So what about those who can't even afford a cheap laptop, I guess those with cheap laptops feel better than them right, get another point, your point is useless.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Continues 'Get a Mac' Ad Campaign with 4 New Ads
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So what about those who can't even afford a cheap laptop, I guess those with cheap laptops feel better than them right, get another point, your point is useless.
And these Microsoft ads are promoting the features of Vista their operating system right?
They don't need to. You can buy it for half of the cost. Apple needs to show why they are worth twice as much.
The same Windows 7 with editions only allowing 3 apps to run at time, damn Apple will have a field day with that one, lol.
I have to agree. There are many, many reasons why someone would want a Mac. I love mine. But that Faces commercial is the single dumbest excuse of a selling point I've ever seen. Just in case you're a big enough idiot to not be able to find your own pictures, buy a Mac because iPhoto has an unreliable feature that will find people by their facial features. Apple can and has done SO much better than that ad.
Yeah and a 90 000 dollar Mercedes does the same thing as a 15 000 Kia, get you from point A to B, what is your bloody point.
I kinda like them
While I agree with some of you that the current ad campaign is getting a bit old, it still get the job done. Any consumer who has seen this campaign can recall their favorite and think "Apple" and isn't that the point of advertising? The team over at TBWA\Chiat have done a great job with branding Apple products as the sleeker, albeit cooler alternative while maintaining a strong point of being user friendly. I will confess that every PC owner I know who argues that PCs are just as stable and MORE capable than a Mac are not average users by any means but are instead highly technical and knowledgeable in both the arenas of Software and Hardware. Just how many consumers are like that? Most of us on this forum I would argue are professionals who use Macs for work or are the technical geniuses who thoroughly know they're way around a computer no matter what OS it runs so I would say that we are not the average demographic these ads are targeting.
Nonetheless I would think the guys down in LA should stay away from addressing the price difference in Macs and PCs solely because in a cost vs cost campaign, the PC wins. Consumers could care less about "hidden costs" as all they see is the price tag at the store. I think they should continue to focus on Apple's image branding, user friendliness (for average consumers), reliability and quality of engineering. I mean, I would pay more for a BMW over a Ford despite both companies making something i can sit in with four wheels and a steering wheel to take me from point A to point B simply because the engineering mindset behind a BMW is more appealing to me vs. Ford. People will often buy what is more appealing, now what defines appealing is different to everyone.
Even in these rough economic times, I believe Apple products can be marketed effectively simply by showing how much more you get with a Mac and these ads do that. Legal copy and stacks especially.
While I agree with some of you that the current ad campaign is getting a bit old, it still get the job done. Any consumer who has seen this campaign can recall their favorite and think "Apple" and isn't that the point of advertising? The team over at TBWA\Chiat have done a great job with branding Apple products as the sleeker, albeit cooler alternative while maintaining a strong point of being user friendly. I will confess that every PC owner I know who argues that PCs are just as stable and MORE capable than a Mac are not average users by any means but are instead highly technical and knowledgeable in both the arenas of Software and Hardware. Just how many consumers are like that? Most of us on this forum I would argue are professionals who use Macs for work or are the technical geniuses who thoroughly know they're way around a computer no matter what OS it runs so I would say that we are not the average demographic these ads are targeting.
Nonetheless I would think the guys down in LA should stay away from addressing the price difference in Macs and PCs solely because in a cost vs cost campaign, the PC wins. Consumers could care less about "hidden costs" as all they see is the price tag at the store. I think they should continue to focus on Apple's image branding, user friendliness (for average consumers), reliability and quality of engineering. I mean, I would pay more for a BMW over a Ford despite both companies making something i can sit in with four wheels and a steering wheel to take me from point A to point B simply because the engineering mindset behind a BMW is more appealing to me vs. Ford. People will often buy what is more appealing, now what defines appealing is different to everyone.
Even in these rough economic times, I believe Apple products can be marketed effectively simply by showing how much more you get with a Mac and these ads do that. Legal copy and stacks especially.
I agree with this. The new MS ads are effective for 3 reasons:
1. They are tightly focused. Specifically, on people in the market for a new laptop who are curious about Macs.
2. They are concrete. This is the most effective part of the ad: they talk about money, screen size, memory, specific brands...even Blu-Ray. And all in the context about what you get with a PC that you don't get with a Mac. (And while there have been 1000's of posts here quibbling with the quality of the PC equipment, the ad is not demonstrably false, and these quibbles don't appear in the ad).
3. They discount the Apple premium as being purely for "flash" (not the program
. That's the subtext to the "Macs are cool/Macs are sexy" bit in the ads; the idea that you pay $100s more for a Mac only to look cool, even though, as a computer, it's not as good. In the last ad, the mother said that "Macs are popular among kids his age" - which suggests that people who can afford their own computer might like something more serious.Conceptually, to counter these ads all Apple needs to do is to show that the extra money spent on a Mac is worthwhile. Apple should focus the ads on people who are either PC users thinking of switching, or on Mac users wondering if they should buy a PC next time. Ad money spent on people who would: (1) buy your product anyway; or (2) never buy your product; is wasted.
Thus, Apple should focus on the benefits that OSX brings - with a specific focus on usability and integration, and less focus on stability and viruses. In other words, the idea is to show you, the user, using OSX to do things easily. And not so much "Here I am, not getting viruses..."
Of course *how* you show something like this is the big question...one for which I don't have an answer. But I think that this would be an appropriate response.
But if there's not a way to do this effectively, then its best to not respond.
What's YOUR point? The utterly false car analogy?
How about if the 15000 Kia had the same engine, the same gearbox, the same chassis, the same suspension, the same steering wheel, the same bodywork....but lacked the AMG alloys and leather interior.
Which, then, offers better value.
LOL. Hodgman is unstoppable.
Wonder why MSFT hadn't try to get him for their ads. I heard he's Mac user - I'm sure he can be as witty about Macs as he's about PCs. Or probably even wittier.
Wonder why MSFT hadn't try to get him for their ads. I heard he's Mac user - I'm sure he can be as witty about Macs as he's about PCs. Or probably even wittier.
bio hazard is my favorite!
edit -woot i'm finally first only took a few years
Haha, grats.
I like these adverts, they're pretty funny, and true. I'm not quite sure which one is my favourite, I can't decide.
And I "almost" believed you were serious.
Because nobody who knows anything buys or doesn't buy a computer because of a commercial...
Among car enthusiasts, its the best way to argue price differences. I've gotten many if my car club members to understand why Macs are more expensive vs a PC using this analogy so please don't claim it as being "SOOOOOOOOO STUUUUUUUUUUUPID" I think that perhaps a more appropriate way to phrase your opinion on this would be to post "I don't understand the car analogy"
Believe it or not, I now have some people referring to Macs as "The German of computers" Whether that's good or bad, I don't know.
Probably it's stupid. But to me the ad stroke accord with my personal Mac experience.
I started using WinXP (~2005, I went from WinNT4 to Linux ~1999, missed Win2K completely) shortly after I have bought my first Mac (iBook G4). The difference in first experience was quite interesting. On both systems, I have tried as much as possible resist installing 3rd party software. But with WinXP I had to wave a flag rather soon and pretty much every other week I had to install something to fill a gap in Windows functionality (image viewer, archiver, keyboard shortcuts, etc). With Mac that experience was opposite: every other week, faced with a new problem, I was digging up some new feature in Mac OS X to solve the problem at hand.
So my point here is that while Wintel PCs generally have very long feature lists (and that's why we use them), they also have numerous gaping feature-holes. Adding extra software doesn't always close the gaps, as new software at times create their own unique problems. With Macs it's opposite: Mac OS, right after fresh install, is well prepared to take on majority of tasks and problems most users are facing. Macs do not have killer features, they are strong with little tiny gems seeded all over the place - the tiny gems which make daily routine much more palatable. (My quote of the old days is that Mac OS X is just like *nix shell, but visual and with mouse support.)
Faces is just one of many such simple gems. It's nothing major, yet with proliferation of digital photography it's a bonus nice to have. Especially considering that P&S users rarely good at organizing their photos.
Exactly...
So, Mac's are actually PC's.
It's not a Kia vs Merc issue.
PC's and Mac's are the same components, just with a different body kit.
That's the truth.
They just run a different OS.
How about Apple, especially in today's economy, lower it's prices (or make it's products more value-added)?
Mini 2.0 1/160 = $549, 2/320 = $649
Drop the White MacBook, make a "basic Aluminum" one for $999. The middle for $1,199, high end for $1,399.
Drop prices on their other computers as well....
They probably won't as it'll look like they're caving in to MS's new ads...
I still wonder why Apple is able to include iLife on every new Mac, but Microsoft is forced to remove their equivalent, the Windows Live Essentials suite (Mail, Photo Gallery, Movie Maker, Messenger, Writer, etc.), and offer it as a free download.
You're spot on with that post. I love the iPhone ads and even go get my wife to show them to her. "Look at what this app or that app can do on the iPhone and the iPod touch." The Mac commercials, in comparison, are just dull, and fall far short of the iPhone commercials.
Ditto the hard link between iTunes and iPods. I don't mind it - but I fail to see how it is not guilty of the same things as Microsoft supposedly are. How come they can bundle Safari....but MS not IE. It's the same sort of thing surly?
*sigh*
Have you driven a Kia? Have a you driven a Mercedes? If you say yes and you still don't get it, then I suggest you stay away from car analogies.
You really do not get it do you?
Kias and Mercedes have all different parts made by all different manufacturers. PCs and Macs have all the same parts made by the same manufacturers. The analogy makes no sense.
As it happens - yes. A Kia Rio, and Kia Picanto (both owned by my other half's mum at various points). And most recently, a Merc C180 (rented for a weekend for a long trip to Kendal)
But the analogy is totally false. Mac's are not a Merc compared to a Kia PC.
Merc's are made of better parts, more powerfull engines, cunning suspension, trick differentials, an amazing stereo,
Mac's and PC's are built with the same parts, from the same manufacturers, and even built by the same people in the same factories.
So - if you want to use a car analogy - you need to find two cars with all the same components, with a different label on the bonnet, and massively difference price tags.
The car analogy is utterly utterly false in every way. Every time anyone uses it in this place, it should be a palm-to-forehead moment for EVERYONE. I suggest YOU stay away from it.
