41–50 of 65 posts
It's nonsensical, unfunny, and just lame. Sorry Microsoft, but you will never be able to catch up with Apple culturally.
for those that didn't get it: the ad shows a normal conversation between two people. it wants to show that pcs are for normal people. this is achieved because it makes you think: hey look here are two famous people discussing something normal... that's the thought that runs in your subconsious and thats what microsoft wants, where instead the message of Apple ads is hey "we use mac, we are better than you" bullshit..…
Spending $300m on an ad campaign to inspire consumers to reconnect with Microsoft not only feels desperate, but seems such a waste when it could have been channeled into making better products or hiring better hackers.
With the cash they have on hand, I have never understood why they aren't doing more parallel development in smaller groups to let the good ideas happen organically. They continue to try to fit every new product into the existing Microsoft ecosystem -- something that is beginning to fail.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you have to explain an ad then it has failed.
An ad that people talk about cannot have failed. Whether that talking is explaining or not doesn't matter.
But do people buy the product? Does the ad reposition the brand or company?? It is certainly possible that this advertisement does either or both of these things, but simply generating buzz in and of itself is not a valuable use of an advertising budget.
Now that I think about it, compare and contrast this to the famous 1984 ad. I love it, it's great theatre. It made everybody talk about Macintosh--because it mentioned the brand. It positioned the brand as being against IBM and corporate computing.
This ad is empty calories, buzz without direction.
Think about this: if all they wanted was this level of buzz, they could have put out a press release indicating they were buying Yahoo. Same buzz, doesn't cost M$300.
i liked it. it reminded me of the way william shatner has reinvented himself by hamming up his old cliche. he is now way more interesting. if bill gates could PR himself the role of 'PC genius doofus dropped back into normal world' with the help of some off the wall humour of JS - i think this could be a really interesting ad-war.
I'll await further installments with interest. Maybe someone a bit more young and trendy could be be picked to play alongside the Gates / Hodgeman PC-analog...
for those that didn't get it: the ad shows a normal conversation between two people. it wants to show that pcs are for normal people. this is achieved because it makes you think: hey look here are two famous people discussing something normal... that's the thought that runs in your subconsious and thats what microsoft wants, where instead the message of Apple ads is hey "we use mac, we are better than you" bullshit..…
If you have to explain an ad then it has failed.
BTW I'm not sticking up for the ad. I doesn't do anything for me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An ad that people talk about cannot have failed. Whether that talking is explaining or not doesn't matter.
David Ogilvy, in his seminal "Ogilvy on Advertising," describes the paradox of the "Gorilla in a Jock Strap." He explains that if what you want is buzz and recall, you simply show something outrageous, and people remember the ad. Put the company's logo on the jock strap, and people remember the brand. But do people buy the product? Does the ad reposition the brand or company?? It is certainly possible that this adver…
Spending $300m on an ad campaign to inspire consumers to reconnect with Microsoft not only feels desperate, but seems such a waste when it could have been channeled into making better products or hiring better hackers.