Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
From Apple's "Why Mac" page on their own site...


"It doesn’t get PC viruses.
A Mac isn’t susceptible to the thousands of viruses plaguing Windows-based computers. That’s thanks to built-in defenses in Mac OS X that keep you safe, without any work on your part."



Does that count as mentioning MS/Windows directly? Will you give up on your silly semantics battle that Apple is innocent when it comes to negative advertising?

Ha, nice try buddy. The fine print on a website is hardly the same a bold marketing headline. Not to mention, Apple still never explicitly said "Microsoft".

It's all semantics though. Apple called out the competition because it had a better product that would satisfy the complaints of millions of users.. Samsung is calling out Apple in desperate hopes that its inferior product can "maybe" get more mind-share.
 
Obvious is obvious, but MS's name was still never spoken or printed on the ad, and that's all I wanted to point out.

Had they mentioned Microsoft or "Windows Vista", they may have been in breech of Microsoft's Trademark guidelines.

http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/en/us/IntellectualProperty/Trademarks/Usage/WindowsVista.aspx

Special Considerations for Third Parties
Always maintain a visual distinction between the third-party company and product name and the Windows Vista trademark. Windows Vista should be less prominent.

Do not use Windows Vista in your product or service name or in your company name.

Do not use product, service, or company names that could be confused with the Windows Vista trademark.

Do not mimic or copy Windows Vista product packaging, advertising, or trade dress.

Do not create or use any logos that include the Windows Vista trademark unless pursuant to a license from Microsoft.

Do not use any Windows Vista brand elements, including the Windows Vista signature (logo), the Start button, the color blends, and screenshots, in third-party materials unless pursuant to a license from Microsoft.
 
From Apple's "Why Mac" page on their own site...


"It doesn’t get PC viruses.
A Mac isn’t susceptible to the thousands of viruses plaguing Windows-based computers. That’s thanks to built-in defenses in Mac OS X that keep you safe, without any work on your part."



Does that count as mentioning MS/Windows directly? Will you give up on your silly semantics battle that Apple is innocent when it comes to negative advertising?

Obviously I was proven wrong with the IBM ad. I acknowledged it earlier in the thread.

But I don't know if you want to compare listing features on a product page on a company website to an actual ad created by an ad agency though. And my point is that the semantics on a "consumer advertisement" probably do play a larger role in marketing than you might believe, and in the case of Mac vs. PC, I believe they do stay clean in never mentioning the word "MS" or "Windows" in that entire campaign. Correct me if I'm wrong though. I'm just merely trying to pointing out that detail, whether it's critical to discussion or not about effective marketing.

Also, that quote from Apple's site you posted helps Apple in a way to promote a feature on the Mac platform. The Samsung ad is trying to promote exactly what feature now?
 
i don't see anything wrong with the ad. i think it's a bit amusing actually. i think most people don't really know or care about corp. vs corp. lawsuits, so this ad will actually manage to grab people's attentions. they'll prob see that since apple spent so much time trying to stop the sale of this product, then it must be serious competition against the ipad.

i'm sure i'll get down voted for saying that, but oh well.. it's a good ad and the tab is a pretty good product.. i don't know why apple continued to go after the redesigned one also.

people take the whole apple devotion too seriously here.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

That a shows how far down Samsung is willing to dig to get sales of their awesome-looking but Android-running Tab. It sucks. I manage a big box retail store and nobody buys them.
 
Bottom line: They can't market the product based on their own brand recognition. So not only do they need Apple for their ideas, Samsung needs them for their marketing.
 
Asked how many units of the Galaxy Tab Samsung was bringing in, McGee said "as many units as we can" but warned "there will probably be short supply against the demand".

1879f18e_e542_e1c6.jpg
 
I'd say it's the other way around champ! Apples probably loving the free advertising Samsung is giving them.

The ad pretty much concedes that Apple is the benchmark to measure against.

Thinking about it - both are getting free marketing - each for their own good, but there is still the underdog attitude for a lot of people - Apple Goliath tried stopping Samsung from selling its product.

Anyway it goes both ways.
 
No Samsung are attacking the users. very smart. :rolleyes:

Please explain to me how that Samsung print add attacked users?

Apple mocked an enormous user base buy portraying PC(Windows) users as nerdy bufoons while mac users were smooth talking hipsters...
 
Samsung thanks Apple for the free Marketing!

Sounds like a headlike you could read on a techblog :D



And I personally think indirectly it is also advertising for apple, whether good or bad is a different matter!
 
I think it's a jolly good idea.

Tablet devices aren't for me, but I must say after all this furore I'm leaning towards a Samsung tablet.
 
The Galaxy tab seems pretty weak if they need to resort to this kind of ad campaign.
This is not about a specific product within Samsungs vast portfolio of products, but rather this is a sign of Samsungs decision to fight fire with fire.

Going after Apple with a laser like focus, backed by an aggressive onslaught of a no holds barred attack, will serve them well. An attack that will evoke Apples typically paranoid response, followed by more acrimonious vitriol.

It's discouraging that Apple felt so weak and vulnerable that they were compelled to start this war. In addition their arrogance may have clouded their vision, blocking them from seeing & realizing just how formidable of an adversary they are attacking.

Despite Apples wild success, superior products, and loyal customer base, the poor egomaniacal company, flush with obscene amounts of cash & revenue, it still was not enough to satisfy their extreme greed.

This is one war that hurts everyone, all because of Apples insatiable need to kneecap their competitors, instead of competing fair & square on a level playing field.
 
This is not about a specific product within Samsungs vast portfolio of products, but rather this is a sign of Samsungs decision to fight fire with fire.

Going after Apple with a laser like focus, backed by an aggressive onslaught of a no holds barred attack, will serve them well. An attack that will evoke Apples typically paranoid response, followed by more acrimonious vitriol.

It's discouraging that Apple felt so weak and vulnerable that they were compelled to start this war. In addition their arrogance may have clouded their vision, blocking them from seeing & realizing just how formidable of an adversary they are attacking.

Despite Apples wild success, superior products, and loyal customer base, the poor egomaniacal company, flush with obscene amounts of cash & revenue, it still was not enough to satisfy their extreme greed.

This is one war that hurts everyone, all because of Apples insatiable need to kneecap their competitors, instead of competing fair & square on a level playing field.

Great sarcasm.
 
Apples insatiable need to kneecap their competitors, instead of competing fair & square on a level playing field.

How is Samsung's cloning of an Apple product "fair & square"? Setting and maintaining precedent that copying intellectual property of another company is fraught with expenses and hurdles, is Apple's smart message here. And it is a long term strategy that pays off. The regular consumer does not read MRs, so are unaware of Apple's blocking of Samsung's copy-pad. What the majority of consumers see in Samsung is an inconsistent product launch, with regional delays and missed schedules. Consumer confusion and doubt in Samsung's product is a smart strategy by Apple, and fair payback for Samsung's uncreative and unoriginal shortcut into a market developed by Apple.
 
I played around w/ a Samsung tablet at best buy; I don't remember which model exactly. Man, that thing was choppy when flipping thru apps. Didn't spend too much time on it but it didn't seem refined. :rolleyes:
 

Are these advertisements or recaps of an Appel event? Are you really unable to tell the difference? Really?

----------

This is not about a specific product within Samsungs vast portfolio of products, but rather this is a sign of Samsungs decision to fight fire with fire.

Going after Apple with a laser like focus, backed by an aggressive onslaught of a no holds barred attack, will serve them well. An attack that will evoke Apples typically paranoid response, followed by more acrimonious vitriol.

It's discouraging that Apple felt so weak and vulnerable that they were compelled to start this war. In addition their arrogance may have clouded their vision, blocking them from seeing & realizing just how formidable of an adversary they are attacking.

Despite Apples wild success, superior products, and loyal customer base, the poor egomaniacal company, flush with obscene amounts of cash & revenue, it still was not enough to satisfy their extreme greed.

This is one war that hurts everyone, all because of Apples insatiable need to kneecap their competitors, instead of competing fair & square on a level playing field.

So the fact that Samsung, et al have decided to copy rather than invent escapes your memory and in your mind is fair?
 
How is Samsung's cloning of an Apple product "fair & square"?

Offering Jony Ive twice the salary and share options that he makes at Apple and let him design the next Samsung tablets and phones, that would be competing fair and square. Finding a designer of similar or even higher talent, that would be competing fair and square. Copying what he produced, that isn't competing "fair and square".
 
How is Samsung's cloning of an Apple product "fair & square"? Setting and maintaining precedent that copying intellectual property of another company is fraught with expenses and hurdles, is Apple's smart message here. And it is a long term strategy that pays off. The regular consumer does not read MRs, so are unaware of Apple's blocking of Samsung's copy-pad.

people here still think that making a rectangular tablet with a screen that is of a different aspect ratio and dimensions with a different os and camera and speaker layout is a straight copy of the ipad huh?
 
Please explain to me how that Samsung print add attacked users?

Apple mocked an enormous user base buy portraying PC(Windows) users as nerdy bufoons while mac users were smooth talking hipsters...


This is utter nonsense. The ads were pure anthropomorphism, and VERY light handed.

Quick evidence gathered from watching the ads:

* Human beings don't have a power cord to trip over
* Human beings don't need ram upgrades to run vista
* HUMAN BEINGS DON'T CRASH AND STOP TALKING SUDDENLY WHILE THEY REBOOT.

If you feel the ads IMPLIED that PC users were bufoons, well, you may be kind of sensitive in that area.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.