Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Dayyam that's clever...

And with a new round of RIAA indictments hitting the news. I woulda loved to be in the war room at Chiat when they came up with that one. Brilliant.

But do we expect anything less from these guys and Apple? Thanks to the law of diminishing returns, whenever Apple fails to totally wow us then we start to worry. Whereas MS can just crank out basic, mediocre stuff and everything's fine...
 
49 posts and nobody has posted the obvious......

tres cool!

this place is slipping.
 
Re: Dayyam that's clever...

Originally posted by Knute5


But do we expect anything less from these guys and Apple? Thanks to the law of diminishing returns, whenever Apple fails to totally wow us then we start to worry. Whereas MS can just crank out basic, mediocre stuff and everything's fine...

I was just thinking the same thing.....that topic would make a pretty neat paper on marketing.....
 
"Pepsi ads wink at music downloading"


oh brother....


I guess it's the right thing to do, its drawing attention to the problem and they are marketing off of it.

But the last thing kids want to hear is a speech.


Hope it doesn't flop....
 
Wow, this is hateful.

Green Day and kids whipped by the system team up to hock Pepsi products with corporate-approved DRMed music. Could this be any less punk rock?

"I'm still downloading music -- only now I Obey!"

Does anyone else here see the irony with all the recent talk about Apple's 1984 ad?



"Think Different!"
 
Re: Wow, this is hateful.

Originally posted by nationElectric


Does anyone else here see the irony with all the recent talk about Apple's 1984 ad?


I think most of us see the irony, but we're just too busy being happy to see Apple mentioned in a Super Bowl ad.

You have a point though.
 
Re: Green Day??!!

Originally posted by rogozhin
The Crickets, Sonny Curtis, The Bobby Fuller Four, Tom Petty, The Clash, Hank Williams Jr, Marshall Crenshaw and Sam Neely have all released versions of "I Fought the Law" since it first was written in 1959. Each of them made the song their own. Countless others have covered it as well, with varying degrees of success.

Any of these versions would have been great. The Clash would have been my personal choice (With the Dead Kennedy's "I Fought the Law and I Won" being a close second), but I guess for a commercial that showcases kids who steal music, it's only appropriate that they get a band who has stolen their act from the Clash and other real punk bands for the past 15 years.

I'll venture to guess Green Day will be playing the Joe Strummer arrangement of the Sonny Curtis classic, because they certainly wouldn't want to start bringing something new to the table this late in their careers...

Exactly, but maybe a little bit more of a play on the Dead Kennedy's "Drinking beer in the hot sun, I fought the law and I won" turned into "Drinking Pepsi in the hot sun, I fought the law and got some?"
Jello Biafra is spinning in his grave and he's not even dead yet.
 
Re: Wow, this is hateful.

Originally posted by nationElectric
Green Day and kids whipped by the system team up to hock Pepsi products with corporate-approved DRMed music. Could this be any less punk rock?

"I'm still downloading music -- only now I Obey!"

Does anyone else here see the irony with all the recent talk about Apple's 1984 ad?



"Think Different!"

How is it not thinking diferent?? iTMS is about the most original concept on the internet since eBay. Instead of doing something illegal and getting themselves sued into oblivion by a Neo-Fascist organization, they can do what they did before for free. Sounds different to me!
 
Re: Green Day??!!

Originally posted by rogozhin
The Crickets, Sonny Curtis, The Bobby Fuller Four, Tom Petty, The Clash, Hank Williams Jr, Marshall Crenshaw and Sam Neely have all released versions of "I Fought the Law" since it first was written in 1959. Each of them made the song their own. Countless others have covered it as well, with varying degrees of success.

Any of these versions would have been great. The Clash would have been my personal choice (With the Dead Kennedy's "I Fought the Law and I Won" being a close second), but I guess for a commercial that showcases kids


Bingo. People like my Dad, who are techy enough to know about iTunes, yet grew up with the morals to think MusicSharing is illigal, have jumped on iTunes. Kids like my 16 year old Siblings (yes, plural, *sigh*), who have no such moral delimas won't use iTunes, unless they like the band, or unless they actually get some money". Besides, kids are all about cool, and it won't take too many people saying they "won" (who doesn't like bragging that they won?) free songs to their friends before people want to give it a shot.

My Point- adults, for the most part, have no alterative. Once informed of iTunes they will either use it or keep going to wal-mart to get music CDs. Kids on the other hand are into a much harder market that will be harder to persway from their ways. And the future isn't the adults, it's the kids. If every kid grows up sharing music, and nothing were done, in 60 years EVERYONE would be sharing music on the web and not buying it. they are targeting the audience that needs to change.

And how that concerns your post. I've never heard of any of those guys and I'm 19 with a father to thank for knowing (and enjoying) people like Tom Petty, and other such old folk. But many kids haven't had my luxgsury, and so want to hear someone they know. Most kids under 25 are going to know who they are. Besides, when they actually play something soft, they sound good ;)


I'll venture to guess Green Day will be playing the Joe Strummer arrangement of the Sonny Curtis classic, because they certainly wouldn't want to start bringing something new to the table this late in their careers...

90% of their music is not quite to my taste. But when they play a soft song, and tey do, it is a bit different, and normally to my taste. I wouldn't put them into a "never change style due to late carree" catagory quite yet.

Earendil
Tyler
 
Originally posted by wPod
any ideas of anything to mix with pepsi? a rum and coke just doesnt taste the same when it is a rum and pepsi.

wait, people mix things with their liquor? On purpose?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I don't abuse alcohol; I take very good care of it."
 
A Jack & Coke should not substitute Pepsi. Since Pepsi has a sweeter taste you need to use a sweet liquor. Since Rum isn't cutting it try a Coconut Rum, or use Crown Royal. Though the best combination of Crown Royal is with Royal Crown Cola.
 
Re: where will the ads end up?

Originally posted by pbooktebo
I don't have a TV, but SuperBowl ads are always great. I assume that all the ads will end up online.

Does anyone know a site that might post/link many or all or the best ads of the game?

Thanks!
Last year, after the game, there was a web site that had all of the Superbowl ads. If there's an equivalent this year, you can probably use Google to find it after the game.

By the way, for those of you who didn't read the fine print, the Pepsi/iTunes promotion says "no purchase necessary". You can send them a self-addressed stamped envelope and get a free game piece, with a 1/3 chance like the bottles have. Of course, that'll cost you $2.22 in postage on average for each 99 cent tune! If you live in Vermont, it's only $1.11 because you don't have to pay the return postage. You'll almost break even!
 
Pepsi and...

Wow, lot's of liquor "connoisseurs" in this thread. ;)

One of the best things I've had mixed with Pepsi is Seagram's Lime Twisted Gin. Mighty tasty...
 
Re: Re: where will the ads end up?

Originally posted by Doctor Q
Last year, after the game, there was a web site that had all of the Superbowl ads. If there's an equivalent this year, you can probably use Google to find it after the game.

By the way, for those of you who didn't read the fine print, the Pepsi/iTunes promotion says "no purchase necessary". You can send them a self-addressed stamped envelope and get a free game piece, with a 1/3 chance like the bottles have. Of course, that'll cost you $2.22 in postage on average for each 99 cent tune! If you live in Vermont, it's only $1.11 because you don't have to pay the return postage. You'll almost break even!


Actually I'm looking forward to purchasing Pepsi next month. I drink soda anyway, so it will be nice to receive a gift. A 1/3 chance sounds good to me. Besides Steve ask us to drink Pepsi.

My wife says that she plans to purchase Pepsi! :)

How many ads were availabe Doctor Q? Were they all in one place? Such as do you just do a search for Super Bowl Ads?
 
Heh, heh. Reminds me of the time when the Napster creator appeared on MTV while wearing a Metallica shirt. Now if one wants to talk about a band which has lost all credibility...well, I need not say any more.
 
Re: Re: Wow, this is hateful.

Originally posted by ShadowHunter
How is it not thinking diferent?? iTMS is about the most original concept on the internet since eBay. Instead of doing something illegal and getting themselves sued into oblivion by a Neo-Fascist organization, they can do what they did before for free. Sounds different to me!

Sure it's different. You're funneling money to the Neo-Fascist organization in question through Apple and Pepsi instead of through Tower Records. That's different. You're paying money for a product that is designed around the fundamental assumption that you're a criminal. That's pretty different. You're doing all of this in an environment where someone is screening the content and making judgement calls about what music you should and shouldn't have access to. That's certainly different from the old p2p networks.

What might be more different, though, would be a system like Weed (http://www.weedshare.com/), which tries to make file sharing profitable for everyone, thus encouraging legitimacy through a carrot instead of a stick. What might be more different than that would be labels like Warp Records (http://www.warprecords.com/bleep/) throwing out the entire assumption that their customers are criminals and simply selling people mp3's. These are creative, legitimate alternatives to the current system. Hopefully there will be more.

iTunes is just an online store. It's a very nice online store, although the selection is a little limited for my taste. That's fine and all, but it's not terribly Different. It's still built on all the assumptions and prejudices that the RIAA has been railing on about for years. The music giveaway is nice, but it's a limited offer to further entrench iTMS, which ultimately helps keep organizations like the RIAA in power. iTMS is a boutique, not a revolution.

"I fought the law and the law won" is really a pretty fitting sentiment here.
 
0259.jpg


I think it's funny!
 
Criminal assumption

Originally posted by nationElectric
You're paying money for a product that is designed around the fundamental assumption that you're a criminal.

Hmmm. Well, we all see what we want to see, I guess.
 
Quality of Commercials

Whenever I think that Apple commercials are not quite as good as I think they should be, I see a MS Office commercial that is embarrassingly bad and I feel a lot better. :)
Not sure if this is a good sign for the Patriots or not. The other team happens to have a particularly relevant nickname (conspiracy theories abound now for how both teams made this Superbowl!).
 
Originally posted by SilentPanda
"A new product will come out and I will want it but will not be able to afford it. Therefore I will drink Pepsi products in February to drown my sorrows."

Don't forget that the new product is 5 times better than the one you just bought for the same price yesterday! :p

Back on topic, anyone know a good place that sells the 20-oz or 32-oz bottles fairly cheap? Most places only sell them individually for like $1.20 or more, when you can get more than twice the liquid in a 2-liter for under a buck. If you consider the difference in price between these bottles and my usual 2-liters, I sorta doubt if I'd break even with the 1/3 iTunes songs... :confused:

Not that a little economics sense is gonna stop me from being a consumer whore and buying into it. :D
 
Re: Quality of Commercials

Originally posted by El Tritoma
Not sure if this is a good sign for the Patriots or not. The other team happens to have a particularly relevant nickname (conspiracy theories abound now for how both teams made this Superbowl!).

No kidding. I'll be rooting for the Carolina 10.3! :D
 
Re: Criminal assumption

Originally posted by splashman
Hmmm. Well, we all see what we want to see, I guess.

True, but it's not some pie-in-the-sky ivory tower speculation. I have a bunch of computers that I do a bunch of weird, but perfectly legal, things with. DRM, even DRM which gives me "generous personal use rights" -- or more accurately, a "generous" subset of my actual personal use rights -- complicates my life.

If I've got a file that deliberately restricts how many computers I can use it on, what kind of computers I can use it on, what kind of audio software I can play it on, what kind of portable players I can play it on, and requires me to be "reauthorized" by a central agency if I have the misfortune to lose a hard drive, what else am I supposed to think? These are all problems I have to deal with as a paying customer because there is an assumption that the user (read: me) may have stolen the file or may be attempting to illegally give it away. It's a system that punishes those who legitimately purchase their content.

It's not a big deal for a song or two. But if I'm planning on building a music collection of hundreds or thousands of songs (at a buck a pop) that I'll want to keep for years, it becomes a significant consideration.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.