They're all decent except the WSJ one which is gay artsy fartsy hipster shtick...in other words they should pull it fast before they lose Switcher sales to it. "Oh great, just what I always though, Mac users are arrogant assholes." What were they thinking.
Also...two white guys. If they could have different people...women...non-white people...that'd probably be good.
Good start I guess, finally taking the kid gloves off. They should have one that mentions that Macs run Windows faster.
They're all decent except the WSJ one which is gay artsy fartsy hipster shtick...in other words they should pull it fast before they lose Switcher sales to it. "Oh great, just what I always though, Mac users are arrogant assholes." What were they thinking.
Also...two white guys. If they could have different people...women...non-white people...that'd probably be good.
Good start I guess, finally taking the kid gloves off. They should have one that mentions that Macs run Windows faster.
i dont think interracial would be good here when youre trying to compare something "good" with something "bad".
What race would you choose the pc to be?, and which race would the mac be? you get the japanese female camera and that's good enough... and hot.
well i hope you get my point...
... besides, these two guys are obviously a reflection of Steve Jobs and Bill Gates
(sigh) it's been such a long time since Apple's ads actually showed a computer... but any advertising at all is better than none, I suppose. \
This matters because? People know what Macs look like because they see them in everyday situations. Everyone knows what computers look like. What they don't know is why you should get one over the other. Thats the point of ads for computers.
Yes Macs look nicer but you should not just buy a computer because its pretty. You buy it because it does what you want and possibly more.
Also, it seems odd that Apple is hijacking the term 'HD' to mean 848x480 -- even for (HD)TV, that usually is either 720p or 1080i (which is 540p with trick play).
480P is apart of the HD designation, but few really use it because its not much better than progressive NTSC. 480 is not as sexy as 1080.
Quote:
"HD" refers to the aspect ratio (16:9) in contrast to "SD" (standard definition) which is 4:3 aspect ratio. Pixel resolution for those aspect ratios is variable (e.g. VGA vs. WideVGA, XGA vs. WXGA, UXGA vs. WUXGA, QXGA vs. WQXGA, etc.)
No that's not true. HD pixel resolution is always beyond the NTSC designation. 16x9 is the official designated aspect ratio you can shoot HD at 4x3.
The fact that HD quantization bit rate, data rate, sample rate, and color space is greater than that of NTSC is also what makes the difference.
This matters because? People know what Macs look like because they see them in everyday situations. Everyone knows what computers look like. What they don't know is why you should get one over the other. Thats the point of ads for computers.
Yes Macs look nicer but you should not just buy a computer because its pretty. You buy it because it does what you want and possibly more.
I do really like the ads, but to date, Apples most successfull computer campaign was for the original iMac, and all of those ads showed nothing but the iMacs.
I do think these new ads will present favorably to the pc buying crowd. Real world differences are what people really need to know about Mac.
The "Think Different" campaign (my personal favorite) flopped because it made people think that Macs were too different.. People are afraid of what they don't know.
The "Switch" campaign flopped because it came across as being too arrogant and pissed people off.
I hope that the MacBook is coming real soon to benefit from all these advertising dollars being spent, otherwise they risk having the public retain the misconception that Apple does not have an offering in the low cost space even after it is released.
Comments
like a children game, a toy... makes me want a mac even more...
i think the ads are very well done
Also...two white guys. If they could have different people...women...non-white people...that'd probably be good.
Good start I guess, finally taking the kid gloves off. They should have one that mentions that Macs run Windows faster.
Originally posted by Aquatic
They're all decent except the WSJ one which is gay artsy fartsy hipster shtick...in other words they should pull it fast before they lose Switcher sales to it. "Oh great, just what I always though, Mac users are arrogant assholes." What were they thinking.
Also...two white guys. If they could have different people...women...non-white people...that'd probably be good.
Good start I guess, finally taking the kid gloves off. They should have one that mentions that Macs run Windows faster.
i dont think interracial would be good here when youre trying to compare something "good" with something "bad".
What race would you choose the pc to be?, and which race would the mac be? you get the japanese female camera and that's good enough... and hot.
well i hope you get my point...
... besides, these two guys are obviously a reflection of Steve Jobs and Bill Gates
Originally posted by cubist
(sigh) it's been such a long time since Apple's ads actually showed a computer... but any advertising at all is better than none, I suppose.
This matters because? People know what Macs look like because they see them in everyday situations. Everyone knows what computers look like. What they don't know is why you should get one over the other. Thats the point of ads for computers.
Yes Macs look nicer but you should not just buy a computer because its pretty. You buy it because it does what you want and possibly more.
Also, it seems odd that Apple is hijacking the term 'HD' to mean 848x480 -- even for (HD)TV, that usually is either 720p or 1080i (which is 540p with trick play).
480P is apart of the HD designation, but few really use it because its not much better than progressive NTSC. 480 is not as sexy as 1080.
"HD" refers to the aspect ratio (16:9) in contrast to "SD" (standard definition) which is 4:3 aspect ratio. Pixel resolution for those aspect ratios is variable (e.g. VGA vs. WideVGA, XGA vs. WXGA, UXGA vs. WUXGA, QXGA vs. WQXGA, etc.)
No that's not true. HD pixel resolution is always beyond the NTSC designation. 16x9 is the official designated aspect ratio you can shoot HD at 4x3.
The fact that HD quantization bit rate, data rate, sample rate, and color space is greater than that of NTSC is also what makes the difference.
Originally posted by drakethegreat
This matters because? People know what Macs look like because they see them in everyday situations. Everyone knows what computers look like. What they don't know is why you should get one over the other. Thats the point of ads for computers.
Yes Macs look nicer but you should not just buy a computer because its pretty. You buy it because it does what you want and possibly more.
I do really like the ads, but to date, Apples most successfull computer campaign was for the original iMac, and all of those ads showed nothing but the iMacs.
The "Think Different" campaign (my personal favorite) flopped because it made people think that Macs were too different.. People are afraid of what they don't know.
The "Switch" campaign flopped because it came across as being too arrogant and pissed people off.
Let's hope the "Get a Mac" campaign will work!
Originally posted by tak1108
480P is part of the DIGITAL TV standard, not HDTV standard.
exactly -- 480P is more SD than HD. apple is now defining "wide SD"
as HD, which is tacky. they should have been content to label
the supersized choice "widescreen".
are we about to witness a collision of the digital TV and computer world,
where each industry has their own snake oil to win over consumers?
still waiting for that 42" 1920x1080 LCD TV (with DVI/HDMI/UDI
inputs) from apple.
Originally posted by 666
it's this kind of arrogance that will get the nerds writing viruses to take Apple down a notch.
If it were that easy McCaffe and Norton/Symantec would have started writing ,ac OS X viruses long ago...
Originally posted by TenoBell
480P is apart of the HD designation, but few really use it because its not much better than progressive NTSC. 480 is not as sexy as 1080.
No that's not true. HD pixel resolution is always beyond the NTSC designation. 16x9 is the official designated aspect ratio you can shoot HD at 4x3.
The fact that HD quantization bit rate, data rate, sample rate, and color space is greater than that of NTSC is also what makes the difference.
480p is technically EDTV
although technically, the term HD has not been defined really in a set-in-stone way.
The "HD" trailer could easily mean "High Definition compared to other streaming media"
besides, anything that looks sharp and crisp can be called high definition. The word "high" just makes it compare to something lower.
so 720p is HD compared to 480i, just as a 20 inch painting is HD compared to a 10 inch painting
Originally posted by akhomerun
so 720p is HD compared to 480i, just as a 20 inch painting is HD compared to a 10 inch painting
technically a 10" painting is just as detailed as a 20" painting as it's not made up of pixels - however the real issue is monitors!
I was the under the impression HD was 720i, 720p, 1080i or 1080p
Originally posted by tmp
Nice, but I wish I could view them from my PC at work.
Works fine on my PC. Just need to install quicktime.