What the heck are they waiting for? I admit it, I don't get it...
Apple should be pushing HARD on the benefits of using OS X.
An ad that touts getting OS X AND the Mini for under $500! Where is it? Bahhh.
people have been pointing this out for years. apple seems to be doing ok, and right now they are getting enough press coverage that they dont really need to market.
Right now the iron is HOT. Right now is the time to impress upon the PC using public that the Mac is a true PC alternative in most repects.
Steve J. said at one of his conference calls not too long ago that he forsaw Mac's "COMPUTER" base increasing. No, I don't recall the specifics, that was the gist of some of his comments.
Remember those anti drug commercials, this is your brain this is your brain on drugs
Well here is my take...A series of mini ads, like 5-7 seconds
strung together into a 30 second spot
show internet explorer in win XP with an anouncer saying "this is the web" (click of a slide projector) on the screen appears a screenshot of Safari in osx and the anouncer says "this is the web on a Mac"
show windows media player announcer:"This is digital music"
(click projector) itunes under osx announcer:"This is digital music on a Mac"
Show ms photo veiwer announcer:"This is digital photography"
(click projector) show iPhoto 5, announcer:"This is digital photography on a Mac"
Show the blue screen of death announcer:"This is a blue screen of death" (click projector) slide is empty announcer:"Wheres the mac blue screen of death?!?"
fade to black with white apple logo
Announcer"Apple, manage your digital life, from $499"
IonYz tries to remember the last time he saw a BSOD.
EDIT
Ok, it was on an Xbox at CES But in the wild, I can't remember.
Ever used XP on a regular basis? particularly when the install get "junked up"
2-3 months after a home user starts fresh, go use it and I garentee that if they do not check for spyware regularly (many do not) and run IE (many do) the chances of seeing a blue screen are pretty good...now if they are vigalent, they are safe but so many people are lazy (the people who never check the car oil untill they hear grinding) or ingorant (well meaning but dont have a clue about tech.
Spyware junks up windows and kills it, yes this is MSs fault for not giveing a damn till July of 2004).
The entire idea of commercials is to sell a product that won't otherwise sell because its not a product people will notice if you don't point to their face.
iPod is selling pretty well; Macs so-so, but in general, I think Apple philosophy is that 'less is more'. A company that quadrupled its profits without any significant amount of ads, according to customers, has some good products in its shelves.
Nope. Our office has a mixture of Win98 and Win2K. Every user computer has Win2K and I haven't seen a blue-screen in years. The Win98 machines do go down from time to time, one I believe either has a DVD-ROM problem or just needs a reinstall. Another one runs our application server (oy...) and may lock up or processes will randomly quit.
I've taught the users who use the machine with DVD-ROM problems to just reboot if they see one so they see them from time to time I'm sure. All our problems are on non-NT machines. So XP has the same stability of 98? Sorry, I can't believe that.
And no, I'm a crappy admin so its hard to use the "Your an admin and in an office, BSODs are less common". That may be the case where they have Windows-savvy admins making a living fixing the faults of Redmond.
Everyone is using either Firefox or Mozilla but IE is still there. They are discouraged from using it but not forced otherwise. I upgrade their software but its not all up-to-date. I scan for spyware but its not on a set, rigorous schedule. And no, I'm not only the admin. For the time being it has to be an ancillary responsibility. Even so I only really do spyware, troubleshoot when a computer is dead.
Nope. Our office has a mixture of Win98 and Win2K. Every user computer has Win2K and I haven't seen a blue-screen in years.
Win 2k has far less crap than xp, and in a corprate enviornment, you can easily restrict unauthorised software instalation. the real problem with XP lies in the account type that most people use, if you follow ver batem the windows installer, you will end up with one account, administrator (or whatever name you puit in with admin access) and if you try to set up a restricted account, you find that windows has 2 extreams: either you run as admin or you run at such a pathetic level that you have no access to what you need on a daily basis (this is not an issue in corp. envionments becauseof inhouse IT polocy implementation)
Now linux in my experience sets up 2 accounts, root and a user sccount of your choice that has a very good level of access, but programs run in that mode cannot directly screw with the under lieing OS whereas in windows in "user" mode, you can barely move arround,thus, everyone runs in admin - thus malware has system level access, not a good thing.
Win 2k has far less crap than xp, and in a corprate enviornment, you can easily restrict unauthorised software instalation.
We don't restrict anything. Users can do whatever they want. See I'm not an anal-retentive, power-hungry system administrator ergo I'm a bad one
Quote:
... either you run as admin or you run at such a pathetic level that you have no access to what you need on a daily basis (this is not an issue in corp. envionments becauseof inhouse IT polocy implementation).
Ah. Well everyone runs as a user, NOT as an administrator. I may be a terrible admin but I at least know the basic rule of "protect users from themselves." There is an admin and a user account. If, whatever, they need to do requires an admin password they need to run it by me first. Its rare they ever see a password prompt so XP must be screwed up royal. AFAIC admin and user accounts is simply commonsense.
Alas, while fun this is veering the thread off-topic. So I'm shutting up now.
The entire idea of commercials is to sell a product that won't otherwise sell because its not a product people will notice if you don't point to their face.
Don't quite understand what you mean, but brand awareness is very important in advertising. Coca-cola has absolutely no need to advertise, but they do simply to keep the brand alive in people's minds (though I often wish they wouldn't).
In the UK, Guiness has fantastic adverts, and they are known for this.
I loved Apple's 'Think Different' campaign, and it still remains to me the essence of using an Apple Mac. I think if they renewed this kind of advert (not necessarily extolling the advantages of using a Mac, but just the fact that they still make computers ) they might see some of the market share come back (with the Mini Mac as the main selling point).
[B]Don't quite understand what you mean, but brand awareness is very important in advertising. Coca-cola has absolutely no need to advertise, but they do simply to keep the brand alive in people's minds (though I often wish they wouldn't).
I would argue Coca-Cola does have a need to advertise otherwise it would not. It is losing much ground to rival products and is not the good ol' Coca-Cola anymore. But what I mean is, you have a product, and you notice that people are just not seeing it on the market. You need to somehow tell them its there. You create ads. But Apple, as far as I see, is relying on the attention its iPods are getting while at the same time trying to utilize that attention and create more computer sales as well. I don't know if its working, but thats the way I see it.
Quote:
In the UK, Guiness has fantastic adverts, and they are known for this.
I loved Apple's 'Think Different' campaign, and it still remains to me the essence of using an Apple Mac. I think if they renewed this kind of advert (not necessarily extolling the advantages of using a Mac, but just the fact that they still make computers ) they might see some of the market share come back (with the Mini Mac as the main selling point).
I'm not proposing that Apple smear the airwaves with ads. No, no, that would be out of character for such a "classy" company.
That the iPod is such a smashimg success, bravo to Jobs and company. It's a great product. Let's not forget that Apple advertised and continues to advertise heavily (for Apple that is...) for the iPod. So the iPod's success has been helped by Apple's ads.
Apple needs to push on it's best kept secret (to the general computer using public...), Mac OS X!
Now, as far as Windows XP goes, I use Pro on both my laptops. It performs like it should. I have never since day one experienced crashes with XP, never.
The biggest problem with XP (besides the flunky file system...) is that it's on 90% of the world's desktops. Therefore, most of the world's hacks, malwares and spywares are aimed at it. If the shoe were on the other foot, and Apple dominated the marketplace, Mac OS would be the main target. XP requires that user actively stay on top of the bugs. Unfortunately, too many users don't.
I'll say once again, I consider Mac OS X to be superior in most ways to Windows XP. When Apple produces a laptop with a modern mobo plus advanced 256MB GPU, I'll come back.
Even though I no longer have a Mac, I still recommend them to friends and clients depending of course, on what they need.
...But what I mean is, you have a product, and you notice that people are just not seeing it on the market. You need to somehow tell them its there. You create ads. But Apple, as far as I see, is relying on the attention its iPods are getting while at the same time trying to utilize that attention and create more computer sales as well. I don't know if its working, but thats the way I see it.
Yep. Apple definitely needs to strike while the iron's hot regarding reminding people that their computers are a viable alternative to the Windows based PC. The hype about the iPod can only go so far. But they need to do it subtly and with style (and with Jeff still doing the voice-over).
...Actually, maybe Jeff is too busy to do ads, maybe that is why there are none (no voiceover on the iPod ad you see...)
Comments
Originally posted by hardhead
What the heck are they waiting for? I admit it, I don't get it...
Apple should be pushing HARD on the benefits of using OS X.
An ad that touts getting OS X AND the Mini for under $500! Where is it? Bahhh.
people have been pointing this out for years. apple seems to be doing ok, and right now they are getting enough press coverage that they dont really need to market.
Right now the iron is HOT. Right now is the time to impress upon the PC using public that the Mac is a true PC alternative in most repects.
Steve J. said at one of his conference calls not too long ago that he forsaw Mac's "COMPUTER" base increasing. No, I don't recall the specifics, that was the gist of some of his comments.
The device is sleek, with a killer UI. Sync's perfectly with Macs and is a joy to use.
How does Apple market it?
By showing a bunch of silhouettes dancing around.
Only one example is Apple's "brilliant" Ad campaign for Macintosh.
Well here is my take...A series of mini ads, like 5-7 seconds
strung together into a 30 second spot
show internet explorer in win XP with an anouncer saying "this is the web" (click of a slide projector) on the screen appears a screenshot of Safari in osx and the anouncer says "this is the web on a Mac"
show windows media player announcer:"This is digital music"
(click projector) itunes under osx announcer:"This is digital music on a Mac"
Show ms photo veiwer announcer:"This is digital photography"
(click projector) show iPhoto 5, announcer:"This is digital photography on a Mac"
Show the blue screen of death announcer:"This is a blue screen of death" (click projector) slide is empty announcer:"Wheres the mac blue screen of death?!?"
fade to black with white apple logo
Announcer"Apple, manage your digital life, from $499"
EDIT
Ok, it was on an Xbox at CES
Originally posted by IonYz
IonYz tries to remember the last time he saw a BSOD.
EDIT
Ok, it was on an Xbox at CES
Ever used XP on a regular basis? particularly when the install get "junked up"
2-3 months after a home user starts fresh, go use it and I garentee that if they do not check for spyware regularly (many do not) and run IE (many do) the chances of seeing a blue screen are pretty good...now if they are vigalent, they are safe but so many people are lazy (the people who never check the car oil untill they hear grinding) or ingorant (well meaning but dont have a clue about tech.
Spyware junks up windows and kills it, yes this is MSs fault for not giveing a damn till July of 2004).
iPod is selling pretty well; Macs so-so, but in general, I think Apple philosophy is that 'less is more'. A company that quadrupled its profits without any significant amount of ads, according to customers, has some good products in its shelves.
Originally posted by a_greer
Ever used XP on a regular basis?
Nope. Our office has a mixture of Win98 and Win2K. Every user computer has Win2K and I haven't seen a blue-screen in years. The Win98 machines do go down from time to time, one I believe either has a DVD-ROM problem or just needs a reinstall. Another one runs our application server (oy...) and may lock up or processes will randomly quit.
I've taught the users who use the machine with DVD-ROM problems to just reboot if they see one so they see them from time to time I'm sure. All our problems are on non-NT machines. So XP has the same stability of 98? Sorry, I can't believe that.
And no, I'm a crappy admin so its hard to use the "Your an admin and in an office, BSODs are less common". That may be the case where they have Windows-savvy admins making a living fixing the faults of Redmond.
Everyone is using either Firefox or Mozilla but IE is still there. They are discouraged from using it but not forced otherwise. I upgrade their software but its not all up-to-date. I scan for spyware but its not on a set, rigorous schedule. And no, I'm not only the admin. For the time being it has to be an ancillary responsibility. Even so I only really do spyware, troubleshoot when a computer is dead.
Using a BSOD is cliché. Thats all.
Originally posted by IonYz
Nope. Our office has a mixture of Win98 and Win2K. Every user computer has Win2K and I haven't seen a blue-screen in years.
Win 2k has far less crap than xp, and in a corprate enviornment, you can easily restrict unauthorised software instalation. the real problem with XP lies in the account type that most people use, if you follow ver batem the windows installer, you will end up with one account, administrator (or whatever name you puit in with admin access) and if you try to set up a restricted account, you find that windows has 2 extreams: either you run as admin or you run at such a pathetic level that you have no access to what you need on a daily basis (this is not an issue in corp. envionments becauseof inhouse IT polocy implementation)
Now linux in my experience sets up 2 accounts, root and a user sccount of your choice that has a very good level of access, but programs run in that mode cannot directly screw with the under lieing OS whereas in windows in "user" mode, you can barely move arround,thus, everyone runs in admin - thus malware has system level access, not a good thing.
Originally posted by a_greer
Win 2k has far less crap than xp, and in a corprate enviornment, you can easily restrict unauthorised software instalation.
We don't restrict anything. Users can do whatever they want. See I'm not an anal-retentive, power-hungry system administrator ergo I'm a bad one
... either you run as admin or you run at such a pathetic level that you have no access to what you need on a daily basis (this is not an issue in corp. envionments becauseof inhouse IT polocy implementation).
Ah. Well everyone runs as a user, NOT as an administrator. I may be a terrible admin but I at least know the basic rule of "protect users from themselves." There is an admin and a user account. If, whatever, they need to do requires an admin password they need to run it by me first. Its rare they ever see a password prompt so XP must be screwed up royal. AFAIC admin and user accounts is simply commonsense.
Alas, while fun this is veering the thread off-topic. So I'm shutting up now.
Originally posted by Gene Clean
The entire idea of commercials is to sell a product that won't otherwise sell because its not a product people will notice if you don't point to their face.
Don't quite understand what you mean, but brand awareness is very important in advertising. Coca-cola has absolutely no need to advertise, but they do simply to keep the brand alive in people's minds (though I often wish they wouldn't).
In the UK, Guiness has fantastic adverts, and they are known for this.
I loved Apple's 'Think Different' campaign, and it still remains to me the essence of using an Apple Mac. I think if they renewed this kind of advert (not necessarily extolling the advantages of using a Mac, but just the fact that they still make computers ) they might see some of the market share come back (with the Mini Mac as the main selling point).
Originally posted by hardhead
What the heck are they waiting for? I admit it, I don't get it...
Apple should be pushing HARD on the benefits of using OS X.
An ad that touts getting OS X AND the Mini for under $500! Where is it? Bahhh.
Pods,Pods,pods,poDs,pOds,pods and yep pods. Does Apple still make computers
Originally posted by DaveLee
[B]Don't quite understand what you mean, but brand awareness is very important in advertising. Coca-cola has absolutely no need to advertise, but they do simply to keep the brand alive in people's minds (though I often wish they wouldn't).
I would argue Coca-Cola does have a need to advertise otherwise it would not. It is losing much ground to rival products and is not the good ol' Coca-Cola anymore. But what I mean is, you have a product, and you notice that people are just not seeing it on the market. You need to somehow tell them its there. You create ads. But Apple, as far as I see, is relying on the attention its iPods are getting while at the same time trying to utilize that attention and create more computer sales as well. I don't know if its working, but thats the way I see it.
In the UK, Guiness has fantastic adverts, and they are known for this.
I loved Apple's 'Think Different' campaign, and it still remains to me the essence of using an Apple Mac. I think if they renewed this kind of advert (not necessarily extolling the advantages of using a Mac, but just the fact that they still make computers ) they might see some of the market share come back (with the Mini Mac as the main selling point).
Agreed.
That the iPod is such a smashimg success, bravo to Jobs and company. It's a great product. Let's not forget that Apple advertised and continues to advertise heavily (for Apple that is...) for the iPod. So the iPod's success has been helped by Apple's ads.
Apple needs to push on it's best kept secret (to the general computer using public...), Mac OS X!
Now, as far as Windows XP goes, I use Pro on both my laptops. It performs like it should. I have never since day one experienced crashes with XP, never.
The biggest problem with XP (besides the flunky file system...) is that it's on 90% of the world's desktops. Therefore, most of the world's hacks, malwares and spywares are aimed at it. If the shoe were on the other foot, and Apple dominated the marketplace, Mac OS would be the main target. XP requires that user actively stay on top of the bugs. Unfortunately, too many users don't.
I'll say once again, I consider Mac OS X to be superior in most ways to Windows XP. When Apple produces a laptop with a modern mobo plus advanced 256MB GPU, I'll come back.
Even though I no longer have a Mac, I still recommend them to friends and clients depending of course, on what they need.
Originally posted by Gene Clean
...But what I mean is, you have a product, and you notice that people are just not seeing it on the market. You need to somehow tell them its there. You create ads. But Apple, as far as I see, is relying on the attention its iPods are getting while at the same time trying to utilize that attention and create more computer sales as well. I don't know if its working, but thats the way I see it.
Yep. Apple definitely needs to strike while the iron's hot regarding reminding people that their computers are a viable alternative to the Windows based PC. The hype about the iPod can only go so far. But they need to do it subtly and with style (and with Jeff still doing the voice-over).
...Actually, maybe Jeff is too busy to do ads, maybe that is why there are none (no voiceover on the iPod ad you see...)
And coke was a bad example. You are correct.