advertising done outside at an advertising agency and these materials are created and conceived at the agency and pitched to company representatives. The company itself has no say over what tools the agency uses in-house. I't be like tell your plumber what brand of wrenches he would use.
Apple and Adobe are a great creative platform, let's not erase that fact be letting our idiocy show.
So according to you Apple ads may well be made on PCs? Yes, I can see Steve allowing that. NOT!
... I just wish everyone with there childish MAC is better or PC is better attitudes would think like him...
Did you even watch the ad? The ad itself is right in the middle of what you're talking about, keeping the flame lit.
What's interesting about the original issue is more how it involves simple human stupidity, not a PC vs Mac argument. In a war of words competition, once you are forced to start explaining yourself, you're sliding further into the losing corner. The whole idea of the commercial is bad marketing, regardless of execution. But that's so obvious as to be uninteresting. It's much funnier (perhaps sad) to see the smaller, more ironic error in corporate judgment.
And likewise, I expect Apple ads using 3D animation to be made on Windows.
Well, you *could* play games on a Mac using BootCamp. But you would have to buy a Mac Pro, kind of expensive...
And that explains why Apple has so little market share on the consummer side.
Many consummers play games.
Many consummers are on a budget. You can buy a $300 PC. It will be crap, but it will be good enough to surf and send emails. You can't buy a $300 Mac. The consummers who can afford a $1000+ iMac are also the ones with jobs that require them to work at home.
I certainly wouldn't want to see Steve Jobs with the market shares of Microsoft, that would be trully scary...
Yes and no. Apple is not such a big threat, because it's really the same kind of company as Microsoft: control freaks, closed source, DRM everywhere. Linux is a more serious threat, because it negates the business model of both Apple and Microsoft.
But Linux is not such a real threat, because it's not meant for the desktop. I work with both Windows and Linux - and I will soon add Mac to the mix. The three platforms do not really compete.
I would not dreams of running my servers on anything but Apache, Oracle and Websphere on Linux (or BSD). I mean, I also have IIS + MS SQL Server + Tomcat servers, and it works, but just not as well. Apple is out of the picture there.
Likewise, I would not play games on anything but a Windows PC. Same with photography as a hobby - Photoshop is Photoshop, don't care if it's on Windows or Mac. Except that to get the equivalent of my custom built PC, I would have to fork the fortune for a Mac Pro.
But I'm considering a MacBookPro for my notebook - the quality is just there. Unless Apple decides to go for the full glossy screen line in the next MacBook release. Besides, you don't have much choice if you want to develop for the iPhone.
As for work, I don't care. Like more and more people in the development industry, I'm now platform agnostic. Java runs everywhere, Eclipse runs everywhere, PHP or Ruby run everywhere. I could switch on a daily basis between Windows, MacOS or Linux and barely notice it...
This is a trend that will also hit the end user as Web Applications and desktop applications built on AIR will increase in market shares... Then, the threat will be mainly for Apple, because the one thing that won't work as webapps or AIR are games. And games and Mac do not mix well, since Steve Jobs doesn't believe in gaming...
We have a few people at work who run MacOS on a PC too...
Well, you have the same experience as I do, and basically added to what I was talking about. It all comes down to choosing the right platform/software for the job at hand. At the moment... and I'm not exactly sure we will ever see it... there is NO perfect, do-it-all operating system for everybody and everything. I won't go so far as to say impossible in the future... but HIGHLY unlikely.
Besides... competition is good unless your an old Marxist believer. Actually, I prefer using different systems and configs for different things, even when certain software is available for all platforms. Using Synergy (or KVM solution) and a multiple monitor environment is an extremely great way to go, believe me!
2) What proof do you have that Apple has "NO' in-house apps for designing their HW.
I don't have proof, but I used to work at Apple. Locate anyone who works at Apple HQ and ask them, they'll know. It's obvious anyway, it's not like it's easy/cheap to develop an in-house "Autocad" when there are very good tools out there to do industrial design that people in the field already use and understand, and that have had millions of dollars invested in them by their respective companies. It would just be an idiotic thing to do, kind of like Apple developing their own "in-house" router software and OS instead of using Cisco's. It's just not logical. But if you need proof I'm sure you can find it somehow. Hey, if it was that simple why do they still use PCs with Windows in the Apple Stores, and Windows Mobile to activate the iPhone?
That sure would make it hard on their developers to produce anything that Microsoft offers at their Mactopia website for Mac, which includes: Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Entourage, Messenger, & Remote Desktop. 'Nuff said.
Don't be an idiot, we're obviously talking about Windows and their PC products (I'm a PC?), which are the basis of their business. Yes Microsoft uses Macs to create Mac products and keep the Mac platform alive in their tiny Mac business unit which isn't a significant part of their business. Apple on the other hand uses PCs to create their very CORE products. Apple is a hardware company and it uses PCs to create that very hardware which is their core business. 'Nuff said.
This goes to show you just how geeky Macs are, Apple misrepresents. It can be beyond frustrating to their newb user base to run into file incompatibility problems (they would have issues with Windows too, newbs find a way to get into trouble with any task).
The thing that is NOT true of these Microsoft ads, is that they "trash" Apple. They are defensive ads, Apple's ads are offensive. Do you think these couldn't have been made in Windows? Ad companies usually work with Macs, don't see the big deal.
We're all idiots for falling for this "pick a side" bs, both companies want this polarization. Both companies also love to pretend that there aren't and couldn't be any other options (and by in large they've been successful at ensuring that there aren't). Windows, we all have to admit is the only reasonable open platform. Windows is truly "without walls" relative to Apple's obsessive monopoly control.
Do you pay the price as a Windows user? I guess so... I mean, running games is so much more hassle than not... rather than the tight controls, MS lets you choose if you want to hassle with games or not. Let me say this, as productive adults it's easy to dismiss the "whole games thing" but any computer scientist will tell you that games have traditionally been the toughest software to create and the hardest on hardware. Apple just says, "scratch that, not worth it, no games". Like video cards? Have at it, it's your choice (intel, Amd, Nvidia, Matrox, etc.). Like a competitive CPU market, want CPU brand choices? Have at it, it's your choice (Via, AMD, Intel). Want a horrible but cheap LCD on your laptop, no? Go forth. You want a really nice laptop? How bout a MacBook Pro? yeah, go on and load Windows on a MBP... it's YOUR CHOICE. ... and on and on and on. By the way I think most MBP owners either use bootcamp or Fusion or Parallels.
So while the Microsoft ads aren't funny, they are more true. I've liked all three so far, the odd ones were even better. The shoe circus one was great, that so reminded of our local Apple stores (I think it was literally modeled after our West county mall here in St. Louis).
Macs are nice, I like them, those commercials though are offensive a lot of time. The one where they mock GNU programming and so on... OMG. The only reason I had a mac at the time was because it's UNIX. Macs are definitely geekier, I think geeky is better... but Apple doesn't I guess. Mixed message.
(Since no one here seems to remember this, I'll bring it up...)
This is very reminiscent of the time it was discovered that the cutting-edge, fly-through animation of a computer logic board produced for one of the first "Intel inside" commercials was produced on a PowerPC Macintosh.
Other related drivel...
As to using the Client's tools in your work for them:
I remember when a firm I worked for designed and then operated a fabulous new cafeteria for a company that produced Craftsman-brand tools for Sears. I accidentally referred to an adjustable wrench as a "Crescent" wrench, and was promptly and sternly corrected by the plant's General Manager. We made damn sure that the installers had shiny new Craftsman tools produced at that plant (the tool's origin is cryptically marked on the handles) to work with in front of the client. Not the same as producing a commercial, but you get the point.
MacBook Pros and glossy screens, non-TI Firewire, etc:
I ordered my MBP with a glossy screen after looking at both options in person. Never had a problem doing graphics on it. Could have had matte if it was a big deal to me, so I don't get the point of the rant about how glossy screen ruins it as a production tool. As for Firewire not coming from TI, I've never had a problem with the FW800 port not working or corrupting data, so I'm unaware of any issues (not saying there aren't any, just saying it has never affected my work). Personally, I use my ExpressCard slot with an eSATA adapter and drives rather than FireWire when data transfer speed is critical. Yeah, that costs extra, but when I work on a project that's worth tens of thousands of dollars, I'm not going to cut corners on a $100 accessory.
I don't see what's surprising... Do people actually believe that a company like Microsoft (or Apple for that matter) does its own advertising? They just outsource it, like the rest of the corporations.
Really nothing new there, people "discover" these facts once in a while, it makes a lot of noise and then the buzz dies...
This IS a story precisely because MS acted so quickly to remove the data showing the ads were created on Macs. Moreover, MS isn't just any OTHER company as an ad agency's client... so, you're right to note that one uses the best tools for the job, or, that you use the tools you have but in THIS case, it makes the whole thing look very weird re: Microsoft's oversight. It is one of the few cases where the machines DID matter... harks back to the Windows desktop being designed on Macs... it reflects poorly on MS. And MS thinks so too obviously. Embarrassed? Their actions speak quite loudly, I think. If nothing else, it gives Mac users a good laugh and let's you have delicious thoughts about Balmer running around, apoplectic, beet red, gasping, waving arms...
its kinda like that one time when Apple had their iPhone display running on Xp. Or that one time the apple store people used Windows Mobile to ring up and activate the iPhones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zanshin
(Since no one here seems to remember this, I'll bring it up...)
This is very reminiscent of the time it was discovered that the cutting-edge, fly-through animation of a computer logic board produced for one of the first "Intel inside" commercials was produced on a PowerPC Macintosh.
Other related drivel...
As to using the Client's tools in your work for them:
I remember when a firm I worked for designed and then operated a fabulous new cafeteria for a company that produced Craftsman-brand tools for Sears. I accidentally referred to an adjustable wrench as a "Crescent" wrench, and was promptly and sternly corrected by the plant's General Manager. We made damn sure that the installers had shiny new Craftsman tools produced at that plant (the tool's origin is cryptically marked on the handles) to work with in front of the client. Not the same as producing a commercial, but you get the point.
MacBook Pros and glossy screens, non-TI Firewire, etc:
I ordered my MBP with a glossy screen after looking at both options in person. Never had a problem doing graphics on it. Could have had matte if it was a big deal to me, so I don't get the point of the rant about how glossy screen ruins it as a production tool. As for Firewire not coming from TI, I've never had a problem with the FW800 port not working or corrupting data, so I'm unaware of any issues (not saying there aren't any, just saying it has never affected my work). Personally, I use my ExpressCard slot with an eSATA adapter and drives rather than FireWire when data transfer speed is critical. Yeah, that costs extra, but when I work on a project that's worth tens of thousands of dollars, I'm not going to cut corners on a $100 accessory.
More drivel:
You can read a lot about the FIREWIRE problems here, and at one point MBPro's had the cheap firewire chipset.
Here is what I find the most annoying, You could never play a game on a macbook and iMac is limited on upgrading, just a eSata port would help in a HUGE way, and better GPU.
Anyway, Macbook, =NO GAMES but you could run motion no problems. The bench mark had the first macbook at 71%, in OPEN GL which was okay, but not great, REV 2, it went up to 104%, then 140% with 3rd REV and MOTION was flying, still no games, but MOTION was full steam ahead and barefeats.com reported on this. Then when LEOPARD came out, with NO UPDATE on the machine except the OS, the OPEN_GL went to 171%, so Apple crippled it. Now it runs at 70% and very, very slow.
So since you could never do gaming, and Apple knew PRO'S could use MOTION, why cripple it when the PRO user is <less than 1%? It makes NO SENSE at all. Todays user is mom/dad/barking dogs and all iMac students and yet Apple cripples the PRO user and forces them to high end or NOTHING and that's to bad, they simply won't put a good GPU on anything than an iMAC and MBP and PRO.....
And the interesting thing is I have a friend WHO SAW the newer FCP last AUG, but at the same time, its as if APPLE could care less about the PRO/CREATIVE user anymore unless creative = iWeb, heck, even the CREATIVE one to one's used to be for FCP and LOGIC, now most don't know it and if you're lucky, you might find one or two creatives that know it as they are all about iLife and the PRO is SO gone, its all about iweb, iphoto, consumer, consumer, consumer.
Personally, all MSFT has to do is create a good suite of products that make it easy for PHOTO'S, MOVIES (heard that VISTA is good at this), VOIP, FX, photoediting, and offer word with all new WINDOWS 7 as well as the above suite making word a combo or word and in design and a photo program closer to FIREWORKS, and I think MSFT does really really well. Especially if their next MOBILE platform is easy to use for touch screen phones.
I think they have learned a lot and must be up to something, could be wrong but Apple might have some price cuts. They got rid of the REFRESH pricing for Employee's (which is sad as hardly anyone on a specialist salary paying RENT could buy a MB, let alone a MBP), so this could be proof that the computers come in more powerful but with at least 10-15% price cut with STUDENT id's still giving the normal pricing (MBP=1799-200 for student) and Apple needs to ad GPU to all machines and come out with mid range product as EFIx is going to do really well as they break no rules at all.
apple's new ad: show the current ms ad full screen. at the end, pan out to show that it's being created on the mac.
---------------------------
the bottom line is that microsoft can make any demands they want regarding their ad(s), even that they be made on windows machines. it's called a legally binding contract. i worked for an ad agency that had coca-cola as a client. they looked in our kitchen and stipulated in our agreement that we have no pepsi products in our fridge. big account, big feather in our cap, big money. of course we signed it.
apple's new ad: show the current ms ad full screen. at the end, pan out to show that it's being created on the mac.
---------------------------
the bottom line is that microsoft can make any demands they want regarding their ad(s), even that they be made on windows machines. it's called a legally binding contract. i worked for an ad agency that had coca-cola as a client. they looked in our kitchen and stipulated in our agreement that we have no pepsi products in our fridge. big account, big feather in our cap, big money. of course we signed it.
what a huge blunder on the part of ms.
Microsoft's new ad: Show a Mac, then pan out to show that it was created on a PC running Windows and AutoCAD.
The bottom line is that MS is not an unreasonable company who would demand that a creative agency change their ways just so childish Apple fanboys wouldn't get their panties in a bunch. I can guarantee the 1984 ad wasn't created on a Mac. Who the f^$ck cares? Don't you feel stupid caring about such pettiness?
Microsoft's new ad: Show a Mac, then pan out to show that it was created on a PC running Windows and AutoCAD.
The bottom line is that MS is not an unreasonable company who would demand that a creative agency change their ways just so childish Apple fanboys wouldn't get their panties in a bunch. I can guarantee the 1984 ad wasn't created on a Mac. Who the f^$ck cares? Don't you feel stupid caring about such pettiness?
I think you are being overly defensive here (one has to wonder why? You are not Bill are you?). Apple fans have a perfect right to laugh at this without being sworn at or accused of being petty. The 1984 ad was not made to compete with Sony or whatever the equipment that was used to make it so it didn't matter anyway. Here we have a direct defensive move (yes defensive, it's hardly an attack) by MS against Apple and yes it does seem a little silly to use Apple equipment to make the ads if that fact is likely to leak. So why not come right out and say it, 'Hello I am a PC and I used a Mac to make this ad you are watching about how PCs can do anything a Mac can do.' Come on, you have to see the humor here
I think you are being overly defensive here (one has to wonder why? You are not Bill are you?). Apple fans have a perfect right to laugh at this without being sworn at or accused of being petty. The 1984 ad was not made to compete with Sony or whatever the equipment that was used to make it so it didn't matter anyway. Here we have a direct defensive move (yes defensive, it's hardly an attack) by MS against Apple and yes it does seem a little silly to use Apple equipment to make the ads if that fact is likely to leak. So why not come right out and say it, 'Hello I am a PC and I used a Mac to make this ad you are watching about how PCs can do anything a Mac can do.' Come on, you have to see the humor here
Yes I'm Bill.
But no, I can't see the humor. The ads are not saying "PCs are better than Macs" (leave that pompous arrogance to Apple) or "PCs can do anything that Macs can do." All they're saying is "lots of people, cool people, different people, nerdy people, foreign people, etc." use PCs, and like it.
Who cares if MS hired an ad agency that uses Macs for production to convey that message? Why is this worse than using PCs to create Macs themselves because that (CAD/CAM) is something Macs can't even do? Is that ironic too? Why is nobody pointing that out? Because IT DOESN'T MATTER. Just like it doesn't matter if Apple's "I'm a Mac" 50 foot billboards on Hollywood Blvd. are made and/or assembled using PCs. OMG HOW IRONIC! Uh.. no. Honestly, just think about it for a second.
But no, I can't see the humor. The ads are not saying "PCs are better than Macs" (leave that pompous arrogance to Apple) or "PCs can do anything that Macs can do." All they're saying is "lots of people, cool people, different people, nerdy people, foreign people, etc." use PCs, and like it.
Who cares if MS hired an ad agency that uses Macs for production to convey that message? Why is this worse than using PCs to create Macs themselves because that (CAD/CAM) is something Macs can't even do? Is that ironic too? Why is nobody pointing that out? Because IT DOESN'T MATTER. Just like it doesn't matter if Apple's "I'm a Mac" 50 foot billboards on Hollywood Blvd. are made and/or assembled using PCs. OMG HOW IRONIC! Uh.. no. Honestly, just think about it for a second.
In my earlier post, I already said it doesn't matter. People use whatever best tool to do the job.
However, as a business, it matters. Someone in Microsoft should have thought about this, and make it an action list to "delete/modify the tags of the video/image". It is a simple business sense.
The issue is not that the ad agency used Mac. The issue is that Microsoft is not detail-oriented, and that shows in MS's product design. If you compare Vista and Leopard, there really aren't that much different when you do a feature-to-feature comparison. However, when you sit down and start using them, Vista is so irritating that I had to switch back to XP.
BTW, actually I think the ad is OK (not as bad as some people say). However, it is almost a copy of Apple's "Think Different" ads.
In my earlier post, I already said it doesn't matter. People use whatever best tool to do the job.
However, as a business, it matters. Someone in Microsoft should have thought about this, and make it an action list to "delete/modify the tags of the video/image". It is a simple business sense.
The issue is not that the ad agency used Mac. The issue is that Microsoft is not detail-oriented, and that shows in MS's product design. If you compare Vista and Leopard, there really aren't that much different when you do a feature-to-feature comparison. However, when you sit down and start using them, Vista is so irritating that I had to switch back to XP.
BTW, actually I think the ad is OK (not as bad as some people say). However, it is almost a copy of Apple's "Think Different" ads.
I disagree. Just because you're outsourcing your work and didn't assign someone to triple check that there is no metadata mentioning Mac anything doesn't mean your products aren't detail oriented. You're SUPER reaching. Yes, Apple is better at designing UI's and detail oriented there. MS is better at building development platforms and frameworks and detail oriented there. That's why one is hugely successful in business and as a platform for millions of applications, and the other is successful at meeting an end user's basic needs. Different strokes for different folks. Business sense? MS is not going to lose anyone's business over this.
The ads are a copy of the Think Different ads? Wow... now with all due respect, that's just crazy talk. What the heck does everybody around the world saying "I'm a PC" have to do with celebrating Picasso and Ghandi and Einstein and saying they're rebels and crazy ones? Sorry but in this case you're not just reaching, you're hallucinating!
Was the content created by Microsoft themselves (and no, just because it was sourced from the Microsoft site doesn't mean that Microsoft actually created it) or by the ad agency that made the commercials to begin with. If it's the latter, then this is really a non story, though fun for all the pro Apple/anti Microsoft folks.
Non Story?!
Okay, let me see if I have this straight. To combat Mac's "I'm a Mac" commercial, MS hires an ad agency to create an "I'm a PC" ad about all the "uses" "PC users" are getting from "using their PC", yet to accomplish this MS commercial, this ad agency utilizes non PC, non MS software (Mac, Adobe CS3)?!
But no, I can't see the humor. The ads are not saying "PCs are better than Macs" (leave that pompous arrogance to Apple) or "PCs can do anything that Macs can do." All they're saying is "lots of people, cool people, different people, nerdy people, foreign people, etc." use PCs, and like it.
Who cares if MS hired an ad agency that uses Macs for production to convey that message? Why is this worse than using PCs to create Macs themselves because that (CAD/CAM) is something Macs can't even do? Is that ironic too? Why is nobody pointing that out? Because IT DOESN'T MATTER. Just like it doesn't matter if Apple's "I'm a Mac" 50 foot billboards on Hollywood Blvd. are made and/or assembled using PCs. OMG HOW IRONIC! Uh.. no. Honestly, just think about it for a second.
I'll tell you what the difference is between this ad being made on a Mac and your other analogies is. MS senior management have stated for the record that they are sick to death of the Apple ads and are going to fight back. Then they are discovered to have (unknowingly or knowingly) used Macs in the fight back against Macs. That's where the humor is. No previous ad by MS, had there been Macs involved, would have garnered this attention (and all your comments would be totally correct) but when you have gone out and stated that this is 'war' it changes the stakes.
You are trying to put a spin on this as if this were just any old MS ad. It isn't, it is an admitted direct response to Apple, not my words, Microsoft senior management's words. If you still try to spin this as anything else there is a job for you in the Republican ad campaign HQ where they are marketing that they are not really running for years 9 through 12 ...
Comments
This is a stupid story and it makes everyone who plays into look just and un-informed.
Anyone who knows anything about anything knows that large corporations including Apple have their advertising done outside at an advertising agency and these materials are created and conceived at the agency and pitched to company representatives. The company itself has no say over what tools the agency uses in-house. I't be like tell your plumber what brand of wrenches he would use.
Apple and Adobe are a great creative platform, let's not erase that fact be letting our idiocy show.
So according to you Apple ads may well be made on PCs? Yes, I can see Steve allowing that. NOT!
Welcome to Apple Insider by the way.
... I just wish everyone with there childish MAC is better or PC is better attitudes would think like him...
Did you even watch the ad? The ad itself is right in the middle of what you're talking about, keeping the flame lit.
What's interesting about the original issue is more how it involves simple human stupidity, not a PC vs Mac argument. In a war of words competition, once you are forced to start explaining yourself, you're sliding further into the losing corner. The whole idea of the commercial is bad marketing, regardless of execution. But that's so obvious as to be uninteresting. It's much funnier (perhaps sad) to see the smaller, more ironic error in corporate judgment.
...so sad...
...glad I'm enlightened enough to use the only operating system that just WORKS.
And likewise, I expect Apple ads using 3D animation to be made on Windows.
Well, you *could* play games on a Mac using BootCamp. But you would have to buy a Mac Pro, kind of expensive...
And that explains why Apple has so little market share on the consummer side.
Many consummers play games.
Many consummers are on a budget. You can buy a $300 PC. It will be crap, but it will be good enough to surf and send emails. You can't buy a $300 Mac. The consummers who can afford a $1000+ iMac are also the ones with jobs that require them to work at home.
I certainly wouldn't want to see Steve Jobs with the market shares of Microsoft, that would be trully scary...
Yes and no. Apple is not such a big threat, because it's really the same kind of company as Microsoft: control freaks, closed source, DRM everywhere. Linux is a more serious threat, because it negates the business model of both Apple and Microsoft.
But Linux is not such a real threat, because it's not meant for the desktop. I work with both Windows and Linux - and I will soon add Mac to the mix. The three platforms do not really compete.
I would not dreams of running my servers on anything but Apache, Oracle and Websphere on Linux (or BSD). I mean, I also have IIS + MS SQL Server + Tomcat servers, and it works, but just not as well. Apple is out of the picture there.
Likewise, I would not play games on anything but a Windows PC. Same with photography as a hobby - Photoshop is Photoshop, don't care if it's on Windows or Mac. Except that to get the equivalent of my custom built PC, I would have to fork the fortune for a Mac Pro.
But I'm considering a MacBookPro for my notebook - the quality is just there. Unless Apple decides to go for the full glossy screen line in the next MacBook release. Besides, you don't have much choice if you want to develop for the iPhone.
As for work, I don't care. Like more and more people in the development industry, I'm now platform agnostic. Java runs everywhere, Eclipse runs everywhere, PHP or Ruby run everywhere. I could switch on a daily basis between Windows, MacOS or Linux and barely notice it...
This is a trend that will also hit the end user as Web Applications and desktop applications built on AIR will increase in market shares... Then, the threat will be mainly for Apple, because the one thing that won't work as webapps or AIR are games. And games and Mac do not mix well, since Steve Jobs doesn't believe in gaming...
We have a few people at work who run MacOS on a PC too...
Well, you have the same experience as I do, and basically added to what I was talking about. It all comes down to choosing the right platform/software for the job at hand. At the moment... and I'm not exactly sure we will ever see it... there is NO perfect, do-it-all operating system for everybody and everything. I won't go so far as to say impossible in the future... but HIGHLY unlikely.
Besides... competition is good unless your an old Marxist believer. Actually, I prefer using different systems and configs for different things, even when certain software is available for all platforms. Using Synergy (or KVM solution) and a multiple monitor environment is an extremely great way to go, believe me!
1) Boot Camp came before Parallels.
2) What proof do you have that Apple has "NO' in-house apps for designing their HW.
I don't have proof, but I used to work at Apple. Locate anyone who works at Apple HQ and ask them, they'll know. It's obvious anyway, it's not like it's easy/cheap to develop an in-house "Autocad" when there are very good tools out there to do industrial design that people in the field already use and understand, and that have had millions of dollars invested in them by their respective companies. It would just be an idiotic thing to do, kind of like Apple developing their own "in-house" router software and OS instead of using Cisco's. It's just not logical. But if you need proof I'm sure you can find it somehow. Hey, if it was that simple why do they still use PCs with Windows in the Apple Stores, and Windows Mobile to activate the iPhone?
That sure would make it hard on their developers to produce anything that Microsoft offers at their Mactopia website for Mac, which includes: Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Entourage, Messenger, & Remote Desktop. 'Nuff said.
Don't be an idiot, we're obviously talking about Windows and their PC products (I'm a PC?), which are the basis of their business. Yes Microsoft uses Macs to create Mac products and keep the Mac platform alive in their tiny Mac business unit which isn't a significant part of their business. Apple on the other hand uses PCs to create their very CORE products. Apple is a hardware company and it uses PCs to create that very hardware which is their core business. 'Nuff said.
The thing that is NOT true of these Microsoft ads, is that they "trash" Apple. They are defensive ads, Apple's ads are offensive. Do you think these couldn't have been made in Windows? Ad companies usually work with Macs, don't see the big deal.
We're all idiots for falling for this "pick a side" bs, both companies want this polarization. Both companies also love to pretend that there aren't and couldn't be any other options (and by in large they've been successful at ensuring that there aren't). Windows, we all have to admit is the only reasonable open platform. Windows is truly "without walls" relative to Apple's obsessive monopoly control.
Do you pay the price as a Windows user? I guess so... I mean, running games is so much more hassle than not... rather than the tight controls, MS lets you choose if you want to hassle with games or not. Let me say this, as productive adults it's easy to dismiss the "whole games thing" but any computer scientist will tell you that games have traditionally been the toughest software to create and the hardest on hardware. Apple just says, "scratch that, not worth it, no games". Like video cards? Have at it, it's your choice (intel, Amd, Nvidia, Matrox, etc.). Like a competitive CPU market, want CPU brand choices? Have at it, it's your choice (Via, AMD, Intel). Want a horrible but cheap LCD on your laptop, no? Go forth. You want a really nice laptop? How bout a MacBook Pro? yeah, go on and load Windows on a MBP... it's YOUR CHOICE. ... and on and on and on. By the way I think most MBP owners either use bootcamp or Fusion or Parallels.
So while the Microsoft ads aren't funny, they are more true. I've liked all three so far, the odd ones were even better. The shoe circus one was great, that so reminded of our local Apple stores (I think it was literally modeled after our West county mall here in St. Louis).
Macs are nice, I like them, those commercials though are offensive a lot of time. The one where they mock GNU programming and so on... OMG. The only reason I had a mac at the time was because it's UNIX. Macs are definitely geekier, I think geeky is better... but Apple doesn't I guess. Mixed message.
This is very reminiscent of the time it was discovered that the cutting-edge, fly-through animation of a computer logic board produced for one of the first "Intel inside" commercials was produced on a PowerPC Macintosh.
Other related drivel...
As to using the Client's tools in your work for them:
I remember when a firm I worked for designed and then operated a fabulous new cafeteria for a company that produced Craftsman-brand tools for Sears. I accidentally referred to an adjustable wrench as a "Crescent" wrench, and was promptly and sternly corrected by the plant's General Manager. We made damn sure that the installers had shiny new Craftsman tools produced at that plant (the tool's origin is cryptically marked on the handles) to work with in front of the client. Not the same as producing a commercial, but you get the point.
MacBook Pros and glossy screens, non-TI Firewire, etc:
I ordered my MBP with a glossy screen after looking at both options in person. Never had a problem doing graphics on it. Could have had matte if it was a big deal to me, so I don't get the point of the rant about how glossy screen ruins it as a production tool. As for Firewire not coming from TI, I've never had a problem with the FW800 port not working or corrupting data, so I'm unaware of any issues (not saying there aren't any, just saying it has never affected my work). Personally, I use my ExpressCard slot with an eSATA adapter and drives rather than FireWire when data transfer speed is critical. Yeah, that costs extra, but when I work on a project that's worth tens of thousands of dollars, I'm not going to cut corners on a $100 accessory.
I don't see what's surprising... Do people actually believe that a company like Microsoft (or Apple for that matter) does its own advertising? They just outsource it, like the rest of the corporations.
Really nothing new there, people "discover" these facts once in a while, it makes a lot of noise and then the buzz dies...
This IS a story precisely because MS acted so quickly to remove the data showing the ads were created on Macs. Moreover, MS isn't just any OTHER company as an ad agency's client... so, you're right to note that one uses the best tools for the job, or, that you use the tools you have but in THIS case, it makes the whole thing look very weird re: Microsoft's oversight. It is one of the few cases where the machines DID matter... harks back to the Windows desktop being designed on Macs... it reflects poorly on MS. And MS thinks so too obviously. Embarrassed? Their actions speak quite loudly, I think. If nothing else, it gives Mac users a good laugh and let's you have delicious thoughts about Balmer running around, apoplectic, beet red, gasping, waving arms...
its kinda like that one time when Apple had their iPhone display running on Xp. Or that one time the apple store people used Windows Mobile to ring up and activate the iPhones.
(Since no one here seems to remember this, I'll bring it up...)
This is very reminiscent of the time it was discovered that the cutting-edge, fly-through animation of a computer logic board produced for one of the first "Intel inside" commercials was produced on a PowerPC Macintosh.
Other related drivel...
As to using the Client's tools in your work for them:
I remember when a firm I worked for designed and then operated a fabulous new cafeteria for a company that produced Craftsman-brand tools for Sears. I accidentally referred to an adjustable wrench as a "Crescent" wrench, and was promptly and sternly corrected by the plant's General Manager. We made damn sure that the installers had shiny new Craftsman tools produced at that plant (the tool's origin is cryptically marked on the handles) to work with in front of the client. Not the same as producing a commercial, but you get the point.
MacBook Pros and glossy screens, non-TI Firewire, etc:
I ordered my MBP with a glossy screen after looking at both options in person. Never had a problem doing graphics on it. Could have had matte if it was a big deal to me, so I don't get the point of the rant about how glossy screen ruins it as a production tool. As for Firewire not coming from TI, I've never had a problem with the FW800 port not working or corrupting data, so I'm unaware of any issues (not saying there aren't any, just saying it has never affected my work). Personally, I use my ExpressCard slot with an eSATA adapter and drives rather than FireWire when data transfer speed is critical. Yeah, that costs extra, but when I work on a project that's worth tens of thousands of dollars, I'm not going to cut corners on a $100 accessory.
More drivel:
You can read a lot about the FIREWIRE problems here, and at one point MBPro's had the cheap firewire chipset.
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/music...-feb-08-a.html
Here is what I find the most annoying, You could never play a game on a macbook and iMac is limited on upgrading, just a eSata port would help in a HUGE way, and better GPU.
Anyway, Macbook, =NO GAMES but you could run motion no problems. The bench mark had the first macbook at 71%, in OPEN GL which was okay, but not great, REV 2, it went up to 104%, then 140% with 3rd REV and MOTION was flying, still no games, but MOTION was full steam ahead and barefeats.com reported on this. Then when LEOPARD came out, with NO UPDATE on the machine except the OS, the OPEN_GL went to 171%, so Apple crippled it. Now it runs at 70% and very, very slow.
So since you could never do gaming, and Apple knew PRO'S could use MOTION, why cripple it when the PRO user is <less than 1%? It makes NO SENSE at all. Todays user is mom/dad/barking dogs and all iMac students and yet Apple cripples the PRO user and forces them to high end or NOTHING and that's to bad, they simply won't put a good GPU on anything than an iMAC and MBP and PRO.....
And the interesting thing is I have a friend WHO SAW the newer FCP last AUG, but at the same time, its as if APPLE could care less about the PRO/CREATIVE user anymore unless creative = iWeb, heck, even the CREATIVE one to one's used to be for FCP and LOGIC, now most don't know it and if you're lucky, you might find one or two creatives that know it as they are all about iLife and the PRO is SO gone, its all about iweb, iphoto, consumer, consumer, consumer.
Personally, all MSFT has to do is create a good suite of products that make it easy for PHOTO'S, MOVIES (heard that VISTA is good at this), VOIP, FX, photoediting, and offer word with all new WINDOWS 7 as well as the above suite making word a combo or word and in design and a photo program closer to FIREWORKS, and I think MSFT does really really well. Especially if their next MOBILE platform is easy to use for touch screen phones.
I think they have learned a lot and must be up to something, could be wrong but Apple might have some price cuts. They got rid of the REFRESH pricing for Employee's (which is sad as hardly anyone on a specialist salary paying RENT could buy a MB, let alone a MBP), so this could be proof that the computers come in more powerful but with at least 10-15% price cut with STUDENT id's still giving the normal pricing (MBP=1799-200 for student) and Apple needs to ad GPU to all machines and come out with mid range product as EFIx is going to do really well as they break no rules at all.
---------------------------
the bottom line is that microsoft can make any demands they want regarding their ad(s), even that they be made on windows machines. it's called a legally binding contract. i worked for an ad agency that had coca-cola as a client. they looked in our kitchen and stipulated in our agreement that we have no pepsi products in our fridge. big account, big feather in our cap, big money. of course we signed it.
what a huge blunder on the part of ms.
apple's new ad: show the current ms ad full screen. at the end, pan out to show that it's being created on the mac.
---------------------------
the bottom line is that microsoft can make any demands they want regarding their ad(s), even that they be made on windows machines. it's called a legally binding contract. i worked for an ad agency that had coca-cola as a client. they looked in our kitchen and stipulated in our agreement that we have no pepsi products in our fridge. big account, big feather in our cap, big money. of course we signed it.
what a huge blunder on the part of ms.
Microsoft's new ad: Show a Mac, then pan out to show that it was created on a PC running Windows and AutoCAD.
The bottom line is that MS is not an unreasonable company who would demand that a creative agency change their ways just so childish Apple fanboys wouldn't get their panties in a bunch. I can guarantee the 1984 ad wasn't created on a Mac. Who the f^$ck cares? Don't you feel stupid caring about such pettiness?
Microsoft's new ad: Show a Mac, then pan out to show that it was created on a PC running Windows and AutoCAD.
The bottom line is that MS is not an unreasonable company who would demand that a creative agency change their ways just so childish Apple fanboys wouldn't get their panties in a bunch. I can guarantee the 1984 ad wasn't created on a Mac. Who the f^$ck cares? Don't you feel stupid caring about such pettiness?
I think you are being overly defensive here (one has to wonder why? You are not Bill are you?). Apple fans have a perfect right to laugh at this without being sworn at or accused of being petty. The 1984 ad was not made to compete with Sony or whatever the equipment that was used to make it so it didn't matter anyway. Here we have a direct defensive move (yes defensive, it's hardly an attack) by MS against Apple and yes it does seem a little silly to use Apple equipment to make the ads if that fact is likely to leak. So why not come right out and say it, 'Hello I am a PC and I used a Mac to make this ad you are watching about how PCs can do anything a Mac can do.' Come on, you have to see the humor here
I think you are being overly defensive here (one has to wonder why? You are not Bill are you?). Apple fans have a perfect right to laugh at this without being sworn at or accused of being petty. The 1984 ad was not made to compete with Sony or whatever the equipment that was used to make it so it didn't matter anyway. Here we have a direct defensive move (yes defensive, it's hardly an attack) by MS against Apple and yes it does seem a little silly to use Apple equipment to make the ads if that fact is likely to leak. So why not come right out and say it, 'Hello I am a PC and I used a Mac to make this ad you are watching about how PCs can do anything a Mac can do.' Come on, you have to see the humor here
Yes I'm Bill.
But no, I can't see the humor. The ads are not saying "PCs are better than Macs" (leave that pompous arrogance to Apple) or "PCs can do anything that Macs can do." All they're saying is "lots of people, cool people, different people, nerdy people, foreign people, etc." use PCs, and like it.
Who cares if MS hired an ad agency that uses Macs for production to convey that message? Why is this worse than using PCs to create Macs themselves because that (CAD/CAM) is something Macs can't even do? Is that ironic too? Why is nobody pointing that out? Because IT DOESN'T MATTER. Just like it doesn't matter if Apple's "I'm a Mac" 50 foot billboards on Hollywood Blvd. are made and/or assembled using PCs. OMG HOW IRONIC! Uh.. no. Honestly, just think about it for a second.
Yes I'm Bill.
But no, I can't see the humor. The ads are not saying "PCs are better than Macs" (leave that pompous arrogance to Apple) or "PCs can do anything that Macs can do." All they're saying is "lots of people, cool people, different people, nerdy people, foreign people, etc." use PCs, and like it.
Who cares if MS hired an ad agency that uses Macs for production to convey that message? Why is this worse than using PCs to create Macs themselves because that (CAD/CAM) is something Macs can't even do? Is that ironic too? Why is nobody pointing that out? Because IT DOESN'T MATTER. Just like it doesn't matter if Apple's "I'm a Mac" 50 foot billboards on Hollywood Blvd. are made and/or assembled using PCs. OMG HOW IRONIC! Uh.. no. Honestly, just think about it for a second.
In my earlier post, I already said it doesn't matter. People use whatever best tool to do the job.
However, as a business, it matters. Someone in Microsoft should have thought about this, and make it an action list to "delete/modify the tags of the video/image". It is a simple business sense.
The issue is not that the ad agency used Mac. The issue is that Microsoft is not detail-oriented, and that shows in MS's product design. If you compare Vista and Leopard, there really aren't that much different when you do a feature-to-feature comparison. However, when you sit down and start using them, Vista is so irritating that I had to switch back to XP.
BTW, actually I think the ad is OK (not as bad as some people say). However, it is almost a copy of Apple's "Think Different" ads.
In my earlier post, I already said it doesn't matter. People use whatever best tool to do the job.
However, as a business, it matters. Someone in Microsoft should have thought about this, and make it an action list to "delete/modify the tags of the video/image". It is a simple business sense.
The issue is not that the ad agency used Mac. The issue is that Microsoft is not detail-oriented, and that shows in MS's product design. If you compare Vista and Leopard, there really aren't that much different when you do a feature-to-feature comparison. However, when you sit down and start using them, Vista is so irritating that I had to switch back to XP.
BTW, actually I think the ad is OK (not as bad as some people say). However, it is almost a copy of Apple's "Think Different" ads.
I disagree. Just because you're outsourcing your work and didn't assign someone to triple check that there is no metadata mentioning Mac anything doesn't mean your products aren't detail oriented. You're SUPER reaching. Yes, Apple is better at designing UI's and detail oriented there. MS is better at building development platforms and frameworks and detail oriented there. That's why one is hugely successful in business and as a platform for millions of applications, and the other is successful at meeting an end user's basic needs. Different strokes for different folks. Business sense? MS is not going to lose anyone's business over this.
The ads are a copy of the Think Different ads? Wow... now with all due respect, that's just crazy talk. What the heck does everybody around the world saying "I'm a PC" have to do with celebrating Picasso and Ghandi and Einstein and saying they're rebels and crazy ones? Sorry but in this case you're not just reaching, you're hallucinating!
Was the content created by Microsoft themselves (and no, just because it was sourced from the Microsoft site doesn't mean that Microsoft actually created it) or by the ad agency that made the commercials to begin with. If it's the latter, then this is really a non story, though fun for all the pro Apple/anti Microsoft folks.
Non Story?!
Okay, let me see if I have this straight. To combat Mac's "I'm a Mac" commercial, MS hires an ad agency to create an "I'm a PC" ad about all the "uses" "PC users" are getting from "using their PC", yet to accomplish this MS commercial, this ad agency utilizes non PC, non MS software (Mac, Adobe CS3)?!
Still priceless!
Yes I'm Bill.
But no, I can't see the humor. The ads are not saying "PCs are better than Macs" (leave that pompous arrogance to Apple) or "PCs can do anything that Macs can do." All they're saying is "lots of people, cool people, different people, nerdy people, foreign people, etc." use PCs, and like it.
Who cares if MS hired an ad agency that uses Macs for production to convey that message? Why is this worse than using PCs to create Macs themselves because that (CAD/CAM) is something Macs can't even do? Is that ironic too? Why is nobody pointing that out? Because IT DOESN'T MATTER. Just like it doesn't matter if Apple's "I'm a Mac" 50 foot billboards on Hollywood Blvd. are made and/or assembled using PCs. OMG HOW IRONIC! Uh.. no. Honestly, just think about it for a second.
I'll tell you what the difference is between this ad being made on a Mac and your other analogies is. MS senior management have stated for the record that they are sick to death of the Apple ads and are going to fight back. Then they are discovered to have (unknowingly or knowingly) used Macs in the fight back against Macs. That's where the humor is. No previous ad by MS, had there been Macs involved, would have garnered this attention (and all your comments would be totally correct) but when you have gone out and stated that this is 'war' it changes the stakes.
You are trying to put a spin on this as if this were just any old MS ad. It isn't, it is an admitted direct response to Apple, not my words, Microsoft senior management's words. If you still try to spin this as anything else there is a job for you in the Republican ad campaign HQ where they are marketing that they are not really running for years 9 through 12 ...