"in a reported US$300 ad campaign to counter the extremely successful "Get a Mac" ads from Apple."

They probably should have spent more on the ads.

John I know you meant to write millions not hundreds of dollars.

$300 was all Seinfeld was worth...

The "I'm a PC" ads are derivative and defensive. That's not the way to run a campaign. Find some interesting people who use Vista in a creative way. Edit out the sweary bits when the BSOD appears. "No, wait, it doesn't do this normally. Hang on a second while I unplug the peripherals and reboot. Where's the CD drive?"

The Seinfeld/Gates ads were cringeworthy. Two old guys wandering around talking about nothing? It could have been an ad for Depends or Cialis or a drug for Alzheimers for all anybody knew.

You get what you pay for!

I didn't think the Seinfeld ads were cringe-worthy, I simply didn't think about them much at all. The word milquetoast comes to mind.

The most recent ads at least have me watching for something, anything, that sparks my interest. I find them mildly interesting, and I don't think the concept is at all horrible or terribly defensive. It seems reasonable to portray ordinary people as PC users. After all, ordinary people from all walks of life ARE PC users, but there is really nothing new here to really chew on.

The best investment Microsoft can make with the ad money is copying Apple's commitment to ensuring a high quality user experience for their products. Word of mouth advertising about satisfaction with their products will do more to improve their brand than any amount of print or TV advertising ever will.

@ Sir Harry,
He did actually reference Millions. Notice the "M" after the $300.

Quote

rpaege wrote:
After all, ordinary people from all walks of life ARE PC users, but there is really nothing new here to really chew on.

Quote

rpaege wrote:
I didn't think the Seinfeld ads were cringe-worthy, I simply didn't think about them much at all. The word milquetoast comes to mind.

The most recent ads at least have me watching for something, anything, that sparks my interest. I find them mildly interesting, and I don't think the concept is at all horrible or terribly defensive. It seems reasonable to portray ordinary people as PC users. After all, ordinary people from all walks of life ARE PC users, but there is really nothing new here to really chew on.

Quote

rpaege wrote:
I didn't think the Seinfeld ads were cringe-worthy, I simply didn't think about them much at all. The word milquetoast comes to mind.

anthropomorphize:
to attribute human form or personality to things not human
(Source: Merriam-Webster dictionary)
IMHO, an appropriate use.

Don't anthropomorphize computers, they hate that!

(from someone's .sig)

<dyslexics untie!>

Apple did a "Get a Mac" add in 2006 called Touche that states Mac is a PC too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQh5Cx-EuV8

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xz5cz_renduquicktimeleger_tech

I like Crispin-Porter+Bogusky's work a lot (The new VW ads, Burger King, etc.) - They have an absurdist bent that I appreciate. However, IMHO, they are committing 3 huge sins. Granted, CPB is an all-mac shop, so maybe they are subconsciously injecting the campaign with suck. Anyway:

1) They are effectively letting Apple dictate the terms of the discussion. The ad's feel defensive, me-tooish, and passive/aggressive. I'd also be willing to be that, ironically, Apple's portrayal of PC-guy is LIKED MORE than Mac-guy. Thats all been hashed through before.

This is especially egregious given MS has a reputation of 'copying' Apple.

2) They don't SAY anything. While some of the Apple ads are jokes / brand exercises, the majority are focused - and this is important - on something you DO with your computer. Not a program, OS, or widget. Which leads to...

3) The biggie, as I see it. They are literally taking things personally. To me, the dynamic is very clear - the Apple ads are anthropomorphizing the machines. The MSFT ads act like they are, but in reality, every one of those varied people are REALLY saying "I USE A PC"

The Apple ads don't say PC users are nerdy/dumb. They say "hey, we're sorry your computer sucks. theres a better way." All the abuse is heaped on the machine, none on the user.

Whereas, by making it personal, the PC ads become immediately divisive. Freedom vs. fascism. Iconoclasts vs. orthodoxy. US vs THEM.

Granted, it's open to interpretation, but I think the big thing that points to the statements being personal and not just anthropomorphizing, is, as of yet, we haven't seen ANY discussion of machine capabilities, performance, etc.

I could be proved wrong if the campaign develops to them saying "HI IM A PC AND I SELL FISH AND I HAVE GREAT ANTI VIRUS PROTECTION." But just follow that train of thought and it becomes clear pretty quickly it isn't compelling.

No, these ads ARE about people. If they develop the theme, we'll see long form ads of people talking about how their PC helps them do their interesting job.

That is a discussion Microsoft really should be wary of. It will immediatly invite people to think of their jobs (good or bad), how they interact with their PC's, and what people they know that have "cool" jobs, and how THEY feel.

I'll bet significantly more cool-job folks are on Macs (in creative fields) or Unix variants in the sciences.




Anyway, thats my long-winded take on it. As much as I snicker at Mojave, its a much better campaign to help stop the bleeding.

In any event, MSFT's problems arent solvable by ad agencies. The product just plain isn't compelling. They need to spend 2 to 3 years doing a head-to-to corporate rebranding, reworking of all product functionality and UI, and really define themselves in an authentic way, THEN go spend big bucks on slick ad men.