New Microsoft Ad Campaign Targets Mac Prices

[Perrumpo]

In what way? Apart from price, the machines are pretty similar.

Both have dual core processors, both have 4GB RAM, both have a 17" screen, both have a 320GB hard drive, both have a DVD-RW drive, both have built in webcams, both have a one year warranty.

The only area where the MacBook Pro will likely outperform the HP is in battery life, but then, I don't want to be one to fall for Apple's marketing garbage on that. I'm promised 5 hours on my MacBook, I get closer to 2 and a half.

For the reasons yetanotherdave listed, as well as the fact that you're getting a superior OS and an aluminum, unibody machine. As I said, the general public will most likely not be concerned with such things, but that doesn't mean they're irrelevant.

 

[Consultant]

I guess she should join forces with the Zune Tatoo Guy
(who eventually got sick of the poor usability of his Zune and got rid of the zune tatoo)

17inch is pushing the portability factor, imo

Not for an Apple laptop.

I carry my 17" MBP around every day as a 17" iPod, video iPhone (ichat / skype), portable office, internet communicator, gaming platform, etc.

Of course. They're going to choose Apple's top of the line. The sad thing is, loads of people will fall for these ads even though comparing the 17" MacBook Pro to the 17" PC in this ad is like apples and oranges.

Here are the spec comparison.
[https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/675665/

 

[neiltc13]

For the reasons yetanotherdave listed, as well as the fact that you're getting a superior OS and an aluminum, unibody machine. As I said, the general public will most likely not be concerned with such things, but that doesn't mean they're irrelevant.

The ad highlights the fact that if you buy a PC you are much more likely to get a computer that meets your needs than if you buy a Mac. If you want to pay double or triple the price to get a different case, then that's up to you.

 

[dejo]

I'm promised up to 5 hours on my MacBook...

Fixed that for ya!

 

[Perrumpo]

The ad highlights the fact that if you buy a PC you are much more likely to get a computer that meets your needs than if you buy a Mac. If you want to pay double or triple the price to get a different case, then that's up to you.

If you buy a PC, you're much more likely to get a computer that meets your financial needs. Otherwise, the Mac is more likely to meet your needs since it includes better specs.

 

[neiltc13]

If you buy a PC, you're much more likely to get a computer that meets your financial needs. Otherwise, the Mac is more likely to meet your needs since it includes better specs.

Not true. The ad shows someone who wants a 17" laptop. She got one for a fraction of the cost Apple wanted for their machine. The Apple system would not have met her needs any more than the HP computer.

You can never separate your financial needs from your other needs, so why bother saying that Apple's machines will only suit you if money is no object?

 

[Benguitar]

"I'm a PC and I got just what I wanted."

- The great thing about a Macintosh is you get more than what you wanted. You get everything you would ever need as a standard consumer.

Whatever, Lauren have fun with your Piece-of-Crap

 

[Perrumpo]

Not true. The ad shows someone who wants a 17" laptop. She got one for a fraction of the cost Apple wanted for their machine. The Apple system would not have met her needs any more than the HP computer.

Fraction of the cost - exactly my point. Sorry, but screen size is not the only factor for someone's laptop needs. We don't know exactly what her other needs were, but it's neither here nor there. In an objective situation, the 17" MacBook Pro is more likely to meet someone's needs than the 17" HP because it is more powerful and higher quality. Period.

You can never separate your financial needs from your other needs, so why bother saying that Apple's machines will only suit you if money is no object?

As for the former, of course you can. As for the latter, when did I say that? In fact, I disagree with it.

 

[Abstract]

Yep, she got exactly what she wanted, so there's nothing more to it, really. In terms of actual hardware tech specs, she got a computer that's somewhat comparable to the 17" MBP. It's just the battery life, weight, size, LCD panel quality, and a bit of speed that she's missing.


However, the situation used in the ad is fairly realistic. The 17" MBP is definitely a better laptop, but the slight benefits the 17" MBP will make to most consumers is not enough to warranty paying 4 times the price, especially if they're not all that into computers to begin with. Ask my girlfriend if she's happy with her computer, and she'll ask you what there is to be happy about.

Another example: I'm sure my $150 earphones aren't as good as a pair of $1000 Sennheisers or UEs, but I'm no less happy with them because there comes a point where it's not worth spending more to get back what I perceive to be little benefit in return. However, if you ask an audiophile, and they'll tell you that the benefits of the $500 to $1000 earphones are obvious, and worth the extra money. Well that's only true to an audiophile, just like the differences between computers only has value to those who care about such things. To me, I get what I need from both my $100+ in-ears.


And she said she'd need to double her ($1000) budget to buy a 17" MBP. Where did she find such an awesome discount? The ad should have said "triple her budget".

 

[neiltc13]

Fraction of the cost - exactly my point. Sorry, but screen size is not the only factor for someone's laptop needs. We don't know exactly what her other needs were, but it's neither here nor there. In an objective situation, the 17" MacBook Pro is more likely to meet someone's needs than the 17" HP because it is more powerful and higher quality. Period.

As for the former, of course you can. As for the latter, when did I say that? In fact, I disagree with it.

I've heard people say "I want a 17" laptop" or "I want a tiny laptop" - the reality is that some people do use this as the only criteria for selecting a machine. The problem is that Apple uses screen size increments to also add other components which may be just as desirable to buyers of the cheapest machine. Backlit keyboard is a prime example - it's a couple of LEDs which cost a tiny amount to manufacture, yet you can only get it if you pay more.

"Higher quality" is debatable. I suppose you haven't read the articles explaining that the 17" MBPs have faulty GPUs. Provided the components don't fail in either machine, I don't see a difference in "quality". They have different enclosures, but that doesn't mean that one or the other is of greater "quality".

I really resent the ideas that people on this site and other forums put forward that Windows machines are in some way inferior to Macs. I've had plenty of problems with my Windows machines and I've had plenty of problems with my Macs. I have noticed that in recent years and particularly since Windows XP SP2 stability on Windows has improved massively. Looking at Windows 7, it seems like that is going to get even better.

I can't say the same about my Mac. I loved using OS X Tiger, it was rock solid and it always did what I wanted it to. Since upgrading to Leopard though, I've noticed a much greater number of program crashes and sluggishness from the OS. Let's hope that Apple take a leaf from Microsoft's book and make improvements rather than spoiling what's good.

 

[Consultant]

Not true. The ad shows someone who wants a 17" laptop. She got one for a fraction of the cost Apple wanted for their machine. The Apple system would not have met her needs any more than the HP computer.

You can never separate your financial needs from your other needs, so why bother saying that Apple's machines will only suit you if money is no object?

Looks like someone should have gotten a Yugo because it costs much less than a Ferrari.

They both have 4 wheels, doors, seats, and get a person to the destination, so OMG there must be NO difference between them by your definition.

Do I smell sourgrapes?

 

[ucfgrad93]

So they're selling it entirely on price. Clever of them, in a way, because they're taking advantage of the bad economy.

Be interesting to see how Apple answers this. IMO, it's a fair criticism. I don't know how many people I know who'd like a laptop but have turned down Apple flat-out because of the price. Maybe we need the laptop equivalent of a Mac mini. (Pricewise...not a laptop without a screen, smartass! )

Agreed, it is a fair criticism. However, the price of Macs is worth it in my opinion.

 

[notjustjay]

- The great thing about a Macintosh is you get more than what you wanted. You get everything you would ever need as a standard consumer.

Yup. Wasn't it Henry Ford who said that if he asked people what they wanted, they would have asked for faster horses?

Lauren got just what she THINKS she wanted.

I know several people who recently switched to MacBooks. These are average every-day PC users, not power users or Mac/PC experts. They are continually being impressed by one more feature they just discovered on their Macs that they never knew about, never thought to ask for, but can't live without now. I hear it all the time now -- "Wow - it can do that?!" Or, more importantly, "Wow, I can do that?!"

 

[bigjnyc]

It's true you can get some nicely spec'd computers for really cheap but all that ram and processing power wont help you when the crappy operating system in it starts getting bogged down with spyware, registry crap, etc.... and your computer slows down after a few months. Thats what a lot of people just don't understand..... I have nothing against hardware manufacturers there are some good ones out there but a computer is only as good as the OS controlling it. A good example of this is you can have the best and ultimate graphics card ever made but if the drivers for it arent programmed to bring out its full potential then what do you have?

 

[Perrumpo]

I've heard people say "I want a 17" laptop" or "I want a tiny laptop" - the reality is that some people do use this as the only criteria for selecting a machine. The problem is that Apple uses screen size increments to also add other components which may be just as desirable to buyers of the cheapest machine. Backlit keyboard is a prime example - it's a couple of LEDs which cost a tiny amount to manufacture, yet you can only get it if you pay more.

Like I already said, I agree that loads of people aren't going to be concerned with the differences that exist between the two machines. In this woman's case, the HP was much more suitable. That doesn't mean, however, that the Mac is not the superior machine. In this comparison, it is, plain and simple. Ergo, it's more likely to meet a person's needs, granted they have use for such power.

"Higher quality" is debatable. I suppose you haven't read the articles explaining that the 17" MBPs have faulty GPUs. Provided the components don't fail in either machine, I don't see a difference in "quality". They have different enclosures, but that doesn't mean that one or the other is of greater "quality".

Ehh, it's too open for opinion. In mine, the Mac has higher quality in a general sense, but to each his own.

 

[chaosbunny]

I think it's strange that the ad doesn't focus on a microsoft product. We know now that hp makes cheap computers. Cool. Hoooray for hp!

Microsoft should focus on comparing their OS to apples OS, not comparing a hp notebook to an apple notebook.

As far as this goes, Lauren could say "wow, what a nice laptop to run osx86 on" in the end.

 

[neiltc13]

It's true you can get some nicely spec'd computers for really cheap but all that ram and processing power wont help you when the crappy operating system in it starts getting bogged down with spyware, registry crap, etc.... and your computer slows down after a few months. Thats what a lot of people just don't understand..... I have nothing against hardware manufacturers there are some good ones out there but a computer is only as good as the OS controlling it.

In the past Windows had issues like you describe. These days though, Microsoft has pretty much solved all of those problems so it really is not a valid argument to use when comparing Windows to OS X. I would love to hear some recent, real life examples of this occurring but I doubt there are many which don't involve some degree of user incompetence.

A good example of this is you can have the best and ultimate graphics card ever made but if the drivers for it arent programmed to bring out its full potential then what do you have?

A Mac Pro.

I think it's strange that the ad doesn't focus on a microsoft product. We know now that hp makes cheap computers. Cool. Hoooray for hp!

Microsoft should focus on comparing their OS to apples OS, not comparing a hp notebook to an apple notebook.

As far as this goes, Lauren could say "wow, what a nice laptop to run osx86 on" in the end.

When HP sells a laptop with Windows installed on it, Microsoft makes money.

 

[chaosbunny]

I would love to hear some recent, real life examples of this occurring but I doubt there are many which don't involve some degree of user incompetence.

Yes and Lauren looks like a pretty competent user to me. I bet she works in IT support or something!

When HP sells a laptop with Windows installed on it, Microsoft makes money.

Sure but that hp is still not a microsoft product. Why don't they focus on the advantages of their own products? Oh, wait a minute...

 

[Perrumpo]

Sure but that hp is still not a microsoft product. Why don't they focus on the advantages of their own products? Oh, wait a minute...

hahah, exactly. And it's a smart move on Microsoft's part what with the economy, their inferior OS, and the sheep of the general public.

 

[neiltc13]

hahah, exactly. And it's a smart move on Microsoft's part what with the economy, their inferior OS, and the sheep of the general public.

In what way is it inferior?

 

[dejo]

In what way is it inferior?

neiltc13 would like to argue the inferiority of OSes, Perrumpo. Cancel or Allow?

 

[Perrumpo]

In what way is it inferior?

neiltc13 would like to argue the inferiority of OSes, Perrumpo. Cancel or Allow?

(tee-hee)

 

[techfreak85]

neiltc13 would like to argue the inferiority of OSes, Perrumpo. Cancel or Allow?

allow...*sigh*

 

[mkrishnan]

I think it's strange that the ad doesn't focus on a microsoft product. We know now that hp makes cheap computers. Cool. Hoooray for hp!

Microsoft should focus on comparing their OS to apples OS, not comparing a hp notebook to an apple notebook.

As far as this goes, Lauren could say "wow, what a nice laptop to run osx86 on" in the end.

I think one should admit, at least, that it's slightly more focused on their products than the recent failboat excursion with Captains Bill Gates and Jerry Seinfeld. Plus... the last major ad campaign from MS that focused on their product was... Mojave. Yeah.

 

[Goona]

In what way? Apart from price, the machines are pretty similar.

Both have dual core processors, both have 4GB RAM, both have a 17" screen, both have a 320GB hard drive, both have a DVD-RW drive, both have built in webcams, both have a one year warranty.

The only area where the MacBook Pro will likely outperform the HP is in battery life, but then, I don't want to be one to fall for Apple's marketing garbage on that. I'm promised 5 hours on my MacBook, I get closer to 2 and a half.

So I guess this 699 HP is better than Apple's top of the line laptop.

What's the point of this? Oh PC has more varieties and choices? Oh I didn't know that

dL

She wants the Mac, goes to the Apple store first, realizes she's not cool enough for Mac so goes and buys the cheap PC.