All of the configurations featured in the NY Times ad are there, along with the one from the first television ad. The prices/configurations are as of February 18.
To me the add works in pointing out that there is greater variety and cheaper prices with pcs.
But, IMO, they blew it when she talked about how she wasn't cool enough to get a Mac. She said it almost wistfully. If she would have said it in a clearly mocking tone it might have worked. If she would have just walked out of the Apple store mad that they only had one laptop under 1k THAT might have ben the best response. I felt sorry for her that she couldn't afford a Mac.
Now some will argue that the add agency who made this had no control over how a 'real' person would act in this reality add, but according to Gruber this girl was an actress. I suspect this add was scripted like any other add.
If she is an actress and the ad was scripted, then it is the director who is incompetent
Anyone else think that Microsoft is looking desperate for a company with a majority marketshare? How many ad campaigns for windows have we seen since Apple launched the "I'm a PC" campaign? If anything, I'd say Apple seems to be winning on some fronts, because in the old says MS would shrug off Apple's ads. Its actually kind of pathetic.
In regards to the ad, it just relates to the price on the box, not what's inside. All I know is the woman wanted a 17 laptop, that's it. On top of that, the commercial is, if anything, for an HP computer with unknown stats. MS is shilling for hardware they don't make - which, if anything, is the advantage of Apple. Sure, the fact that they control the whole Mac ecosystem is bad from a competitive pricing standpoint, but it means that everything works. It also means that this woman likely had to spend a ton of time at home messing with bloatware when she got back from her shopping trip.
And I do feel that you get what you pay for. I just replaced my 10 year old G4 and my 7 year old iBook with a Macbook Pro. WHy? because they were getting dated and slow. But they still worked and were solid. At my last job I had a Toshiba Tecra. Not only did the OS grind down over a year, but the screws kept falling out of the bottom. I'd rather spend 2K every 5-10 years than 1K every 2 years. And I know upgrades can keep a PC running longer, but she bought a laptop which is limited in regards to upgrades, but also, if she is a typical consumer, then she likely won't upgrade anyway.
But what I really take away from the ads is that PCs aren't "inexpensive" or "affordable", but "cheap", which is a word I don't like when I buy things. "cheap" might mean low cost, but it also implies lack of quality and durability.
I also like the fact that I am considered cool because of my Mac. I didn't say it, the woman in the MS commercial did.
Edit: also, anyone else have the gut feeling that the agency made the ad on a mac?
Well OK but from what you say it seems you are referring about your personal experience. I part owned a training school for Macs and saw hundreds of switchers sigh with relief in a few short days; these were mostly Newspaper and Magazine publishing and graphics professional not those 'entertaining themselves'.
Also I switched from using a high end video editing system (not PC I admit) to Apple software and Macs for TV video production as did many I know and had the same fast relearning experience.
It is easy to learn something that is logical, intuitive and seamless. Rather like going from a manual / clutch to an automatic - please don't flame me - I know a stick shift can be fun Perhaps taking a PC around a few hairpin bends once in a while can be too :
No, I'm not talking only about my personal experience. I know people who also teach PC users. They are themselves very experienced users and were somewhat programmers in the past. They publish books about how to use PCs and Internet. They can't take Mac. Not because it isn't intuitive, but because they are not accustomed to and because they perform slower on Mac. This is enough for them to reject. They just have no time to lose with thinking how to do something.
And because I know the matter as good as you can only imagine, I state, that in your school you can not (and you do not) measure how efficient your students are at work on Mac.
You certainly teach them how to do this and that on Mac. They, sure, learn it, know it and can do it. What is guaranteed, after some short days they do same thing faster on PC, than on Mac, if they have some considerable experience on PC.
No, publishing isn't entertainment, it's a job like others. Yes, in terms of necessary operator working speed it's looser than some other jobs.
All interfaces are to some extent logical and seamless. Some of them are better just in some area, not at everything.
Lots of people complain about that, but I just plug my digital camera in via USB and iPhoto imports all the pics no problem. Why would I need some mega card reader? How many different devices does the average consumer have? Esp considering most use either SD or micro SD.
That's what I do. It's not like the cable is heavy, awkward or anything like that. I figure the ideal solution would be bluetooth though adding bluetooth to cameras will make them more expensive which is why many cam makers have avoided stuff like bluetooth and wifi.
I guess i'm just sick of card readers being tossed in everything. I just saw a SATA drive dock with a card reader in it (scratches head). Card readers in everything signifies to me that the vendor has run out of ideas and thus "tosses" in a $.60 card reader into the product and checks off another feature.
Plus another thing is that as these cards begin to go up to 32GB and beyond the performance of a card reader becomes essential. Go to Amazon and look up the Lexar FW800 compact flash reader. There will be a lot of photogs that love the device because moving 16GB of data takes time and many built in card readers are dog slow.
"However, Microsoft stepped in and dumped low cost Windows XP licenses on the PC makers to get them to stop selling Ubuntu's software as a competing product, according to Ubuntu CEO Mark Shuttleworth."
Call me naive, but doesn't this smell exactly like the behavior that got MS busted in the first place for monopoly behavior? Aren't they still under observation for this, or has that all passed?
Actually not a bad ad, especially by MS standards. While the hardware isn't as nice, they do have a point that for someone looking for a budget machine, Apple simply isn't competitive. And I'm not sure how apple can respond - they can't really dispute it in advertising, and they have long been unwilling to even offer any sort of budget machine, even though there are certainly people who just want a machine for basics and don't care about the expensive extras that apple doesn't give the option of leaving out.
I know apple doesn't want to go for the extreme low end, but would it kill them to offer budget laptops for under a grand, particularly ones that have bigger screens but leave off other high end features?
In today's economy every is trying to watch their dollars a bit closer.
Ballmer kicked of the "Apple's too expensive" campaign last week and now
it looks like Microsoft is going to ride this for their 8 seconds.
The scary part is that for once they may be right. Apple's latest lineup is
simply not price/performance competitive.
Not 'chicken little', but definitely short-sighted. This environment will pass, and Apple has the cash to ride it out and take advantage of the time for development and positioning, exactly as they did in 2002 recession when they did the same thing with iPods.
If they race to the bottom now, they'll be stuck there when the economy upturns again. Apple doesn't go there, and they're right.
Apple isn't pricing themselves comparable to the market but rather out of the market. Their current customers will justify the price because of the experience but they need new blood all the time as does any platform. The kid buying his first laptop for college isn't going to drop $2500 versus $800 on an unknown. They don't have the money to purchase twice if they have made a mistake. Apple needs something to hook them in at a reasonable price. They used to do it with proprietary hardware that might not have even benefitted from the economics of scale. How they do have those advantages and still just run up the price.
I fully agree with this.
People are in a recession. Apple have 28 billion in the bank. I'd like Apple to reduce their margins so that customers who stood by the company in the 'good times' are rewarded in the 'bad times'. But no. Apple doesn't even keep them level. They jack them up by at least 20% here in the UK. And that isn't all stering either. Other PC companies...loads of them...can take a hit on margins to sell a fair spec for a fair price.
I don't think Apple's current prices are 'fair.' They're starting to look like the greedy margin chasers of the late 80s/early 90s. And it cost them marketshare. They just don't seem to get it.
It's not about having the cheapest PC for 10 pence. It's about a fair entry price for students, working class people for whom a £1000 is alot of money. It doesn't have to be £100. But the Mac Mini is a £195 computer if ever I saw one pretending it's worth £500 with a gig of ram. Puh-lease. There are PCs which cost the same and have plenty of ram, hd, discrete gpu, quad-core and monitor and k/board...for the SAME price. They're not junk.
The iMac? Apple used to make great play of the discrete graphics in their mini and iMac. Now? £900-1100 you have to spend on an iMac. And guess what? Integrated crappics. When you have 1 gig gpu middle market gpus like the 4870 in rigs costing a grand. With a quad core PC.
Sure, the iMac make be a competive a-i-o compared to Dell or HP. But that doesn't absolve Apple for not having a competitive consumer tower product which Dell and everybody else has...and THEY ARE more affordable than an iMac.
Apple's premiums over similar levels of performance...are ridiculous. I think they really lost the plot with the last round of desktop updates.
...and they yet to bring their alu' laptop into the price range of the former macbook's entry price.
Students...struggling artists...etc...what about them? It doesn't have to be dirt cheap. But define 'reasonable'.
Never in the 30 year history of Apple have they ever compromised quality (at least not while under the direction of Steve Jobs). Why on earth would Apple, dead smack in the middle of a true rebirth, resort to a business practice which goes against everything they've ever stood for? Stripped down computers for the masses is not in their DNA. Doing so would DESTROY the brand loyalty the company has rightfully acquired over the past three decades. They'll do just fine continuing to sell "relatively" expensive computers which are routinely deemed to be worth the price many times over.
These ads are taking advantage of the fact Apple only competes at certain price points.
So a consumer says, "Okay, I want to buy a laptop. I have $1500/$2000/$2500 to spend." The fact is that the MacBook is very competitive at those price points, especially when tangibles like industrial design and Mac OS X are factored in. [In other words, when you don't ignore quality -- as this ad campaign must to be effective -- and you start competing against the best PC hardware designs and Vista Ultimate.]
You're saying that offering a 17 inch budget machine for under a grand would "kill" apple?
Based on what?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTL215
Never in the 30 year history of Apple have they ever compromised quality (at least not while under the direction of Steve Jobs). Why on earth would Apple, dead smack in the middle of a true rebirth, resort to a business practice which goes against everything they've ever stood for? Stripped down computers for the masses is not in their DNA.
I'd have an easier time believing all that if they hadn't been shipping that turd of a mac mini for the past three years or so. Compromised quality? Check. Stripped down computer? Check.
Apple DOES offer pretty basic machines, there are certainly models that lose out to PCs that are far cheaper. Apple just overcharges for their "budget" machine, using a pretty case as an excuse.
Maybe apple should just create a new brand name for selling budget machines, call it the Honeycrisp line or something.
Do lexus and infiniti and acura sell economical cars?
Sure, they are hondas and nissans and toyotas. Because they are smart and try to address the whole market, not just a small niche of it. There's nothing inherent to OSX that it couldn't ship on a decent but simple box at a competitive price. Apple just chooses to blow off part of the market.
AND, She's a PC and she got just what she wanted. She's right. Remember, you get what you pay for.
Ballmer is trying to play on some of the "old" Apple attitudes with "I'm not cool enough for Apple."
I am a recent, but now hard core, convert to Apple and OS X. I bought a used iMac G3 in October 2006. It was just what I wanted: Unix in a slick, easy to use package!
Before OS X came out, I was an Apple hater. It seemed like a smug company, and yes, elitist, who charged way too much. I remember the girl in the Mac ad working away on a Mac saying "I'm sorry, I don't know anything about computers" to the guy with the PC asking for help. Great message: Apple is for non-technical people who lots of money! Not very appealing to us technical types. At the time, PCs seemed to give more bang for the buck hardware wise, plus you could get "under the hood" in a way you didn't seem to be able to do with Apple products. I remember using an Apple occasionally and all those smarmy little popups that said, "You can't do that." Way, way too personal!
Times have changed. The strength of PCs -being to add in hardware and customize - is now it's downfall. There are just too many pieces of hardware out there for ANYTHING to cover all of them. This is why Windows is a piece of junk. By trying to cover all, it doesn't run well on ANY hardware! Apple is an integrated system, same as, many of us remember, workstations from Silicon Graphics, IBM, HP, and Sun in the 80s and 90s.
Heaven forbid he should actually try to sell Windows!
It's just strange to see Microsoft on the defensive. They are still the leader in terms of sales and volume, but are acting like the little guy. Every attempt to ding the competition just knocks them down a notch in my book.
Because they are scared, I mean I thought people said Apple was only at 3% worlwide and Microsoft had like 96%, why are they wasting their time on such a small segment, that is a blip on their radar. I guess they do feel the heat Apple lit under them.
Never in the 30 year history of Apple have they ever compromised quality (at least not while under the direction of Steve Jobs). Why on earth would Apple, dead smack in the middle of a true rebirth, resort to a business practice which goes against everything they've ever stood for? Stripped down computers for the masses is not in their DNA. Doing so would DESTROY the brand loyalty the company has rightfully acquired over the past three decades. They'll do just fine continuing to sell "relatively" expensive computers which are routinely deemed to be worth the price many times over.
What about the Apple III? Quality? LOL. Come on. They ain't perfect, and have put out some bad products.
I will gladly pay extra for the lack of headaches with using OS X. No wondering what is going to break and disable the machine when installing the latest updates or antivirus software. Easily sharing a printer even to Windows machines ... seamlessly fitting in in a Windows network ...
Besides, I love Unix! I have had a Linux machine for 12 years.
Anyone else think that Microsoft is looking desperate for a company with a majority marketshare? How many ad campaigns for windows have we seen since Apple launched the "I'm a PC" campaign? If anything, I'd say Apple seems to be winning on some fronts, because in the old says MS would shrug off Apple's ads. Its actually kind of pathetic.
In regards to the ad, it just relates to the price on the box, not what's inside. All I know is the woman wanted a 17 laptop, that's it. On top of that, the commercial is, if anything, for an HP computer with unknown stats. MS is shilling for hardware they don't make - which, if anything, is the advantage of Apple. Sure, the fact that they control the whole Mac ecosystem is bad from a competitive pricing standpoint, but it means that everything works. It also means that this woman likely had to spend a ton of time at home messing with bloatware when she got back from her shopping trip.
And I do feel that you get what you pay for. I just replaced my 10 year old G4 and my 7 year old iBook with a Macbook Pro. WHy? because they were getting dated and slow. But they still worked and were solid. At my last job I had a Toshiba Tecra. Not only did the OS grind down over a year, but the screws kept falling out of the bottom. I'd rather spend 2K every 5-10 years than 1K every 2 years. And I know upgrades can keep a PC running longer, but she bought a laptop which is limited in regards to upgrades, but also, if she is a typical consumer, then she likely won't upgrade anyway.
But what I really take away from the ads is that PCs aren't "inexpensive" or "affordable", but "cheap", which is a word I don't like when I buy things. "cheap" might mean low cost, but it also implies lack of quality and durability.
I also like the fact that I am considered cool because of my Mac. I didn't say it, the woman in the MS commercial did.
Edit: also, anyone else have the gut feeling that the agency made the ad on a mac?
I remember buying a Dell Inspiron with warranty in 2005 for over 2000 dollars, 1 year later it was half dead, with the battery not charging and the hinge almost falling off. After this I vowed never to buy another PC, even if I don't have the money for a Mac, I would rather save than go use another PC.
Comments
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/choosepc/allaround/
All of the configurations featured in the NY Times ad are there, along with the one from the first television ad. The prices/configurations are as of February 18.
To me the add works in pointing out that there is greater variety and cheaper prices with pcs.
But, IMO, they blew it when she talked about how she wasn't cool enough to get a Mac. She said it almost wistfully. If she would have said it in a clearly mocking tone it might have worked. If she would have just walked out of the Apple store mad that they only had one laptop under 1k THAT might have ben the best response. I felt sorry for her that she couldn't afford a Mac.
Now some will argue that the add agency who made this had no control over how a 'real' person would act in this reality add, but according to Gruber this girl was an actress. I suspect this add was scripted like any other add.
If she is an actress and the ad was scripted, then it is the director who is incompetent
(or a Mac partisan).
In regards to the ad, it just relates to the price on the box, not what's inside. All I know is the woman wanted a 17 laptop, that's it. On top of that, the commercial is, if anything, for an HP computer with unknown stats. MS is shilling for hardware they don't make - which, if anything, is the advantage of Apple. Sure, the fact that they control the whole Mac ecosystem is bad from a competitive pricing standpoint, but it means that everything works. It also means that this woman likely had to spend a ton of time at home messing with bloatware when she got back from her shopping trip.
And I do feel that you get what you pay for. I just replaced my 10 year old G4 and my 7 year old iBook with a Macbook Pro. WHy? because they were getting dated and slow. But they still worked and were solid. At my last job I had a Toshiba Tecra. Not only did the OS grind down over a year, but the screws kept falling out of the bottom. I'd rather spend 2K every 5-10 years than 1K every 2 years. And I know upgrades can keep a PC running longer, but she bought a laptop which is limited in regards to upgrades, but also, if she is a typical consumer, then she likely won't upgrade anyway.
But what I really take away from the ads is that PCs aren't "inexpensive" or "affordable", but "cheap", which is a word I don't like when I buy things. "cheap" might mean low cost, but it also implies lack of quality and durability.
I also like the fact that I am considered cool because of my Mac. I didn't say it, the woman in the MS commercial did.
Edit: also, anyone else have the gut feeling that the agency made the ad on a mac?
Well OK but from what you say it seems you are referring about your personal experience. I part owned a training school for Macs and saw hundreds of switchers sigh with relief in a few short days; these were mostly Newspaper and Magazine publishing and graphics professional not those 'entertaining themselves'.
Also I switched from using a high end video editing system (not PC I admit) to Apple software and Macs for TV video production as did many I know and had the same fast relearning experience.
It is easy to learn something that is logical, intuitive and seamless. Rather like going from a manual / clutch to an automatic - please don't flame me - I know a stick shift can be fun
No, I'm not talking only about my personal experience. I know people who also teach PC users. They are themselves very experienced users and were somewhat programmers in the past. They publish books about how to use PCs and Internet. They can't take Mac. Not because it isn't intuitive, but because they are not accustomed to and because they perform slower on Mac. This is enough for them to reject. They just have no time to lose with thinking how to do something.
And because I know the matter as good as you can only imagine, I state, that in your school you can not (and you do not) measure how efficient your students are at work on Mac.
You certainly teach them how to do this and that on Mac. They, sure, learn it, know it and can do it. What is guaranteed, after some short days they do same thing faster on PC, than on Mac, if they have some considerable experience on PC.
No, publishing isn't entertainment, it's a job like others. Yes, in terms of necessary operator working speed it's looser than some other jobs.
All interfaces are to some extent logical and seamless. Some of them are better just in some area, not at everything.
Lots of people complain about that, but I just plug my digital camera in via USB and iPhoto imports all the pics no problem. Why would I need some mega card reader? How many different devices does the average consumer have? Esp considering most use either SD or micro SD.
That's what I do. It's not like the cable is heavy, awkward or anything like that. I figure the ideal solution would be bluetooth though adding bluetooth to cameras will make them more expensive which is why many cam makers have avoided stuff like bluetooth and wifi.
I guess i'm just sick of card readers being tossed in everything. I just saw a SATA drive dock with a card reader in it (scratches head). Card readers in everything signifies to me that the vendor has run out of ideas and thus "tosses" in a $.60 card reader into the product and checks off another feature.
Plus another thing is that as these cards begin to go up to 32GB and beyond the performance of a card reader becomes essential. Go to Amazon and look up the Lexar FW800 compact flash reader. There will be a lot of photogs that love the device because moving 16GB of data takes time and many built in card readers are dog slow.
Call me naive, but doesn't this smell exactly like the behavior that got MS busted in the first place for monopoly behavior? Aren't they still under observation for this, or has that all passed?
I know apple doesn't want to go for the extreme low end, but would it kill them to offer budget laptops for under a grand, particularly ones that have bigger screens but leave off other high end features?
In today's economy every is trying to watch their dollars a bit closer.
Ballmer kicked of the "Apple's too expensive" campaign last week and now
it looks like Microsoft is going to ride this for their 8 seconds.
The scary part is that for once they may be right. Apple's latest lineup is
simply not price/performance competitive.
Not 'chicken little', but definitely short-sighted. This environment will pass, and Apple has the cash to ride it out and take advantage of the time for development and positioning, exactly as they did in 2002 recession when they did the same thing with iPods.
If they race to the bottom now, they'll be stuck there when the economy upturns again. Apple doesn't go there, and they're right.
Apple isn't pricing themselves comparable to the market but rather out of the market. Their current customers will justify the price because of the experience but they need new blood all the time as does any platform. The kid buying his first laptop for college isn't going to drop $2500 versus $800 on an unknown. They don't have the money to purchase twice if they have made a mistake. Apple needs something to hook them in at a reasonable price. They used to do it with proprietary hardware that might not have even benefitted from the economics of scale. How they do have those advantages and still just run up the price.
I fully agree with this.
People are in a recession. Apple have 28 billion in the bank. I'd like Apple to reduce their margins so that customers who stood by the company in the 'good times' are rewarded in the 'bad times'. But no. Apple doesn't even keep them level. They jack them up by at least 20% here in the UK. And that isn't all stering either. Other PC companies...loads of them...can take a hit on margins to sell a fair spec for a fair price.
I don't think Apple's current prices are 'fair.' They're starting to look like the greedy margin chasers of the late 80s/early 90s. And it cost them marketshare. They just don't seem to get it.
It's not about having the cheapest PC for 10 pence. It's about a fair entry price for students, working class people for whom a £1000 is alot of money. It doesn't have to be £100. But the Mac Mini is a £195 computer if ever I saw one pretending it's worth £500 with a gig of ram. Puh-lease. There are PCs which cost the same and have plenty of ram, hd, discrete gpu, quad-core and monitor and k/board...for the SAME price. They're not junk.
The iMac? Apple used to make great play of the discrete graphics in their mini and iMac. Now? £900-1100 you have to spend on an iMac. And guess what? Integrated crappics. When you have 1 gig gpu middle market gpus like the 4870 in rigs costing a grand. With a quad core PC.
Sure, the iMac make be a competive a-i-o compared to Dell or HP. But that doesn't absolve Apple for not having a competitive consumer tower product which Dell and everybody else has...and THEY ARE more affordable than an iMac.
Apple's premiums over similar levels of performance...are ridiculous. I think they really lost the plot with the last round of desktop updates.
...and they yet to bring their alu' laptop into the price range of the former macbook's entry price.
Students...struggling artists...etc...what about them? It doesn't have to be dirt cheap. But define 'reasonable'.
Discuss.
Lemon Bon Bon.
would it kill them to offer budget laptops?
Yes it would.
So a consumer says, "Okay, I want to buy a laptop. I have $1500/$2000/$2500 to spend." The fact is that the MacBook is very competitive at those price points, especially when tangibles like industrial design and Mac OS X are factored in. [In other words, when you don't ignore quality -- as this ad campaign must to be effective -- and you start competing against the best PC hardware designs and Vista Ultimate.]
Then why did she go into the the "Mac" store?
And why was she worried about not being "cool enough?"
Sounds like she got what she had to settle for, based on price (free), not what she wanted.
And at 32 seconds in, she picks up a little 13 inch and coones, "this is like a phone".
Why is she even looking at it if she wants a 17" screen?
Yes it would.
You're saying that offering a 17 inch budget machine for under a grand would "kill" apple?
Based on what?
Never in the 30 year history of Apple have they ever compromised quality (at least not while under the direction of Steve Jobs). Why on earth would Apple, dead smack in the middle of a true rebirth, resort to a business practice which goes against everything they've ever stood for? Stripped down computers for the masses is not in their DNA.
I'd have an easier time believing all that if they hadn't been shipping that turd of a mac mini for the past three years or so. Compromised quality? Check. Stripped down computer? Check.
Apple DOES offer pretty basic machines, there are certainly models that lose out to PCs that are far cheaper. Apple just overcharges for their "budget" machine, using a pretty case as an excuse.
Do lexus and infiniti and acura sell economical cars?
Sure, they are hondas and nissans and toyotas. Because they are smart and try to address the whole market, not just a small niche of it. There's nothing inherent to OSX that it couldn't ship on a decent but simple box at a competitive price. Apple just chooses to blow off part of the market.
AND, She's a PC and she got just what she wanted. She's right. Remember, you get what you pay for.
Ballmer is trying to play on some of the "old" Apple attitudes with "I'm not cool enough for Apple."
I am a recent, but now hard core, convert to Apple and OS X. I bought a used iMac G3 in October 2006. It was just what I wanted: Unix in a slick, easy to use package!
Before OS X came out, I was an Apple hater. It seemed like a smug company, and yes, elitist, who charged way too much. I remember the girl in the Mac ad working away on a Mac saying "I'm sorry, I don't know anything about computers" to the guy with the PC asking for help. Great message: Apple is for non-technical people who lots of money! Not very appealing to us technical types. At the time, PCs seemed to give more bang for the buck hardware wise, plus you could get "under the hood" in a way you didn't seem to be able to do with Apple products. I remember using an Apple occasionally and all those smarmy little popups that said, "You can't do that." Way, way too personal!
Times have changed. The strength of PCs -being to add in hardware and customize - is now it's downfall. There are just too many pieces of hardware out there for ANYTHING to cover all of them. This is why Windows is a piece of junk. By trying to cover all, it doesn't run well on ANY hardware! Apple is an integrated system, same as, many of us remember, workstations from Silicon Graphics, IBM, HP, and Sun in the 80s and 90s.
Heaven forbid he should actually try to sell Windows!
It's just strange to see Microsoft on the defensive. They are still the leader in terms of sales and volume, but are acting like the little guy. Every attempt to ding the competition just knocks them down a notch in my book.
Because they are scared, I mean I thought people said Apple was only at 3% worlwide and Microsoft had like 96%, why are they wasting their time on such a small segment, that is a blip on their radar. I guess they do feel the heat Apple lit under them.
That Ad Agency is dumber than I can even imagine!!!
Somehow I find that hard to believe.
Never in the 30 year history of Apple have they ever compromised quality (at least not while under the direction of Steve Jobs). Why on earth would Apple, dead smack in the middle of a true rebirth, resort to a business practice which goes against everything they've ever stood for? Stripped down computers for the masses is not in their DNA. Doing so would DESTROY the brand loyalty the company has rightfully acquired over the past three decades. They'll do just fine continuing to sell "relatively" expensive computers which are routinely deemed to be worth the price many times over.
What about the Apple III? Quality? LOL. Come on. They ain't perfect, and have put out some bad products.
I will gladly pay extra for the lack of headaches with using OS X. No wondering what is going to break and disable the machine when installing the latest updates or antivirus software. Easily sharing a printer even to Windows machines ... seamlessly fitting in in a Windows network ...
Besides, I love Unix! I have had a Linux machine for 12 years.
Anyone else think that Microsoft is looking desperate for a company with a majority marketshare? How many ad campaigns for windows have we seen since Apple launched the "I'm a PC" campaign? If anything, I'd say Apple seems to be winning on some fronts, because in the old says MS would shrug off Apple's ads. Its actually kind of pathetic.
In regards to the ad, it just relates to the price on the box, not what's inside. All I know is the woman wanted a 17 laptop, that's it. On top of that, the commercial is, if anything, for an HP computer with unknown stats. MS is shilling for hardware they don't make - which, if anything, is the advantage of Apple. Sure, the fact that they control the whole Mac ecosystem is bad from a competitive pricing standpoint, but it means that everything works. It also means that this woman likely had to spend a ton of time at home messing with bloatware when she got back from her shopping trip.
And I do feel that you get what you pay for. I just replaced my 10 year old G4 and my 7 year old iBook with a Macbook Pro. WHy? because they were getting dated and slow. But they still worked and were solid. At my last job I had a Toshiba Tecra. Not only did the OS grind down over a year, but the screws kept falling out of the bottom. I'd rather spend 2K every 5-10 years than 1K every 2 years. And I know upgrades can keep a PC running longer, but she bought a laptop which is limited in regards to upgrades, but also, if she is a typical consumer, then she likely won't upgrade anyway.
But what I really take away from the ads is that PCs aren't "inexpensive" or "affordable", but "cheap", which is a word I don't like when I buy things. "cheap" might mean low cost, but it also implies lack of quality and durability.
I also like the fact that I am considered cool because of my Mac. I didn't say it, the woman in the MS commercial did.
Edit: also, anyone else have the gut feeling that the agency made the ad on a mac?
I remember buying a Dell Inspiron with warranty in 2005 for over 2000 dollars, 1 year later it was half dead, with the battery not charging and the hinge almost falling off. After this I vowed never to buy another PC, even if I don't have the money for a Mac, I would rather save than go use another PC.