Apple! Please take this ad seriously and drop the price! This advertisement shows the only reason I buy PCs instead of Mac!! Come on!!! My next purchase is more likely to be a PC! The biggest reason I hate PC less is the price, otherwise I would hate Mac less.
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.
Microsoft Releases Second 'Laptop Hunters' Commercial
- Thread starter fpbecker
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
He should have gotten a Celeron computer, that's pretty powerful in the PC world.
I wish these forums would stick to a technical analysis. The comparison for this individual would be the basic 2.4 GHz MacBook Pro 15.4. If the fellow is so picky and "knowledgeable" he would know better, but strikes me as an idiot.
1. The HP HDX 16t uses DDR2 RAM and has an FSB of 800 MHz. Adding more than 3 GB to Vista is of no use and wasted RAM. The MacBook Pro uses DDR3 and will benefit in performance upto 6 GB of RAM; it also has a FSB of 1066 MHz. Performance on the MacBook Pro should be at least 10% better.
2. The HP HDX 16t uses standard display with CCFL back lighting. The MacBook Pro offers a smaller screen, but its improved battery life is due to the LED back lighting for the display. Further, the MacBook Pro offers superior color accuracy due to its LED back lighting and can easily reproduce 90%+ of the NTSC color gamut. The HP can't.
3. Ergonomics. The MacBook Pro 17" is 0.98 inches in height. Very compact. The HP HDX 16t is 1.31 inches in height. The HP is 1/3 more thick! Its weight is 7.06 pounds and the MacBook Pro 17" is 6.6 pounds, the 15.4" MacBook Pro is 5.5 pounds. Further, the aluminum case on the MacBook Pro serves as a large heat sink. So heat dissipation is superior on the MacBook Pro.
4. Finally, MS Vista is a crippled OS. Period. If you could apply various coupons and get the HP HDX 16t on-line for ~$900 and then load OSX 10.5.6 on it, it might be a good idea.
1. The HP HDX 16t uses DDR2 RAM and has an FSB of 800 MHz. Adding more than 3 GB to Vista is of no use and wasted RAM. The MacBook Pro uses DDR3 and will benefit in performance upto 6 GB of RAM; it also has a FSB of 1066 MHz. Performance on the MacBook Pro should be at least 10% better.
2. The HP HDX 16t uses standard display with CCFL back lighting. The MacBook Pro offers a smaller screen, but its improved battery life is due to the LED back lighting for the display. Further, the MacBook Pro offers superior color accuracy due to its LED back lighting and can easily reproduce 90%+ of the NTSC color gamut. The HP can't.
3. Ergonomics. The MacBook Pro 17" is 0.98 inches in height. Very compact. The HP HDX 16t is 1.31 inches in height. The HP is 1/3 more thick! Its weight is 7.06 pounds and the MacBook Pro 17" is 6.6 pounds, the 15.4" MacBook Pro is 5.5 pounds. Further, the aluminum case on the MacBook Pro serves as a large heat sink. So heat dissipation is superior on the MacBook Pro.
4. Finally, MS Vista is a crippled OS. Period. If you could apply various coupons and get the HP HDX 16t on-line for ~$900 and then load OSX 10.5.6 on it, it might be a good idea.
This is a clear partnership and to do with contracts. Apple iPhone only works with ATT in US because they are the only phone provider using it.....
HP is not the only contracted Windows Vista/XP supplier.
I suppose that you are joking.
But let's see. He's been here on MR since July 2003 and has over 12,000 posts. I would say that he had been around a while.
True.
And that is one area that these ads do not address is the ease of operation of various systems that are considered.
Linux is definitely becoming more popular. Ubuntu is a good Linux build that is constantly updated.
IT really doesn't make sense that he clearly mentions portability, and then ends up getting a big laptop. He even starts looking at netbooks, so the ad kinda confused me. Like, how aware of his priorities was he really when we get the impression that he wanted portability, and then didn't get that..
It would have been a better ad if it attacked Apple from the other end of their product-range, the ultraportable and cheap computers that Apple doesn't have at all, but many of them run linux don't they..
Oh well, good for MS that they're making some decent ads for once! I really don't see the big deal though, most mac-users should know that if you want ram and graphics cheap without caring about size and usability you should get a pc.
It would have been a better ad if it attacked Apple from the other end of their product-range, the ultraportable and cheap computers that Apple doesn't have at all, but many of them run linux don't they..
Oh well, good for MS that they're making some decent ads for once! I really don't see the big deal though, most mac-users should know that if you want ram and graphics cheap without caring about size and usability you should get a pc.
I love the people who are bashing the machines "low" resolution. 
Have any of you ever considered that most people don't even know what a resolution is? Most of them keep the default that came with their computer. And most of them couldn't give a crap either.
Then there are the few like me who like lower resolutions. All of my computers are set to 1024x768. Monitor sizes range from 10" to 21". And that's the way I like it, I'm sure there are others who do as well.
Have any of you ever considered that most people don't even know what a resolution is? Most of them keep the default that came with their computer. And most of them couldn't give a crap either.
Then there are the few like me who like lower resolutions. All of my computers are set to 1024x768. Monitor sizes range from 10" to 21". And that's the way I like it, I'm sure there are others who do as well.
I'm willing to bet that this bozo in the ad has a six pack of Coca-cola in his fridge right now.
We all buy things because of branding. Thats why the companies spend so much on advertising.
You are missing the point. The point of the commercial is to show that if you want a laptop there are hundreds, nay thousands of hardware choices out there on the pc side and about 4 choices on the mac side. Since the general public sees "windows" and "pc" as synonymous its a valid ad. That and the fact that windows works on all of these thousands of configs whereas OSX works on 4 different laptops.
Aaaaand:
"You get what you pay for."
Apple will never lower their prices. Apple will not take this ad "seriously".
The INTERNET isn't taking these ads seriously.
Why all the backlash here? Hopefully these ads will have some effect on apple and they'll be able to start offering some more bang for your buck.
So here is what I see.
The actor looks at HP's. Cool. Nothing wrong. Then it happens...
He goes to the macs, doesn't do so much as look at specs or touch the keyboard trackpad. He just spouts off a line about aesthetics, then walks away. Why even go to macs if he already has a preconceived notion in his head about them?
He wanted portability, battery life and power.
Portability - 16" is not portable. Yes, someone earlier claimed it is portable, just bigger and heavier. Technically the 21"-23" laptops I have seen every now and then fit your definition of "portability", but you know they aren't portable. Portable means light and small, easy to carry. Bigger, heavier, etc goes against that.
Battery Life - Macs have the best battery life I have seen in a laptop these days. They have amazing battery life, and that is WHILE using wifi, with brightness on, etc. How the heck did he go with an HP over a mac when looking at battery life?
Power - Macbook unibodies come with a dedicated graphics card. That still fits in his limit. They come with powerful intel cards, 2 gigs of ram, upgradable, DDR3 ram. I don't see the HP having DDR3. The macbook wins here too.
So for his lifestyle, a 13" Macbook Unibody would have been the ideal purchase. Not to mention that thanks to the setup microsoft made, it doesn't matter if he got a $900 or a $1500 computer because M$ would comp him for it. And for the guy trying to defend the HP earlier, yes, an external monitor would help with the screen. That's more $$$ and would put him past his limit. I don't remember the rest that was said in that post, but it all cost more $$$ over the original price of the computer.
The actor looks at HP's. Cool. Nothing wrong. Then it happens...
He goes to the macs, doesn't do so much as look at specs or touch the keyboard trackpad. He just spouts off a line about aesthetics, then walks away. Why even go to macs if he already has a preconceived notion in his head about them?
He wanted portability, battery life and power.
Portability - 16" is not portable. Yes, someone earlier claimed it is portable, just bigger and heavier. Technically the 21"-23" laptops I have seen every now and then fit your definition of "portability", but you know they aren't portable. Portable means light and small, easy to carry. Bigger, heavier, etc goes against that.
Battery Life - Macs have the best battery life I have seen in a laptop these days. They have amazing battery life, and that is WHILE using wifi, with brightness on, etc. How the heck did he go with an HP over a mac when looking at battery life?
Power - Macbook unibodies come with a dedicated graphics card. That still fits in his limit. They come with powerful intel cards, 2 gigs of ram, upgradable, DDR3 ram. I don't see the HP having DDR3. The macbook wins here too.
So for his lifestyle, a 13" Macbook Unibody would have been the ideal purchase. Not to mention that thanks to the setup microsoft made, it doesn't matter if he got a $900 or a $1500 computer because M$ would comp him for it. And for the guy trying to defend the HP earlier, yes, an external monitor would help with the screen. That's more $$$ and would put him past his limit. I don't remember the rest that was said in that post, but it all cost more $$$ over the original price of the computer.
Apple drops the price then they show they are bowing down to presser from the advertising of a competitor and it would price them out of the market they are in and compete successfully with the like of Sony and are on a par with in terms of specs and price.
Another thing, it doesn't mention what they actually want to do with their computer (OS), only mentions the hardware requirements. I'm pretty sure if he said he wants to do spreadsheets, gaming and presentations he would go for windows. But he says he wants a powerhouse of a laptop, he needs it to run vista. Anyway apple will also be better in aesthetics and software, because they define what is the best, no manufacturer will ever catch up.
Desperate
This whole campaign stinks of desperate marketing. Of course MSFT are knocking Apple on hardware cost it's the ONLY area they can make a point in their favor even thought they don't sell it!. I'd love to see them try to win the same argument based on a comparison of the OS or the bundled apps that come with Winblows.
They're also going after the uneducated user. If you were to try to find WinTel hardware that matched the specs and performance of Apple's laptops you'd either be disappoint coz it isn't available or you'd find it actually cost more.
I guess they must to onto something and that's why the Apple stores are packed solid whenever you visit them..
Pathetic.
This whole campaign stinks of desperate marketing. Of course MSFT are knocking Apple on hardware cost it's the ONLY area they can make a point in their favor even thought they don't sell it!. I'd love to see them try to win the same argument based on a comparison of the OS or the bundled apps that come with Winblows.
They're also going after the uneducated user. If you were to try to find WinTel hardware that matched the specs and performance of Apple's laptops you'd either be disappoint coz it isn't available or you'd find it actually cost more.
I guess they must to onto something and that's why the Apple stores are packed solid whenever you visit them..
Pathetic.
With Windows XP, generally set for 1024x768.
Although I must say that Windows XP looks great on my 22 inch ACD at native resolution.
The Macbook Pro has a smaller screen but with a higher resolution (1440x900) so it's another Pro in favour of the MBP.
The character in that ad is clearly not a tech savvy person, nor is the actor that's playing the part.
MacBook:
Designed by Apple in California - Assembled in China.
iPod Shuffle:
Designed by Apple in California - Assembled in China.
BT Mighty Mouse:
Designed by Apple in California - Assembled in Malaysia.
iPod charger:
Designed by Apple in California - Assembled in China.
Designed & Assembled is completely different.
Where do all computers get assembled? the answer is above 3-1.
Apple makes the cases code their own software then buy from 3rd party vendors and their hardware is assembled by another company.
Windows sells their software to OEM'S who then buy from 3rd party vendors and their hardware is assembled by another company.
The difference between the 2....One makes pretty enclosures the other one relies on other vendors easthetic ideas. PERFECT BUSINESS SENSE.
I give it to apple though.
You know companies like dell, hp etc will forever back microsoft thats why microsoft will not loose. They have the biggest companies backing them.
And here is apple with a closed business idea no backing at all. but yet somehow make big corporations shake in their boots.
APPLAUD APPLE. Now that is power.
An analogy is a comparison of certain similarities between things which are otherwise unlike.
So yes, ATT and Microsoft are not exactly alike in the product they make or they way they advertise it. But the similarity I am pointing out is that they both use complementary products to advertise their own.
So I do not think the analogy is wrong. That's all I'm saying.