Since most Superbowl viewers haven't seen a Mac in 20 years, never heard of Mac OS X, and have no idea what Macs do these days, a Superbowl commercial certainly doesn't need to show anything new. I hope the commercial will:
(a) Show a computer.
(b) Show Mac OS X, iPhoto, iTunes.
(c) Not be flashy or confusing, but clearly show some of what Mac OS X does and why it's better.
What would be cool would be a clear-speaking football player, say Eddie George, using a 17" iMac and running the program.
Given the commercials I see lately, the chances of all three coming true is near-zero. I expect something more like this:
Front of Apple Store. Flash! Young people smiling. Flash! Student in class gets ibook out of backpack and starts to open it. Flash! Brief glimpse of iPod on teen walking to school. Flash! Brief glimpse of iPhoto uploading photos. Flash! Teenagers greeting each other in front of convenience store, one holding a slightly visible iBook. Flash! Picture of CD tray with disk closing, then a rotating Burn Disk icon. Flash! And so on. "Apple. Your Digital Life". Fade to black.
Like Amorph says, things are about to get interesting this time. Round 2 in the Apple vs M$.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
In a sense, though, I don't see things this way. Gates sees everything in terms of "competition," and "winning," and that's why MS is an oppressive monopoly that kills smaller companies with better products to avoid any challenge to its own mediocre offerings.
I see Apple replacing PowerPoint and Outlook and so forth not to compete with MS, but because a great deal of the capabilities of the available hardware and software technologies are being squandered. MS takes the same program and makes it bigger and slower for no obvious reason in order to spur hardware upgrades, because they don't have any imagination for how to exploit the capabilities of new hardware — their focus is on "winning," not on technology. This is a fundamental culture clash, which the 1984 ad underlined, and which I think any sequel will underline: Apple is trying to make the most usable machine available. MS is trying to kill everyone who opposes them and turn everything into a consistently growing revenue stream. One exploits technology; the other exploits the end user.
This is obviously idealized, because I'm working within the confines of hypothetical ad copy. MS has displayed the occasional stroke of inspiration, and Apple has displayed the occasional streak of greed. But there is more than a grain of truth to the generalization. Apple is product driven; MS is profit driven. These differences have a very real impact on what the companies offer, and how they impact the world.
I think Simon Jary's Macworld editorial says it all for me.
Apple and M$ appear to have begun trading blows. And 'iWorks' is a signal of intent to me.
But I do agree with your 2nd paragraph. There's a fundamental difference between Apple and M$. When Apple do software...it may be flawed or have the odd bug...but hey, it's usally insanely great, gets you talking and you wondered how you ever did without it. Look at imovie, iphoto, isync, rendezvous, idvd, itunes, keynote, safari etc. And for me? It's great to see this. Apple ARE good at making software. Let's see more. Ease of use. Elegant. Works.
Looking back, you wonder how IE ever got 90% of the market Now, Apple have Safari and Keynote. And IE and Powerpoint are already breathing hard.
The good thing is that Apple have realised they're a software company. Good. Because now they don't need to rely on M$ for software. Just so happens that Apple make great kit to put that software on! (And am I the only guy around here just as excited that Apple are promising a virtual software blitz to accompany the rumoured 970 tower?)
Apple funded M$'s rise to glory. I'll happily place an outside bet that Apple can plunder them. (Well, maybe leading the charge of Unix/Linux hoardes on... )
What have Apple been afraid of all these years?
...and with iWorks (hello Thinksecret!), next time M$ threatens to yank the 'Office' umbilical cord, Steve can say, We don't need it. We got iWorks and it's free to all our Apple Store customers...' M$ must have made quite a few enemies over the years...I can't wait as one by one they line up with the baseball bats...
What would be cool would be a clear-speaking football player, say Eddie George, using a 17" iMac and running the program.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
How it should end: He's talking to the camera and his own image appears on the screen behind him, identical to what we're seeing. The camera zooms in to the screen image and goes "through" the screen, which becomes the new "reality" with his image again behind him on a screen - a "hall of mirrors" sort of effect. Through this he is saying, "And by the way, this entire ad that you're viewing was created on THIS 17" iMac."
A very surreal, mind-bending conclusion to leave peoples' heads spinning. :cool:
<strong>...and with iWorks (hello Thinksecret!), next time M$ threatens to yank the 'Office' umbilical cord, Steve can say, We don't need it. We got iWorks and it's free to all our Apple Store customers...' M$ must have made quite a few enemies over the years...I can't wait as one by one they line up with the baseball bats...</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's exactly what I've been thinking. Apple may not be gearing up to wage a war, but instead getting ready to prove to the tech world that they can survive on their own just fine. An Apple community that doesn't need to rely in any way on the MS world, but can work in sync with them just fine, would be an incredible thing. Imagine how much more credit Macs would be given if they had all their own software that before had to come from Microsoft. I think they know that much of the Mac world is ready to take the leap with an Apple alternative to the Office crutch they have seemed to lean on for a while now. I do however think that Steve would be slightly reluctant to go too far into the direction of a software company, after NeXT started to fall and tried to offer just software, but still went down. Which further strengthens the idea of a Digital Hub, "hardware prices may be too high for some people's likes, but look, we're also an amazing software company offering more than a computer, we have a hub". Over the last few years we've been seeing the parts coming together, but not really as a whole. But what I think we're seeing here, starting with the introduction of the first iMac, hitting it's next substantial landmark in 2004, is one of the best planned out comeback stories in the industry.
Comments
Since most Superbowl viewers haven't seen a Mac in 20 years, never heard of Mac OS X, and have no idea what Macs do these days, a Superbowl commercial certainly doesn't need to show anything new. I hope the commercial will:
(a) Show a computer.
(b) Show Mac OS X, iPhoto, iTunes.
(c) Not be flashy or confusing, but clearly show some of what Mac OS X does and why it's better.
What would be cool would be a clear-speaking football player, say Eddie George, using a 17" iMac and running the program.
Given the commercials I see lately, the chances of all three coming true is near-zero. I expect something more like this:
Front of Apple Store. Flash! Young people smiling. Flash! Student in class gets ibook out of backpack and starts to open it. Flash! Brief glimpse of iPod on teen walking to school. Flash! Brief glimpse of iPhoto uploading photos. Flash! Teenagers greeting each other in front of convenience store, one holding a slightly visible iBook. Flash! Picture of CD tray with disk closing, then a rotating Burn Disk icon. Flash! And so on. "Apple. Your Digital Life". Fade to black.
Viewer response: Huh?
<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
apple is everywhere...hiding in the shadow but with the happiest costumers
no one with a pc thinks about mac - thats it in europe at least - most of them dont even know macs exist
some get scared about investing in a mac..they wait every day - mumbling "...macs will vanish...mhrm..." - cause their local pc magazine told them...
though...some wish they had a mac
<strong>
Like Amorph says, things are about to get interesting this time. Round 2 in the Apple vs M$.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
In a sense, though, I don't see things this way. Gates sees everything in terms of "competition," and "winning," and that's why MS is an oppressive monopoly that kills smaller companies with better products to avoid any challenge to its own mediocre offerings.
I see Apple replacing PowerPoint and Outlook and so forth not to compete with MS, but because a great deal of the capabilities of the available hardware and software technologies are being squandered. MS takes the same program and makes it bigger and slower for no obvious reason in order to spur hardware upgrades, because they don't have any imagination for how to exploit the capabilities of new hardware — their focus is on "winning," not on technology. This is a fundamental culture clash, which the 1984 ad underlined, and which I think any sequel will underline: Apple is trying to make the most usable machine available. MS is trying to kill everyone who opposes them and turn everything into a consistently growing revenue stream. One exploits technology; the other exploits the end user.
This is obviously idealized, because I'm working within the confines of hypothetical ad copy.
Apple and M$ appear to have begun trading blows. And 'iWorks' is a signal of intent to me.
But I do agree with your 2nd paragraph. There's a fundamental difference between Apple and M$. When Apple do software...it may be flawed or have the odd bug...but hey, it's usally insanely great, gets you talking and you wondered how you ever did without it. Look at imovie, iphoto, isync, rendezvous, idvd, itunes, keynote, safari etc. And for me? It's great to see this. Apple ARE good at making software. Let's see more. Ease of use. Elegant. Works.
Looking back, you wonder how IE ever got 90% of the market
The good thing is that Apple have realised they're a software company. Good. Because now they don't need to rely on M$ for software. Just so happens that Apple make great kit to put that software on! (And am I the only guy around here just as excited that Apple are promising a virtual software blitz to accompany the rumoured 970 tower?)
Apple funded M$'s rise to glory. I'll happily place an outside bet that Apple can plunder them. (Well, maybe leading the charge of Unix/Linux hoardes on...
What have Apple been afraid of all these years?
...and with iWorks (hello Thinksecret!), next time M$ threatens to yank the 'Office' umbilical cord, Steve can say, We don't need it. We got iWorks and it's free to all our Apple Store customers...' M$ must have made quite a few enemies over the years...I can't wait as one by one they line up with the baseball bats...
Lemon Bon Bon
:cool:
<strong>
What would be cool would be a clear-speaking football player, say Eddie George, using a 17" iMac and running the program.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
How it should end: He's talking to the camera and his own image appears on the screen behind him, identical to what we're seeing. The camera zooms in to the screen image and goes "through" the screen, which becomes the new "reality" with his image again behind him on a screen - a "hall of mirrors" sort of effect. Through this he is saying, "And by the way, this entire ad that you're viewing was created on THIS 17" iMac."
A very surreal, mind-bending conclusion to leave peoples' heads spinning. :cool:
<strong>...and with iWorks (hello Thinksecret!), next time M$ threatens to yank the 'Office' umbilical cord, Steve can say, We don't need it. We got iWorks and it's free to all our Apple Store customers...' M$ must have made quite a few enemies over the years...I can't wait as one by one they line up with the baseball bats...</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's exactly what I've been thinking. Apple may not be gearing up to wage a war, but instead getting ready to prove to the tech world that they can survive on their own just fine. An Apple community that doesn't need to rely in any way on the MS world, but can work in sync with them just fine, would be an incredible thing. Imagine how much more credit Macs would be given if they had all their own software that before had to come from Microsoft. I think they know that much of the Mac world is ready to take the leap with an Apple alternative to the Office crutch they have seemed to lean on for a while now. I do however think that Steve would be slightly reluctant to go too far into the direction of a software company, after NeXT started to fall and tried to offer just software, but still went down. Which further strengthens the idea of a Digital Hub, "hardware prices may be too high for some people's likes, but look, we're also an amazing software company offering more than a computer, we have a hub". Over the last few years we've been seeing the parts coming together, but not really as a whole. But what I think we're seeing here, starting with the introduction of the first iMac, hitting it's next substantial landmark in 2004, is one of the best planned out comeback stories in the industry.
[ 03-16-2003: Message edited by: iBrowse ]</p>
<strong>
they will have a new name..not mac
</strong><hr></blockquote>
that would be commiting suicide. The overall brand recognition is too powerfull to drop it.
New brand develop. and installation would be way to expencive for a tiny company like apple computers.
Apple simply never would drop their most powerfull brand. Period.
[ 03-17-2003: Message edited by: Vox Barbara ]</p>