Would Bill Gates have aired Laptop Hunters?
I got a thoughtful message last week from Jim Neal, a retired advertising and PR guy who owns a little Apple (AAPL) stock and spends a lot of time following its ups and downs.
Lately he's been trying to make sense of Microsoft's (MSFT) Laptop Hunters TV ads — the ones where ordinary Americans are given a budget and a wad of cash and set loose in a computer store to buy a PC.
Microsoft aired the fifth spot in the series last week (pasted below the fold), and Apple for the first time answered back with a couple Get A Mac spots. See here and here.
"Microsoft's anti-Apple ads," Neal writes, "are generally considered a response to Apple increasing market share, something generally believed to be at the expense of Windows market share [and] made possible due to the failure of Vista to deliver.
"All that may be true, but the decision was a poor one. I'm guessing it was made by Steve Ballmer, clearly a more visceral, shoot-from-the-hip guy than Bill Gates.
"Would Gates have made the same decision? Possibly not. He may have opted to continue to ignore Apple's inroads and put all his efforts into making sure Windows 7 was all that it could be. With the new campaign, the heat will really be on Microsoft to deliver with Windows 7.
"Gates may well look at the current Microsoft ad campaign as a mistake and much as [the ads] may delight some people in their camp, he'd be correct.
"The moment Microsoft decided to attack Apple, they increased Apple's credibility. That's a given any time you decide to respond to an opponent you previously didn't acknowledge even had right to get into the ring with you.
"Further, any marketing pro looking at the issue would know that (1) Apple's rabid fan base would react strongly and do all it could to poke holes in the validity of the campaign, thereby further raising the level of the debate, and (2) Apple would eventually decide to enter the fray, making the need to produce an iron-clad argument against Apple all the more imperative.
"After all from Apple's perspective, Microsoft has done them a favor by putting to a larger the audience the key question, 'which combination of OS and hardware is better for the user?'
"Anyone who has taken time to dissect the Microsoft ads (as so many have), knows they're full of holes big enough to drive a truck through.
"Microsoft clearly knows this. The ads didn't just accidentally end up being crafted in a way that's quite misleading. The problem for Microsoft is that they really, really felt compelled to take on Apple, so much so they did it even though they didn't have a leg to stand on. Someone promoted the argument that in the current recession, Apple's weakness was price. It's a weakness, but not as big a one as Microsoft wants to believe, not based on Apple's sales.
"Microsoft went with it anyway. They could have just said, 'we're less expensive, so if you don't have much money, we're the only game in town,' but that wasn't enough.
"So they created a false premise, that Apple products are over priced for what they are, that Windows machines give you more for the money, and they manufactured a set of conditions intended to support the false premise.
"Why Microsoft continues to view their market dominance as proof they have a better product is beyond me. It's the type of thinking that can really kill a company in the long run, the type of thinking that leads one to make really stupid decisions.
"It's like Goliath not only stepping into the ring with David, but handing him the stones to put in his sling and urging him to fire away.
"The Ballmer decision, I think, was a knee-jerk reaction not only to Apple's increase in market share, but to concerns raised by its largest clients, Dell (DELL), HP (HPQ), etc. It was done at a time when Microsoft is at its weakest, the very time when they needed to take the high road and ignore Apple. It was a very stupid marketing decision.
"But Ballmer couldn't take it any more. He took the bait, set out by Apple through its Get a Mac ads.
"To paraphrase Star Trek's Captain Kirk: 'Now we've got them right where they want us.'"
ADDENDUM: Neal doesn't mention it, but Bill Gates would be even more embarrassed if he knew what some people are saying about the format of the Microsoft ads. The image of a young woman being handed a fist-full of cash is apparently a visual trope used quite frequently in a very different kind of film. See Laptop: Porn Hunters.
See also:
- How Microsoft put Apple users on the defensive
- All about Microsoft’s ‘Lauren’
- Is the Apple press falling into Microsoft’s trap
- Apple slaps Microsoft with rubber chickens
Below the fold: The latest Laptop Hunters ad.
I am a PC user and have always been. I recently bought a Mac and feel as though my individuality has been taken from me. When I am in class, every other student has the same or newer Macbook pro. That's just my 2 cents.
The only reason I bought one is because the place where I work at offered to pay a portion of my Mac so I can learn how to fix them. For some reason they get really hot with incompatible programs? Other than that they are ok. For some reason I think my Macbook runs better under Windows 7. Maybe that's just me though.
People should get over this whole PC vs. Mac. They're just computers…
When you buy a Mac, you are also buying a PC (with the purchase of Windows OS software). With BootCamp, a Mac also runs Windows compatible software natively at full speed. You get 2 computers for the price of 1.
For example, you could use your Apple laptop as a Mac for all of your personal and creative needs and Windows for business and for games which are not available for the Mac.
If you are a Windows user switching to a Mac, you can still use the PC software you already own, with the option of buying PC or Mac software in the future.
I don't know why Apple does not promote this obvious advantage. Anyone who buys an Intel based Apple computer does not have to choose a side because he or she is a Mac AND a PC.
I am a PC user. MACS look very cool to me. Truth be told if I had the money I would have both a PC and a MAC. Bottom line is I don't have that kind of money. I have a computer I use almost too much and it does what I need it to do with few problems. I don't feel like the poor relative in fact I feel blessed that I do have a computer.There was a time when I could not afford one. However several of the MAC owners that I know try to make me feel like a moron for not having a MAC. Most of the time I find it quite comical but other times quite sad. At least I am not paying credit card charges each month for something I can't afford. In advertising companies are supposed to put the other product down. I just wish it did not happen so often with computer users.
What's interesting about this entire article is that it justifies the validity in what the actual commercial portrays. Even MACs reactive commercial further solidifies that (1) PCs are way cheaper and (2) there are way more choices.
And of course ALL of this goes w/o saying that Apple is going to have to do something to counter the Netbook era which is just about to kick into high gear.
Please consider residual value in this discussion. Every time I upgrade my Mac I sell the oner I already had for on average half what I originally paid. This means the next one is well subsidized. This high residual value is because Macs keep working and run the latest OS X for a long time. I only need the latest as I am a graphics and video professional. I still use (and am using now) an old iBook G4 running the latest OS from Apple and it works fine for mail and web. How much will Lauren's PC be worth in a few years when she wants to get a new one?
Many of the quotes by Mr. Neal reveal a very incomplete understanding of the Windows platform
He argues that the ads leave Microsoft vulnerable counterattack from "rabid" Macintosh fans. Macintosh fans like that will alway be critical, usually nonsensically. Plus it's not like Apple itself isn't the technology company most guilty of logical impropriety over the years in it's claims and ads, for which they also have recieved plenty of (less visible) critisism.
Glossing over the price difference is a pretty glaring fault in Neil's argument. Probably the most poignant statement in the laptop hunter ads is right at the end where Lauren says, "I'm a PC, and I got just what I wanted"— which is really the main attraction of the Windows Hardware. You want certain exact features? you can likely find them from multiple vendors. Apple, however, with it's limited lineup and configurations is an agressive upseller: you want a decent gaming card like the NVidia GT? You're looking at a $2500 Apple computer equipped with the expensive Nehlem processor. On the PC side however, you can make cost-effective compromises and settle for a good Core2 or Phenom system that can also make good use of the same video hardware for high detail gaming for under a thousand.
The very fact that the "Laptop Hunters" attract this much attention – including articles from many big online publications like Fortune shows the efficacy of the ad campaign.
I'm an Apple user myself and enjoy Apple products (If you check your website stats you can see I'm using Safari on MacOSX) but what the "Hunters" ad say is true – Macs are indeed expensive and Apple's prices need to be lowered a bit to reflect the sagging economy.
Then again, Apple, unlike other computer companies, is doing fine despite of the recession so attacks on their pricing scheme is probably no skin off their nose. Apple wins. However, we the consumers lose because we are forced to pay a higher price for the privilege to own a Mac.
I do hope that M$ through Windows 7 and a more effective marketing effort (Laptop Hunter is a start) would force Apple's hand in lowering their prices a bit more in the future.
I'm an Apple fan, but this article is overwhelmingly bias. Part of the "Ad Game" is to generate buzz so that people will look at your product. It is funny that those corny "Vista /Bill Gates" mocking Apple ads were not met with such disdain. Most people outside the I.T. field don't know the functional differences between MacOS and Windows anyway, so they can write the article to the lowest common denominator. Hence we get these ridiculous ads.
Most ads prey on folk's ignorance, because folks won't research the products thouroughly and simply believe everything the ad says. In other words, good marketing means making the ad just believable enough to get people NOT to check the sources.
Anyways, most of the ads, including the classic 1984 Macintosh ad are stupid. If you want to show relevance of your OS and/or computer, show what people can DO with it — not this "mine is better than yours" junk. The Big Three Auto companies learned a thing or two about that. By GM comparing itself to Toyota, etc. it legitimized the competitor in the minds of folks who are ignorant and won't do the research. Why expose your competitor to EQUAL press as you?!?
If Microsoft really wanted to show that they are better, how about an ad about the REPAIR costs and the proprietary nature of Apple products (iPhone, iPod, Macs, etc.) If Apple wanted to appeal to the PC/Corporate folks, how about their inexpensive XServe products or their FREE recycling program. Either one of these would sit better in the conscious of viewers than the current ads.
I'd first like to say that I am a lifelong Mac user, and have never owned a PC.
But I think this article is a little off base. False premise? Apple IS overpriced. I made the mistake of purchasing a $3k desktop once, which ended its life as a doorstop. Never again! Buying used is best with Mac purchases (check out Other World Computing or Ebay). I think a lot of Mac users are really drinking the kool-aid on this one. Yes the operating system is very nice, and so far OSX has been rock solid for me. But the cost is really out of whack.
When I saw the laptop hunter ads, I thought they were pretty successful at making the point that a PC purchase is a lot more cost effective for most users. And the "I'm a PC" ads showing the diversity of PC users were a great answer to those annoying "I'm a Mac" ads. When I see those, btw, I'd like to smack the smug look off the Mac guys face.
If Microsoft is losing market share to Apple, then I predict it is because people are making more videos. Interesting…
@Michael Chicago, Ill. -
You are correct. The avid users of either platform will never succumb to the fact that both platforms have made leaps and bounds to where these arguments first started. You are also correct that the Vista = crap arguments have been blown out of proportion. I have Vista running on numerous system specs and cleanly on each one. Windows 7 is faster and can run on computers with lesser specs than Vista could. The fact is people don't like change and Vista was a huge change in both protecting the user from themselves and from a "look and feel" aspect as well. People do not like that … they are more comfortable with their Classic Windows look & feel and not having the OS think for them when it comes to "Should this program run or not?". Keep in mind, Mac OSX has that same functionality of protecting the user from him/herself — but Mac users don't mind the computer thinking for them. Heck, for the price I'd want my Mac to make me coffee in the morning and suggest the lottery numbers I play to maximize my chances at winning the lottery.
Interesting that my post with the link to the McAfee report was edited to include comments not posted by me.
To Terry in Az.- I'm well aware of the alleged tactics used by the anti-virus industry to increase sales … some of that is legitimate and some of that is paranoia and tin-foil hat thinking. The same argument you use to defend your precious Mac can be used to debunk the volume of viruses that affect non-Mac PC's. The numbers are inflated for both platforms, but to say viruses don't exist for the Mac is ridiculous. And whether you or anyone here wants to admit it, it does go back to market share as to why there are less for Macs. If more businesses were like the poster below who is a system admin with 99% Macs, then you would undoubtedly see more viruses and exploits take place. Virus developers want to get the biggest bang for their buck … specifically in the business sector. If more Macs end up being used in that sector, you'd better believe incidents will increase.
As for not knowing the difference between OSX and Windows … yes, I do know the difference and *nix platforms are more secure but not invulnerable. If you are naive enough to think otherwise, you are the ignorant one … not me. And as someone else pointed out, you are again the ignorant one because you think Apple designs their own motherboards. They don't … they are glorified non-Mac PCs now with specs like small business Intel-based servers. This is why you can now run Windows on them and why you can also run many formerly PC-only games on Macs. Sure, the specs are higher on Macs but for the average consumer, they don't need a small business server for checking e-mail and browsing the Internet.
@Robert…
And how much did you pay for your 99% Mac network, and how did you sell it to upper management?
The reason your network is "99" MAC is because Macs don't play well with others. Try to get it to integrate with Microsoft Active Directory / exchange. Or try getting it to talk to your IBM AIX servers. Or try managing VM ESX servers from you Mac….
The truth is most Mac owners feel a sense of entitlement. Like you belong to some elite club. So talk on your Iphones and watch your Apple TV while doodling on your Macbooks, call the enterprise when you are ready to play with the other children.
Congratulations on a fine article. You address the issues without an overly biased perspective, and for that I am grateful.
I must disagree with your contention that the ads are "manufactured" or are "full of holes big enough to drive a truck through". Am I missing something? Are there Macbooks under 1500 with similar specs to be compared apples-to-apples (no pun intended) with a Dell or HP pc?
I spend a great deal of time on both and for the life of me can't understand what's so fantastic about OS-X. It's a great operating system but it isn't perfect. On my Dell 1720 with Vista I have a great operating system that is much more capable for the videos I watch and games I play, not to mention it’s easy to read multiple websites simultaneously or edit work documents. On my macbook I have a smaller screen, longer battery life and less weight. Those are advantages. If I had to give one up, I promise, it wouldn't be the bigger, heavier and more powerful $800 Dell. It would be the $1800 macbook.
Since I enjoyed your article, I wish you would address my points and answer this: At what price does OS-X become a disadvantage to a savvy shopper? When are the gamers of the world going to get a valid mac option?
I find that both the PC and mac users fight too much. Its all about how YOU THE USER prefer to interface with the system. I personally prefer windows as : A. i have used it for a very long time and know it inside and out. B. It still has more compatibility than a mac.
The issues with windows vista have been blown way out of proportion. there are lemons out there for every operating system (including mac) and both are equally secure. (mac users will start to feel the virus threat as the user base increases in size). It doesn't matter which is better or worse. It has to work (which both do). And i need it to be compatible with anything and as the current standard windows provides that for me.
Some things I want to debunk.
Apple designs their own motherboards – This hasn't been true since the switch to Intel. Your Macs actually run on Intel Motherboards… It's their Server Class line of motherboards.
No Viruses on Mac – I've personally dealt with 3. they were minor and were rendered impotent with a Apple Security Update.
New NT kernel in windows 7 – Nope, the reason for most software incompatibility is due to new security measures in the OS. Microsoft has been using the same NT Kernel since NT4
No macs in Enterprise – I'm a system admin for a nework that is 99% Mac including our Database Server, Web Server and our XSan fileserver.
Macs are not for gaming – with publishers like Activision\Blizzard and EA giving full support to the mac this is a moot point because the Quality PC games find their way onto the mac… I have WoW, Civilization, Spore to play on my mac, that's good enough.
For those of you who are buying a computer "every two years"… I would say, 1) don't buy the lowest configed system and 2) don't treat your system like trash. And for all those who think a Mac will effectively function for 10 years… call me in 10 years and tell me (or better yet, tell me who is still using a 10 year old Mac to do most of their computing workload today). Apple products are good… it's like buying a sleek sports car… you pay a premium for a fashion statement, or to show off… but at the end of the day, it's still just a computer that does computer stuff… some better than Windows… some worse.
Unfortunately most of you are way off about PCs and Windows. People aren't buying MACs because they last longer. Most businesses, whose needs are much more mission critical than buyer's of MACs, use PCs and are even still running Windows XP…6-7 years after it was first made available. That doesn't sound like something that only lasts 3 years.
In fact, Netbooks have been booming…and guess which OS they are running…that "old and run down" OS called XP. That doesn't sound like an MS software falls down after 2-3 years. The hottest PC trend is using XP for crying out loud.
And don't be ridiculous. People buying MACs, by and large, are not people keeping their PCs 10 years. They are people who will pay the premium for hardware and software for the brand, not the utility.
By the way, if you read any of the Windows 7 reviews by independent reviewers, they ALL are raving about Windows 7. So stop the falsehoods.
If that girl would have bought a notebook with Linux installed (e.g. Ubuntu) she could save even more money (and get a decent virus-free operating system).
I find the comments by the PC fanboys laughable. They have a wonderful gift of distortion, just like the latest MS commercials. That's what jealousy does unfortunately. Just ask Steve "Monkey Boy" Ballmer, the same guy who laughed at the iPhone when it came out; he's not laughing any longer.
The bottom line is this:PC users are generally cheap, Walmart type shoppers – and they get what they pay for. However, the truth is a lot of PC users like to fiddle with their computers, whether removing viruses, fixing corrupted registries, playing with device drivers, whatever – or playing games, while at the same time claiming their PCs are "business machines."
Mac users generally just want to get their work done, and have fun doing it. For this, Macs are often called "toys" by the PC fanboys, who are really shooting themselves in the foot. These are the same guys who years ago used MS-DOS and laughed at Apple's graphical user interface, calling it a toy, until Bill Gates copied Apple. And now MS has a graphical user interface, which somehow isn't a "toy." Bill Gates sneered at the Internet, while the World Wide Web was being developed on Steve Job's Next computer. Then MS discovers the Internet!. Again they tried to copy Google with their crap search engine, with their me too, me too mentality. PC fanboys sneered at the iPod when it came out, until they copied with the Zune turd. MS sneered at the Apple's App Store until now they are making one – me too, me too (as they up Windows Mobile to mimic the iPhone). On and on and on.
Microsoft really needs to thank Apple because Apple's ideas helps fill the creative void at MS and the design by committee crapware that they turn out. However, if you PC fanboys are happy with your Yugos and Edsels, go for it. But be sure to write Microsoft's board not to fire Steve Ballmer for the plunge of MS stock since he took over – he's really quite entertaining.
Microsoft had to respond to the Apple ads that have been running for years. If you compare Microsoft with Apple from a developers perspective, I would imagine many developers prefer Microsoft to Apple any day. Microsoft has created a huge, mostly open ecosystem that has allowed hundreds of ISVs and IHVs to get rich. Apple has mostly enabled themselves to get rich. It is pathetic that to this day that Apple still controls the App store and license agreements for iPhone SDK with an iron fist. They also don't allow any virtual environments on the the iPhone (like Java). It is amazing that the EU could find fault in Microsoft for bundling IE, but says nothing to Apple about their draconian control of … well just about everything they do.
I might not be a Rocket scientist but I do know that Mac has always been better than PC.
I can buy a nice Windows base laptop for 600-100 which will last at least 3 years
I can buy a nice Mac for 1500+ that will last me 10 years
The question is why would I want to use any of those for any longer than 2 years? Considering the fact that components get upgraded really quickly, the max life for a PC/Laptop IMO is 3 years. So the argument that I’m making is yes Mac is better, but I’m just not willing to spend the extra 500-900 for something which I will use for about the same amount of time. Another reason that Mac has lagged behind PC for the longest time is Gaming/Custom Built rigs
Wait… a guy who spent 30k for a station wagon/minivan from bankrupt auto manufacturer is using that as proof he's too smart to own a PC? You Apple users are too funny. You can rationalize anything.
John, New York, NY
You must be kidding!!!
You stated:
" If you have up to date hardware like i do (Intel Quad Core CPU, 4 GB RAM, nvidia geforce 9800 GTX, etc.) there is not a Mac out there that can match that performance when you couple that hardware with Windows 7."
You need to get informed, there quite a few Macs with specs superior to what you mentioned.
Actually Windows 7 is a change in the kernal of the operating system. This is the reason many earlier software that worked on Vista won't work on 7 without virtualization of Windows XP to run legacy apps.
When you buy a car what do you look for? I look for a car that will last a long time, get good gas mileage, be dependable and be a quality car. I bought a Pacifica, sure I paid $30k for it but I also got a great car. I was willing to pay a little extra for the things I wanted. Ask someone who buys a PC but drives a Honda Accord. They buy it because it is a Honda and they know it is a good car. If we were buying a car to get us from point A to point B why not buy a Kia? Why do people buy a PC? Because it is cheap. A Mac can last a long time, like 10 years and the only reason why you would need a new one is because you need a better processor for new OS's. So, let me see, I can spend 1k for something that will last 2-3 years maybe, or I can spend $1700 on a Mac and have it last 10+ years. I guess I am too smart to own a PC.
This article does not answer the question, which IS something I would care about..
So…. Who cares. Does the media actually report anything anymore, or just tell us how to think?
John
Windows 7 is very slightly faster than Vista in some things and actually slower in others. This is well known. It is still Vista with a simplified interface.
Rich you are going to quote from McAfee? they and Symantec have said all sorts of silliness to try to get Mac users to buy their software. So go ahead and name me a virus in the wild for the Mac. Now. Because there aren't any. There is one known Bot which has affected very few users and came from people who downloaded iWork. Quoting viruses in 1987 is pre )S X and therefore irrelevant except to prove that small market share doesn't mean you won't have viruses. You don't say what kind of consultant you are but you apparently don't know the difference between OS X and Windows. You also don't know that Apple designs its own motherboards and uses consistent and higher quality components than say Dell. Apple has better quality control and dramatically better support than any other PC company. other than that yeah its the same…I hope your not in IT.
Greg
Heh, I'm gonna guess you are a teenager. Plenty of very large corporations use Macs. I used them at Motorola, Cisco, and Oracle and they are very popular. Bzzzttt!!
Stewart!
There are more games on PC??? Really? Thanks for letting us know!
CG
Apple stock has taken a minor hit due to the economy but they had their second biggest quarter ever in the middle of a recession. Maybe you are thinking of Microsoft? Dell? HP?
The irony is that PC hardware needs higher specs because Windows is such a bloated pig and resource hog. I cringe at these ads. Apple is optimized for a fixed platform. A mac simply doesn't need huge hardware to perform basic tasks.
I think it's funny. A mac and a PC with the same comparable features and software packages costs virtually the same as a PC.
The reason people are buying more Macs is because it's a superior product for the price they're paying. That's why people spend $4000 more to buy a Toyota vs a Chevy. Toyotas last twice as long.
Right now Microsoft doesn't have a prayer. Apple is positioned perfectly that if they put their OS on the open market tomorrow, they would take 15% market share from Microsoft within weeks.
Those videos are too painful to watch. A college student looking at a Pro? A video editor/artist actually being offered a free computer, and opting for a PC?? What a mad mad world we live in.
I've been running the Windows 7 beta (64-bit) for about a week now and it is an excellent OS. It is like Vista except without all the things you hate about Vista (poor performance, software and driver compatibility issues, etc.). It starts up very quickly, and operating system runs programs crisply, with no hang-ups or load times. All of my peripherals worked the first time I booted it up, i didn't have to go search for drivers for anything. Every program that i have installed has worked without a single compatibility issue (try that on Windows XP 64-bit or Vista, lol).
Microsoft has finally figured things out with Windows 7. If you have up to date hardware like i do (Intel Quad Core CPU, 4 GB RAM, nvidia geforce 9800 GTX, etc.) there is not a Mac out there that can match that performance when you couple that hardware with Windows 7.
McAfee Whitepaper discussing Mac Viruses/Explots
The above whitepaper is from 2006, yet distinctly indicates viruses detected for Mac OS dating back to 1987 — long before Apple was gaining market share.
We can only expect the number to increase incrementally with the incremental market share increases. So, please … all of you Apple fan boys (and girls) … please be quiet now about your invincible Mac OSX.
ex ped: Thanks for the link. The graph usually quoted from that McAfee report is this one:
"Since 1987, McAfee ADVERT labs has documented just 76 viruses targeted at the Mac OS (see Figure 1 for the annual distribution). Compared to the 168,000 threats, including about 100,000 viruses, targeted at Windows devices from 1986 through the end of 2005, the contrast is striking."
Figure 1 shows that all but four of those viruses predated OS X. Moreover, McAfee's 2006 prediction that Apple would soon find itself in a "new and unwanted position in the crosshairs of malware authors" hasn't exactly panned out.
To all of those out there spreading the lies about "absolutely zero" viruses or malware for the Mac — what about the most recent one that was all over the news spreading from Mac to Mac? I can think of two trojans and a worm that have caused trouble since January. That doesn't appear to be "absolutely zero" to me.
I also remember that some of the most destructive viruses came out on Macs due to their use in graphic design in businesses where they can cripple creative departments. Most viruses for the traditional PC (Macs are PCs too by definition) are simply annoyances, not truly damaging. I'm not naive though and will not say there aren't damaging viruses for traditional PCs too.
As a consultant, I have worked on both platforms. I do not own a Mac as I have no need to. Everything that can be done on a Mac can be done at home on my desktop PC or my laptop. I might, however, consider buying a Mac if I didn't need to spend another $500-1000 more for the privilege (ie. the brand).
Also — keep in mind now that Mac uses Intel processors, they are not much different than a traditional PC. The added cost is simply for the brand.
Macs are for personal use and video editing… period.
You won't see them deployed in the enterprise, and you won't see them in corporate server racks.
Windows 7 is much better then Vista, but its still Windows. It still has outdated tech, like the registry system.
Windows 7 will be just like all the others. It will run well for about a year and then you have to either reinstall it or spend tons of time trying to figure out what is wrong.
We have 7 Mac Pros that range from new to nealry three years old and they all run nearly as fast as the day they were purchased. Show me a Windows computer that can do that and I will switch back to PC. You all know it will never happen until MS completely revamps their OS.
By not handing out cash as an inducement to buy Windows PC, the shopper would likely buy something she really wanted, an iPone.
Apples are for 16 year old girls, spending their time on their myspace pages and craving a Jonas brother.
In my opinion, it wasn't Microsoft attacking Apple, but the other way around.
With the Laptop Hunters ads (actually, with the "I'm a PC" campaign in general), it seems Microsoft is just taking control of their branding – something they should've done years ago – while Apple's ads are a direct "attack" on their competitor.
PC users dont worry about that ad. Microsoft will put out an upgrade for it in about 18 months. Then all will be well.
Why do I choose PC over MAC? Because 90% of the software I use will not run on a MAC. As a gamer, the MAC is not a contender. When I can run 100% of gaming software on a MAC, without any performance loss, I'll consider a MAC. Until then, it's PC for me.
@ Brian NY NY,
Welcome to the world of computing on a Mac- ten years ago. This is when you ask yourself: What is YOUR time worth!
Some people are just losing it. "Microsoft the next GM???" Give me a break. Wishful thinking is not intelligent thinking.
As for those that claim the Mac bullet proof from virus and Worms. Go check the 100's of OSX patches for the past year and you will find "remote code execution" patches which if exploited with local privilege escalation vulnerabilities could be used for a worm. Problem. Don't patch it if its not able to be compromised. Is Apple just doing this for fun???
I must admit I disappoint myself when I read these kinds of "PC vs. Mac" comments, but I read every last one–some informed and some not.
As a long-term professor of computer science who has used both platforms over the years, I must say each has its place. Windows machines are a cheaper commodity that largely work but need more technical support because the final product comes from a larger number of price-driven vendors. Macs generally are easier to use and sustain fewer problems, but are initially somewhat more expensive. It's no surprise that Windows dominates in business (Apple made plenty of mistakes long the way), but surely that has hurt business productivity.
It is a pity that a company with Microsoft's resources has done such little innovation. Apple has done a lot more R&D and shaped computer usage much more. I watch with sadness as the once-great GM dwindles to a market cap of less than 1% of Toyota. Unless Microsoft gets dynamic, new leadership, I fear it will emulate GM.
Get the computer you like that fits your circumstance and needs and let's put the old "Mac vs. PC" flame wars behind us. It's juvenile.
Yes, it is true, the Mac is secure because of its small market share. It's only the number 4 or 5 computer manufacturer in the US. And yes, it is secure because of its obscurity. The other day, I was talking to a developer. When I mentioned my Mac, he said, "Mac? What is that? Apple Computer? Never heard of it. I know that UNIX can't have children, but what does that have to do with apples?"
It's hard to find someone who is competent to write malware who also knows what a Mac is.
The real question is not why OS X has never had a single virus. That's what I expect. The real head-scratcher is why Windows has hundreds of thousands of them.
I see Microsoft as the next GM. I am convinced that they are going about a planned obsolescence strategy (GM in the 70’s) that is going to backfire. I have been a PC user for years, and finally decided that having to buy a new PC every two years was unacceptable, no matter how “cheap” it is. I didn’t buy a Mac because it was pretty (although it is), and definitely not because of the super annoying Mac guy. I bought it because it can perform simple tasks without issue, not just now, but two years from now, which is all I want from a computer. TIME IS MONEY, and I don’t have time to bork around with a PC. Part of what makes Apple nice is its obscurity, and frankly I hope it stays that way. If you think it’s too expensive, great, don’t buy it and go back to McDonalds.
I’ll draw an analogy to cars. I am not a mechanic. I have no patience for a car that needs an overhaul every few years. I want to get from point A to point B without issue. If you are a mechanic, great, good for you. You can “customize” your PC to your hearts content, and you are probably savvy enough to keep your PC working for several years. I’m not, don’t want to be, and am not going to pay someone else to do it. I have better things to do with my time. Frankly, as far as “marketing hype” that’s clearly Microsoft’s bag.
I am a photographer and I do a lot of graphics work and own both a Mavbook pro and the PC is quicker and has more control. Hands down when windows 7 comes out thats what I am switching to 100 percent
I agree completely. This is like Ballmer's defunct anti-Linux
Get the Facts marketing campaign, only he is trying to bash Macs this time. It didn't work then for Linux and this won't work now for Macs. If Ballmer and Microsoft keep lying like McBride and SCO instead of innovating like Torvalds and Apple, then both Ballmer and Microsoft will be a fading memory in Chapter 7 liquidation five years from now (like SCO is).
I want a laptop with an OS that's slow, requires huge amounts of RAM, is a total resource hog and doesn't work with any of my old peripherals requiring me to invest in all new components. Which one will I pick :-p
Eric said:
"I think the adds clearly show the people that you pay about $1000 for Apple OSX if you equal the hardware costs. Personally I am glad to see the uptick in market share as Apple will have to start dealing with security issues that Microsoft has spent years fighting. Notice they just picked up the Security chief for the one-laptop-per-child program.
Apple doesn’t only spread FUD, but they also put their users at great risk with their claims. If people want to know what they have to contend with go check the security patch count of Vista against OSX’s in the past 2 years. You will be suprised by what you find. IBM’s X-Force research tallies these and OSX carries 14.3% of all OS vulnerabilities disclosed. Vista however only 5.1%. Thats almost a 3 fold amount over Vista. Get my point people?"
There are several things wrong with your thinking.
(1) Many many people have compared the cost of a Mac vs a PC with EQUIVALENT options/features and the cost is essentially a draw. If you then add the software advantages then there is no comparison. Apple doesn't make a stripped down system and that's why you can't even buy a $400 Mac
(2) That security guy you referred to has been put in charge of some educational marketing department in Europe, so his expertise in security is meaningless.
(3) There are no Mac viruses or worms out there that can automatically infect a Mac system without the user's knowledge. None. Zero. (A "vulnerability" does not equal an exploit, and even something such as an application crash is often counted as a vulnerability… a theoretical one.)
Get my point?
Microsoft knows a lot more about running a monopoly than what the public actually wants. The basic problem with this monopoly is that it assumes an inert, stupid public and that it can get away with behaving like a Bull(mer) in a china shop.
I'm a system administrator responsible for all the laptops in a company that is a Microsoft Gold Parter. I'm even the partner administrator, too. I put my computer under my desk so I have more work space. That's what I tell everyone. The real reason it's under my desk is that it's really a Mac. There's nothing I can do on a PC that I can't do more easily on a Mac.
Which is better: WIndows or Mac? Which is easier: Windows or OS X? Which is less expensive in the long haul, Windows or Mac? Debate that all you like, I don't care. All I know is that the Mac gives me less bang for my buck: that is, less banging my fist on the desk in frustration per dollar I spend.
Does Windows still exist? I don't care.
I am a programmer and I have to use Apple, Microsoft and Linux daily. Despite all the clap trap, the three computer genres differ only by price and operating system.
I think Apple's "Finder" is inherently inferior to Microsoft's "My Computer". In an effort to keep the users from getting confused, Apple actually makes it more difficult to manipulate files. I still can't find my mp3 music tags on using Apple's finder (they easy to find using Windows Explorer).
That said, if you're a light "grand ma" computer user who only wants to surf the internet, it might makes sense to spend an extra $1000 on a mac knowing you can get great support at Apple's "Genius Bar".
If you're you're doing anything more than surfing the web, however, you could spend the $1000 on a much faster pc with windows 7 on it.. or Linux.
I recently installed the Windows 7 Release Candidate beta, and all i can say is Microsoft has finally delivered. Vista was a complete disaster. It looked nice, but functionally it was an awful OS. Windows 7 looks like Vista, except functionally it is flawless.
I turned it on the first time and everything worked. I didn't have to install drivers for the network card, video card or printer; even my computer's digital audio output to my speaker system worked right away. I have to say I'm very impressed with Windows 7 so far.
I don't get the attacks on Vista. Maybe it had a lot of bugs when it first came out, but I find it stable and good. It may be that Macs' OS is better; I don't know, but I haven't had any problems w/ Vista on my HP.
In the end, when all ads are said and done, consumers own waaay more Macs then Windows machines and that's what counts, doesn't it? It has been that way since the Mac OS and Windows first hit the market. The people have voted with their billions over the years and the Mac became predominant because it was a good value. People received they received more for their money on a Mac.
Oh no, wait, reverse all that.
I find the Mac ads more misleading –by representing the PC in human form with an ignorant, fat man. I actually really like the new Microsoft ads. I had to buy my Mac laptop used –it was the only way to afford one but I still use my custom PC most of the time. I will say the Mac is very good for music production out of the box but not worth the extra $$$. Also, the proprietary nature of iTunes is VERY ANNOYING.
Truth is, when you compare capability of machines, to run applications, the inexpensive PC will grind to a halt, while the iMac or iBook will zip right through.
Comparing oranges to Apples, is an old windows trick.
Being intelligent enough to actually compare the capability of the machines, to do work, will quickly demonstrate, there is no real difference in cost, between the two platforms. Indeed, in many cases, the Mac will actually be less expensive, because it outperforms the PC, in may areas of applications, for the same money.
Let's face it, most PC users have stayed with PC not for work, but for games, because there are fewer games available for Mac. Guess mac users do more work, while PC users simply play.
I use a Macbook at work and find it a delightful toy. I can browse the internet, send e-mail, and do a little bit of work processing. However, there are two issues that need to be addressed. First is the law of substitution which states that give two items of similar utility, the less expensive one would be preferable. Here, the PC wins. Secondly, the vast amount of third party software and HARDWARE support.
It tends to boil down to the fact that Macbooks are perfect for those folks who really don't like computers in general but when it comes to serious gamers (who push the hell out of R&D) and geekophiles, the PC walks away from the Mac.
Finally what's good about the Mac? It's really pretty.
I use only PCs at work. But when it comes to using my hard earn money to get a computer for home use, I have two MACs. Enough said.
I'm a college student, and the Mac's on campus run Windows too. So I don't see Microsoft going anywhere….
She only looked at the MAC PRO´S thelatest top of the line of macs! Ups i guess she misse the mac Book Air! DUH!
Cheers! Mac Forever! 
i surf the net, shop, and pay my bills. Do i need to pay over $1000 to do that? I didn't think so, probably 90% of people who use a computer pretty much does what i do. i know not to download anything dumb. i don't think i've ever had a virus.
It amuses me when these type of discussions get started. People just seem to love lining up and arguing the endless argument. I would like to add my two cents worth on both sides.
1 – Apple makes a good product and the overriding reason that their system runs "better" is that they control the experience from start to finish. They control the operating system and they control the hardware it runs on. This makes it much easier to control the experience the end user has.
2 – Microsoft, has a good operating system (XP, not Vista) and is undoubtedly the 800lb gorilla in the room and will be for the foreseeable future. While they have lost market share to Apples OS, Microsoft's operating systems are still cash generators for the company. But here is where the comparison between the two has to stop. There is such a proliferation of hardware that runs on the Windows platform and the endless stream of code updates, etc. it is impossible for Microsoft to ensure that their system handles all properly. Most of the time this is upto the hardware manufacturers to verify compliance. So Microsoft cannot control the end users experience the way Apple can. Depending instead on the Computer manufacturers.
3 – So when you try to compare Apple to Microsoft the computer manufacturers must be included. So until Apple licenses the manufacture of Apple clones they will never achieve the market share so many Apple fans seem to feel they are destined to.
Let's face it both companies are good at what they do, give them credit. Both have made mistakes in the past. It just seems Microsoft's mistakes are larger because of the larger market they serve.
I love reading the ongoing saga via Apple 2.0, but my computers at home and at work are all Windows based and I can honestly say that I haven't had any major blue screen issues for over 10 years. But all my kids have Ipods and so does my wife. Good product.
Anybody but the most blind MS zombie knows that the "ordinary Americans" in these ads are actors. And the "Apple costs twice as much ZOMG!!!" lie they're trying to spread here is the same garbage they've been spreading online for years. Lame and tired.
I use both… an iMac at home and a Macbook for the road and a PC at work. Each machine does what it needs to in a different way. I can't imagine a world where one is taken from me, I like having a choice. Still, I am old enough to remember when the choices were much larger. OS2/Warp, Unix, Sun, Mac, Amiga, Atari Gem, MS Dos/Windows…it goes on. Our choices for software and hardware were severely limited because development and compatibility were nightmarish problems. Too many choices slowed development and kept prices sky-high. I like the two-worlds before us. I like having both worlds and I especially like that each platform keeps improving.
Apple has been creative under Steve Jobs and for the past ten years or so has completely reengineered its platform on both hardware and software front, rewriting its operating system, and OS X currently is on the fifth release already, and Snow Leopard will be release this calender year. Lets see what Microsoft did during this period, a few Office updates, XP and Vista, thats all they did. Oh no, they build the Doom world with sub-standard online experience and iPod clones that doesn't even make dollars and cents. My God, Microsoft operates like an American car company, they believe bigger is better, just by rolling out one model after another regardless of how bad their products really are. I am glad in this planet, there is a choice, otherwise, we will all be stuck with Microsoft for life.
What the price comparison doesn't capture is the aggravation of actually using the computer. My PC at work is intolerable at times, with outlook and word hanging ever other day when outlook tries to use word as the email editor, powerpoint quitting when I print to certain printers, etc. I get .dll errors when I launch task manager.. and this is on a well protected corporate network with full antivirus software. I've spent dozens of hours with tech support, it rarely helps unless they rebuild it. I enjoy going home to the Mac where the computer not only works, but works well – its 4 years old and works like new where the windows machines just seem to deteriorate over time.
Looking at author's profile, he has been following apple for a while and has developed loyalty towards it. I would say that the article is biased toward apple and has been same with apple fans.
There is always a question of stability and reliability of PC vs Mac. But there are several stark differences between them that makes them not so easy to compare.
1) PC is software only offering whereas Macs are hardware and software offering. If you a strong hold on hardware you can eliminate a lot of software crashes as you have to write software for several architecture motherboard and also depend on firmware builder to write error free software. Also firmware builder is also have to play by the rules of Software Manufacturer (MS) which in many scenarios is not possible (end up using workarounds and they don't work all the time)
Sorry to be geeky here
Software complexity and stability is directly related with the number of scenarios/condition your software will have to go through and making sure that you have covered all the bases to produce high quality software.
A good analogy will be G1 phone running Android/ HTC touch running windows mobile in contrast with Apple's iPhone running on its own Apple OS 3.0
2) Mac has majority of applications written by them and gives them edge over other third party vendors doing it right. We develop third party software and I agree we don't design one would classify as high end software products. MS is loaded with third party softwares and the performance and glitches of these third party software playing on it. Some of the software require very low level (closer to kernel) operations which are only best understood by Software Manaufacturer (MS and Apple). So that limits third part software vendors and create their pseudo operation which has questionable success.
3) Virus/Malware/Spyware – First we have to understand the bottomline we have an association which creates these nasty softwares. There are primarily to steal personal information or use our computer as zombies to run their programs or just senseless cause harm and destroy property. Its more like a organized crime group out there and there is a lot of money behind this industry and its growing by leaps and bound. Talking about market share (please I am not favouring MS) and most bang for buck they can have is to exploit MS PC. If Apple were to take this position in future I bet they will have the same problems. Its just matter of time and right incentive to crash Mac PCs then they will be attacked big time. Ultimately they(windows or OS X) are software and there are ways to break it.
4) EU not attacking them yet – MS is always attacked by EU for packaging IE with Windows but have not attacked Apple for doing the same but more worse its packaging everything that third party vendors could have built.
This may be enough but my point is Mac is different offering than PC. Apple is being smart and taking a less risky statergy and is sucessful and i congratulate them for that. But there is tough road if they want to take over entire PC market as people will ask for independence from apple hardware and Apple have to respond to it and then it will be a good "Apple to Apple" comparision.
Only reason Microsoft is doing these ad's is to help settle the law suit with the big vendors (Dell, HP, Intel,etc) about the Vista ready campaign. It's free advertisement for hardware vendors at Microsoft's expense.
Do you not find it ironic that each commercial mentions one of the top hardware manufactures involved with the Vista ready campaign?
Don't you remember where Microsoft said Vista would run on specific hardware specs… then changed its mind!
I think most people are forgetting it comes down to preference and needs. I personally have no use for a MAC. PC does what I need a computer to do. To be honest, most computer problems occur because of the user. Most users are uneducated about what it takes in need to make a computer be safe from viruses and malware/adware.
As for people saying MACs are virus proof etc… You're getting ahead of yourself. While MACs do have a strong OS, it doesn't make it 100% proof from harm.
Also someone made a comment about some people buying it because it's cool. It's true some do, it's a trend especially in younger generations.
Re: "ADDENDUM:"
My lord, does CNNMoney or Fortune not have an editor? I cannot believe a link to the word "porn" was not caught. If the stupid ADDENDUM is not caught by the editors, then it will be by corporate America's web surfing filtering firewalls tomorrow for sure.
Tacky Tacky Tacky and just stupid.
It is SO about time that Microsoft launched "bang for the buck" ads. Anybody who does their homework knows if you take a $3500 Apple apart, you can get more power, RAM, Options,Flexibility for a 1/3 of the price. $1250 today gets you a Core i7 with 9 gigs of RAM. That's $5,000 in Appleland.
Big round of applause to Microsoft for FINALLY doing what they should have 4 years ago!
No, really – Vista is great! Seriously!
All you Apple Fanboys who insist on saying Vista was a failure just because Microsoft moved on to Windows 7 are full of it.
Everyone knows that Microsoft is simply preserving a masterpiece. They're not "abandoning" Vista, they're just making sure a masterful execution of programming doesn't get muddied up in the fight.
Thank you, Microsoft, for your unwaivering excellence, and stuff.
I find it amusing with all of Apple's fantastic marketing that their market share is pretty much static and actually decreased the past year.
Reality is the bulk of Apple users are under 25. Apple sells iPods and hope for the halo effect for their other products. So all these iPod toting, Macbook users are realizing there are no jobs for them and if / when they move out of Mom & Dads house that corporate america has no love for Apple so here's your windows based pc and get to work.
Apple is great for casual usage and the fact that most users never install anything proves that fact. Gaming is still pathetic on Mac and even the Photoshop edge is gone with CS4 actually running better under windows.
And please stop the virus crap – that was 1990's. Everything now is spam / malware driven. The chance of an actual virus is slim. Install the proper security and keep your computer be it windows or mac based up to date and stay off bit torrents nd you will never have an issue.
Last I check I get as many OS X updates as Windows and btw I've seen a good number of spinning beach balls and bombs in my day.
I don't care about cool! My computer is a tool, nothing more. The less it gets in the way the better. The reason I switched to a Mac two years ago: You get what you pay for!
As a computer engineer, I've often thought I should buy a Mac just so I can file a class action lawsuit over their ads. Honestly, they claim "Macs don't get viruses" despite their numerous vulnerabilities. Their only protection has been their low market share, which is not a defense I would rely on. I'm also not a fan of the fact that Apply tries to limit your choice by tying OS to hardware, and more recently music files to the iPod platform (I realize they recently stopped, but it shows their intentions are no less anti-competitive than MS). I'm not say MS is in any way perfect (I'm a big ubuntu fan), but lets not pretend like Apple is somehow a more consumer friendly option.
Come on PC folks. Please stop comparing PC's to Apple's high end work stations! You are being goofy! (Or are you desperate employees of MS?)
I'm a long time Mac user and have a $999 laptop and $1199 desktop. Of course you can buy a POS for less. And some people think Ford and Chevy are state of the art. I like really good stuff. Not cheap stuff.
You get what you pay for. I'm very satisfied w/ Apple.
Over the years I have gotten angry at Apple for this or that and write to Steve Jobs. Know what? Every time someone from his office calls me! Every time! Calls me! Live!
I had a problem with Word last year. I called them. It is so sad. The guy on the other end of the line did not seem to be having fun. Oh, and after an nearly an hour he could not fix my issue!
All I know is that I've used a PC for all my life and had numerous "customer service" experiences over the years.
I never had the opportunity to talk to an American. It's always someone in India whom I cannot understand on the phone.
I'm sure it's coincidental, but after buying my first Mac (after my last laptop crashed), I had to call Apple support and talked to an American girl in California! She spoke perfect English and helped me solve my problem, which turned out to be of my own making. She stayed on the phone with me until I figured it out. How delightful it was!
When my dell laptop flaked out one too many times, and an office trial uninstall put my laptop in an infinite blue screen, I had had enough. I went to the apple store, and told them I wanted to start my divorce… from Microsoft. I have had it with problems with my PC. I bought a macbook in Jan, and switched my wife over in a very short amount of time.
There are some small issues, but far less than I ever had with my PC's. The service at the mac store was amazing. Best customer experience I have ever had at any store anywhere.
Why didn't I listen to my son earlier…
I've been an IT consultant for 29 years now, and I've worked with hundreds of businesses. Not one… not even ONE… used an Apple for anything other than graphic design.
In January 2000, Steve Ballmer was officially named chief executive officer.
Here is a chart showing Microsoft's stock price history for the duration http://tinyurl.com/6ppraf
If you will take a look at the chart you can see that something happened in the year 2000 and it was not good.
The writer ignored the performance issues between the Apple and Windows platforms. You don't need a rocket computer to run Windows XP or even Vista. With a half decent CPU (not dual core), 2-4 meg of ram and a good video card, most Windows machines will outperform Apple's. I should know – I run both of them. Apple machines NEED dual core tech and more ram than Windows to even come close to the performance of a PC.
The biggest difference between these two isn't software – it is hardware and it's time Microsoft understands this.
Who cares about Safari, IE, Windows Media Player vs iTunes – the name of game is hardware and PC platforms can outperform and out gun any Apple for about 1/2 of the price.
What a dumb argument. Y'know Microsoft has a ton of faults we all know that, but the way nobody ever gives them credit when they get something right is astonishing. 1. Gates would've just focused on Windows 7? Uh so what? Gates put all that effort for all those years and they've still gotten trashed. 2. With the rise of the iPod and iPhone Apple's visiblitiy was so high that ignoring them was no longer a option. 3. Whether Apple fans or the blogosphere mock the laptop hunter ads is irrelevant because what nobody seems to realize is most of the populace don't go to tech blogs or apple forums. Look at how IE is still clinging to a majority market share, because people are too dumb or lazy to change the default browser. They are not tech saavy, they do not go to Gizmodo or Macrumors or whatever. 4. There was no bait… You Apple people, you really do live in a fantasy world. Apple does not think that far ahead, Apple is just like any other company they act then react, they do not have some elaborate master plan or play mind games. I mean I'm sure to Jim Neal the flap over the baby shaker iPhone app was just a Apple ploy to get free pub for their app store, yup Apple doesn't make mistakes. Right.
PED: Thanks for finding this post.
PC supporters continue repeating what they've been saying during this whole downward PC sales trend: a) Macs have viruses too; b) PCs have better specs for a cheaper price; c) who cares, it's just Apple fanboys. All the while ignoring what so many clearly have experienced with PCs to the point of switching: viruses galore; Vista problems; cheap hardware with poor customer support.
No matter; let them stay in their denial; they shall simply be last. The sales trends continue at a steady pace.
Everyone seems to miss the point that there is no single computer manufacturer called "PC". Apple is a single mfr that builds high quality, hassle free, computers at various price points. PCs are made by thousands of different companies, some good, most not so good. Macs are built using more expensive, high quality, components. Macs really are virus and pop up free. I have used PCs and Macs for 20 years (at home and work). Macs OS is much more reliable and elegant than Windows. To get a PC that performs as well as a Mac you have to spend much more over the life of the computer. Don't compare a Mercedes to a Yugo.
@Joe – I think it's important to realize that advertising does not equal perception.
Advertising is a company's paid attempt to influence how a particular public views its product or service. To argue that advertising = perception is like saying you think that if you drink a certain brand of beer, 4 sexy women will magically be attracted to you.
That being said, the best way to view advertisements is with a healthy dose of skepticism – that goes for PCs and Macs.
@Brad – The point isn't that you can get better specs for a cheaper price on a PC, it's that Microsoft is validating Apple's products and market position despite having remarkably more market share. Microsoft could have easily just left it alone, but instead they have chosen to continue to raise the PC vs. Mac question.
I used to work in sales for a major PC OEM and most of the people I spoke with never even considered a Mac – if they were going to get a computer, it was going to be a PC; so by bringing up the question of "Mac or PC," Microsoft is putting that question in the mind of it's customers.
What's this guys point? The ads work for what they do. The fact is that you can get better specs for a cheaper price on a PC.
"There are an equal amount of Mac viruses, as a matter of fact, viruses first appeared on the Mac, not the PC."
I used MAC for over 10 years. I got no viruses. I recently purchased a intel-Mac. installed Windows XP. 2 months later, I got ignoring pop-ups on the XP.
ADDENDUM: Jobs would give up his pancreas and Ballmer the rest of his hair to rake in the amount of cash the porn industry rakes in.
I remember during the last decade when I was a young new college graduate with a job. I was willing to pay more money for a computer because it was "cooler." This has always been Apple's marketing genius. They may make a marginally better product, but the only way to actually get people to pay that much more money is to appeal to the buyer's ego. For me, a young 20-something, it worked. I bought a Mac. I quickly became disillusioned by frequent system crashes, and wondering why I paid more for less memory, speed, and HD storage.
I'm older and wiser now. I know that a car, or a pair of shoes, or an overpriced computer isn't going to make me cool. I'll take the $975 one and I'll take the remaining $1,000 saved and consider it more than ample compensation for my un-coolness.
First, this was interesting. Thanks PED. Second:
The notion that anyone buys a computer to be "cool" is actually interesting. Sure, certain people might buy Macs to be cool. But for someone (Joe in CA) to lump ALL Mac buyers into that bucket is pretty naive.
My first assumption when someone makes that statement: They've never really used a Mac. Of course there are exceptions, and I've seen posts along those lines.
But here's something else I see throughout comment threads: Plenty of people who make a living supporting Windows have switched to Macs. It's hard to believe those people, who know exactly what's involved in Windows maintenance, would switch to be cool.
I have dozens of MS systems certifications in my past. MCSE, MCT, etc. Buying a PC for home is not a remote possibility for me. I'm open to it, but these days the decision is easy.
I don't have Mac stickers on my car. I don't sign my emails "I have a Mac." I don't often take my Mac to public places. So who knows I'm cool? Just me.
Plain and simple, I have a Mac because it's less maintenance and it feels more responsive than Windows. Further, the manufacturer, Apple, has a store in my local mall. I can drop the computer off there and walk away if there's a problem.
People buy Macs to be cool? I'd say there's a lot of that thinking going on – by the people who haven't bought one. The people who buy them? They might be cool. But they might be trying to find a tool that works well for them.
Joe in CA: For you to admit you think the same of every Mac user means you subscribe to sweeping generalizations. Is that how you want to be perceived? Do you know so little about Macs and Windows that you don't think there might be some valid argument other than being cool to explain the purchasing decision?
Check out this PC vs. the Macs and ordinary PC's
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2009/5/13/meet-murderbox2c-the-pcs-true-anti-mac.aspx
Ballmer is doing for MSFT what the fizzled soda-jerk, and the smoke spewing, der diesel, did for Apple at a critical juncture – insure it's near demise. Re above Lauren and Sue get a 'Dell-doh' as a computer?
obviously the author of this article has no technical experience and isnt aware fo the FACT that it is possible to buy a device that has all the features of an apple for 1/2 the price which is the point of the well architected ad campaign.
Hey Christopher, you misspelled "mispelled". Now who looks like the Bright One? Do you own both Mac and PCs, much less use various flavors of Windows, Linux and Apple Unix OS X on multiple machines? I do, We have 25 machines in my home based consultancy business representing a blend of Windows, Apple and Linux OS platforms. For me there are a few things to share with any audience I have at hand.. First, I only work with Windows because the industry I serve is dominated by Windows machines, and there is no practical way to escape its grip. Second I use Apple and Linux anywhere I can, and use Windows only where I must. Third, Linux is like a poor man's Mac. I have a lot of dual boot Windows/Linux (Ubuntu Linux) machines, and all default to Linux. I hate what Windows has become, and move folks with Windows problems (viruses, spyware, malware, auto-updates that foul their entire machine) to either Mac or Linux, depending on their budget, just to get them into a more secure, easier to use platform. Give up the battle, the M$ war is lost. But their base is so large that is will take a while for the monster to bleed out.
They have an apple fan boy claim the ads are a mistake and he speaks like he is the God of advertising. How the hell does he know what works and does not.
Since those ads, every time i see a Mac user I think: poor guy thinks he can be cool because he paid more for a product.
I am only one person but I can not imagine everyone not looking at Mac users as insecure regardless of the real reasons they bought a Mac.
Adv. is percetiion and the perception is that apple users are paying more to be cool, so uncool.
I recently bought 2 Macbook Pro laptops for use at home because they are the best laptop to run Vista on. Part of Apple's increase in market share may be the ability to easily be a Windows computer. It was the first time in 15+ years that I purchase a Mac.
For the record, most of the information in the Mac commercial is bogus. There are an equal amount of Mac viruses, as a matter of fact, viruses first appeared on the Mac, not the PC. Anyone, other than an Apple fanboy, familiar with the history of Macs and PCs would know this. but unfortunately most consumers are not, and most media buys the hype.
ex ped: You're wrong about Mac viruses, Alle. The first virus, according to Viruslist.com, was detected on the ARPANET — long before the Mac. The first personal computer virus, according to this site, was spread by floppy disks among Apple IIs — again, long before the Mac. The first IBM-compatible virus — Brain — appeared in 1986 and the rest is history. There have been Mac virusus, but I believe you'll find that since the advent of OS X, it's mostly a history of Windows viruses.
Also find it funny that in one of the MAC ads that was posted. It makes it sound like Macs don't get viruses that is a load of crap. They get viruses just like PCs and just has easy. It just effects MACS different than they do on a PC.
ex ped: This is from Wikipedia and unsourced, so I can't vouch for it, but FYI:
"Macro viruses have become common since the mid-1990s. Most of these viruses are written in the scripting languages for Microsoft programs such as Word and Excel and spread throughout Microsoft Office by infecting documents and spreadsheets. Since Word and Excel were also available for Mac OS, most could also spread to Macintosh computers. Although most of these viruses did not have the ability to send infected e-mail, those viruses which did took advantage of the Microsoft Outlook COM interface.[citation needed]" link
To RJ in Cambridge – Not sure what an Apple "fanboy" is exactly, but as a user of both Mac and Windows based machines, I find the Microsoft campaign to be mildly entertaining, and Mac commercials to be a sardonic, while maintaining a sense of fun. In the end, I don't think the Microsoft campaign will accomplish anything more than reinforce a brand that is already pervasive. There just aren't gonna be a sea of potential Mac buyers thinking twice after viewing these ads. Check an Apple Store near you and see what I mean.
Honestly, I applaud Microsoft for their efforts, but this campaign does more to prop up a couple of ad firms than it does build sales of PCs.
I think the adds clearly show the people that you pay about $1000 for Apple OSX if you equal the hardware costs. Personally I am glad to see the uptick in market share as Apple will have to start dealing with security issues that Microsoft has spent years fighting. Notice they just picked up the Security chief for the one-laptop-per-child program.
Apple doesn't only spread FUD, but they also put their users at great risk with their claims. If people want to know what they have to contend with go check the security patch count of Vista against OSX's in the past 2 years. You will be suprised by what you find. IBM's X-Force research tallies these and OSX carries 14.3% of all OS vulnerabilities disclosed. Vista however only 5.1%. Thats almost a 3 fold amount over Vista. Get my point people?
First off the biggest hole is that the budget Microsoft give these people was too high. For the $1700, I would come out of the apple store with a Unibody Macbook, a Brenthaven bag, Printer, and a spanking new ipod touch. That should be about $1700 give or take.
I didn't see "Lauren" being offered a Zune with her "Windows" laptop?
But heres a better add…..
Lauren gets handed $1700 and sent loose in Best Buy. she comes out with a Unibody Macbook ($1300) and a copy of Windows 7 for what $199 or so and a copy of VMWare Fusion.
Now she has her mac and can eat it too! So the only losers are Dell, HP, Acer and Toshiba and the straggler PC clone market. Sure, They would air that.
Does anybody know that "Lauren" is a paid actor?
What if "Lauren" came out with a macbook? Would they have aired that?
Hey Apple, You guys should hire that dude that used to sell Dell (Dude, you're getting a Dell… hugh hugh….) and use him to sell Macs in a new ad campaign.
It could be Dude, you're getting a Mac Now, Want a toke…(puff puff)… They would get 90% of the collage crowd overnight…
I think Apple has learned several things. First and foremost, they sat back and waited for Microsoft to make a mistake and then they let them dig their own grave. Two, they actually made a fantastic product. All you then need to do is unleash it and show people how good it is with simple and amusing ads. No big reality show, no ads resembling a freshly downloaded video from MILFHUNTER or bangbus. Just good old fashion marketing and mud slinging.
Now, the final nail in the coffin is to sit back and let Wall Street do the rest…
This idea that ADS sell computers is nutty – people buy the computer they want. Personally, I wouldn't buy another PC if someone paid me to own one. Microsoft is seriously lost and Ballmer needs the boot. It will take years, if ever, for the Redmond boys to get back into the game.
It's over for the PC – sell your related stock!
So lets ask an apple fanboy and stock holder what he thinks about microsoft's new campeign,,, I'm reallllly sure you're going to get an unbiased opinon………..
To the Author, Philip Elmer-DeWitt,,, the motto of this article should be "Mac news from INSIDE the reality distortion field."
ex ped: You make it sound like I solicited Jim Neal's opinion. If you had written something as cogent from your point of view, RJ, I would have happily posted it.
Those Microsoft ads worked so well I just bought a MacBook 2.4 GHz with a bunch of accessories. Thanks for helping me make this key buying decision Microsoft!
The new MAC ads continue the same barbed humorous format that the old ads had. In addition, they answer the charges of the Evil Empire that Mac's are only for the "rich cool" computer users by stating some of the reasons the MAC is a better buy for the user than the cheap trash w/ Windoze promoted by MSFT.
Apple's sales of computers have held up far better than MSFT's in the current downturn. In fact if you count the iPhone (a held held computer that makes phone calls) & the iPod Touch (a hand held compter that doesn't make phone calls) as some tech pundits do, AAPL's total computer sales have RISEN.
Of course, if you count MSFT's sales on the Zune you—err—well at least you don't run out of fingers & toes in your count.
Ayuh
You mispelled Windows 7 (sixth paragraph). Also, as much as Apple fans may try to gloss-over the intent of the ads, it really boils down to one point: spec for spec, PCs give more functionality and power than Apple Hardware on a dollar per dollar basis. Talk about holes? What about that nice little company that made it possible to sell the Apple OS without the expensive Apple hardware? Oh wait! They sued them to stop it from happening! I wonder if that's why they're not complaining about these ads?
I read the article but I didn't see any mention that the Microsoft ads were found to be using actors, not real people. Nothing wrong with that, but it isn't very smart. Like the author said, the fan base will work hard to poke holes in anything they dish out and nothing is worse than getting branded a fake.
ex ped: We only know for sure that one was an actor.
I was a 100% PC user until about 6 months ago. At that time work provided me with a MACBOOK. 2.19 Duel Core with 2Gigs of ram, OS X 10.5. I run VMWARE and develop ASP.NET and .NET 3.5 on Windows XP. I have found that a) Windows does not crash as often b) when it does, I can quickly restart the system not losing all of my other documents c) I can have windows loaded up, the MAC side loaded up and still have very good performance out of the computer.
Running Windows on a pc system with twice the capabilities and twice the price gave me half the results. I spent time recovering documents from crashes, compile times are slower, even running multiple IIS DevServ testing complex WCF Services and Interfaces ran smoother.
That said, when I sit down to do something, I will pay the extra $$ to have this stable environment any day. Do I use MACs for everything, No. I have my gaming system, I have my SQL servers and IIS boxes.
My biggest problem with these adds is they do not show the validity of the price difference. Take a few minutes to watch the manufacturing videos on APPLE.COM and explain to me how the price is too High. Its like a Cadillac, they are out there, and not every can have one, but if you want one, or you need one, they are available.
I will own a PC and a MAC to get the broadness they give combined. The newest OS X from MAC will support many Microsoft applications such as Exchange.
To sum up, I just purchased a top of the line MACBook Pro, not because its MAC, not because it was Expensive, but because it is a finely tuned processing machine. One that will be guaranteed to run smoothly and reliably when I open it to use it. If these are not your needs, don't feel bad when buying a PC.