Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
How 'bout an ad with three frogs in a pond looking at an Apple Store on the shore. The first frog says "eyyyyyyyye", then the second frog says "poddddddddd", then the third frog says "Apple iTunes Music Storrrrrrrrrre"? ;)

budweiser4x6.jpg
 
I hope they don't make a Superbowl ad.

I'm actually kind of tired of Apple spending millions of dollars on ad campaigns and they only air a couple of times. I saw the iPod ads once during normal viewing. So the 1984 ad was one of the best ads ever - advertising to a bunch of drunks during the superbowl. Where has it put Apple? 3% market share 20 years later.
 
Money and reasons

Didn't the 1984 mac advert start teh whole trend for advertising during the superbowl (which initially was chosen because they couldn't get their first choice ISTR)

Therefore it wouldn't be unfeasable that some negotiations have occured with the people who run the superbowl and with pepsi to get dirt cheap (if not free) advert running during the bowl. Doing so would only increase demand for next year.

I wonder which director is doing the latest advert :)
 
My add

Here is idea for a new ad
A cool song is playing. We see shot after quick intercuts of XP blazing through applicaions, throwing text around, playing music, running visualizations, surfing the internet, playing quake, chatting ect. Then it crashes to the Blue Screen of death. Then user hits alt-control-delete on an Apple brand keyboard (we see only hands) Changes to a remix of the background music on his iPod, minimizez his Windows emulator and...procedes to do each and every windows task he did with OSX, Same intercuts better version of the same song in the BG. We pull out to reveal that the user is....



I'm not sure. You guys think up celebs. I'll start with Gerorge Clinton, maybe James Bond. Maybe each time the ad plays its a differnt guy.

Anybody else have an idea?

Think Different Ads
:confused: :confused:
 
Re: I hope they don't make a Superbowl ad.

Originally posted by bdkennedy1
I'm actually kind of tired of Apple spending millions of dollars on ad campaigns and they only air a couple of times. I saw the iPod ads once during normal viewing. So the 1984 ad was one of the best ads ever - advertising to a bunch of drunks during the superbowl. Where has it put Apple? 3% market share 20 years later.

Call me cazy, but the slip to 3% has to do with more things than just that ad, or atleast i hope so.
 
The 1984 ad had nothing to do with the slip of marketshare. From 1984 and throught he late 80's Apple held 50% of the marketshare back then. If anything the commerical helped them.

No matter how many people probably hate the lemmings commerical I still today think it's pretty fitting for most windows users. It's just not PC.

Maybe they can get Speilberg and Lucas to direct the commerical. That would be sweet.
 
Originally posted by ITR 81
Maybe they can get Speilberg and Lucas to direct the commerical. That would be sweet.

Why not throw Pixar at it? I mean that's only obvious. :)

Maybe a "Finding Apple" ad instead of Finding Nemo. Pixar could crank out a seriously bad ass commercial for them.
 
Originally posted by Jerry Spoon
I believe it ran locally in one or two places and I've seen it in reference to "best ads of all time" things, but I don't believe it ever ran nationally again.

Anyone else know differently.

As I recall, they ran it locally twice so they would qualify for some ad award.
 
Originally posted by iomar
I think the rerun of 1984 ad is a bad idea.

I agree.

A sequel would be nice. Show what happens to all the "lemmings" after the screen blows up. Successful, hip people using Macs in business and everyday life.

Cut to current day "lemmings" sitting in front of a screen with a Windows logo.
 
neat

Viewing the add, I think it's pretty neat. i also think it made sense to only run it once, but to a big crowd. It's heavy, and you're getting bored by it if you have to view it twice an hour. Just like watching a movie twice.

It sure doesn't make sense to run it unchanged again.
For one: it's not 1984. It makes a lot of difference.
another: it's not new. It rather reminds me of a pink floyd video
there are numerous other reasons ot to run it again. Even political ones, just look at all that terrorist bumf and all the military in the big cities.
Just like 1984 should have been named 2004 and be more true to live.
 
Originally posted by rdowns
As I recall, they ran it locally twice so they would qualify for some ad award.

To be precise:

Apple-related products were frequently advertised with similar thin columns of text on a white background, an image of a Mac and often Apple's own logo. The notable exception to Apple's simple elegance is the initial television ad for the Macintosh, played only twice - at one a.m. on December 15 1983 on an obscure Twin Falls, Idaho station merely to qualify for the 1984 advertising awards (it won at least 35 for its creators at Chiat/Day, including the Grand Prix at Cannes); and at the January 22 Super Bowl, beginning a tradition of expensive Super Bowl-specific commercials (MacWorld, May/June 1984, p. 26).
-- http://www.landsnail.com/apple/local/design/design.html
Another page with interesting info about the ad (and a .mov file of it) is:
http://www.duke.edu/~tlove/mac.htm
 
Originally posted by ITR 81
The 1984 ad had nothing to do with the slip of marketshare. From 1984 and throught he late 80's Apple held 50% of the marketshare back then. If anything the commerical helped them.

Yes, but the computer market was about 0.1% as big as it is now, and the money involved nowadays makes it almost insignificant.

Apple has always shipped the same amount of units pretty much all through its history, but the market has always got bigger and bigger and apple can't keep up, so to speak.
 
Originally posted by Doctor Q
What does Superbowl air time cost this year? Maybe Apple shouldn't blow a year's worth of the advertising budget on one ad!

Well Apple did spend a little over $125 million in advertising for 2003.
 
Originally posted by Doctor Q
What does Superbowl air time cost this year? Maybe Apple shouldn't blow a year's worth of the advertising budget on one ad!

I agree that they should not air an ad. The cost of advertising is ridiculous and will have little benefit. They could do a lot of advertising elsewhere with that money and get more of an impact.
 
If that was Gates on that big screen (I know it's not but may as well) he says "we shall prevail" before getting the hammer. Sadly he has, a bit like Hitler, only protected by a capitalist government and the general US and world public (who should be bald like in the ad). Sad world, dumb planet, I want to get off... provided my Mac work in zero Gs.
 
They should run the original ad, and then, instead of saying "On January 24, Apple Computer will release......." just say "Twenty years ago, Apple Computer released Macintosh, and the world has never been the same."
 
There was an article recently outlining the reasons for not producing an add with any reference to 1984 and any potential follies...

Simply rebroadcasting a 20 year old ad is just plain dumb, and if that happens... Apple doesn't deserve to be held in such high regard.
 
Kind of seems like a waste of money to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars, or millions, or whatever a SuperBowl ad costs, to rerun a 20-year-old commercial - at least make it a new one! I doubt many people will remember the original 1984 ad, and I don't know how many people will even get the reference to the novel either. If anything, people might think "Oh, there's Apple, running some stupid, old-looking computer ad - hmm, they must not have anything new to offer, and there's no reason to switch to them, so I'll just stay with my Dell."
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.