SuperSite Blog

For most of us, this was obvious.

Maybe some of the boneheads we've seen comment on the first ad will see this memo and get it too.

Not likely, but maybe.

"The bad guys have owned this conversation for too long"

Has this what it's come to? "good guys" and "bad guys"?

Good grief, Paul, we're not talking life and death issues here. Or even the merits of a really good French Bordeaux versus a fine Argentinian Malbec. ;-)

It's a platform, not a religion.

lotsa

You got it wrong, it isn't the platform that's "good guys vs bad guys".

What's good guys vs bad guys is "life can be better, here's how" vs "If you don't do exactly what we say it proves you [are a loser|are immoral|deserve to suffer] and we'll take joy in your misery" as cultural memes.

Whether it's in selling software or politics or overall societal tone, those two competing ideals have run in this culture lately; hopeful growth or feared condemnation.

Is this ad campaign a big part? No. Of course it's only a trival example. But the divide is there.

And which meme you think of as good and which as bad is for you to decide.

"I'm glad Microsoft is finally telling its own story. The bad guys have owned this conversation for too long."

Illegal monopoly. Restraint of trade. Bundling products to stifle competition. Fined billions of dollars by the EU.

Who's supposed to be the "bad guys" here?

Or, to bring it back to simple advertising themes, its:

"Buy our wine and your party will be more fun"

versus

"Wear any jeans but ours to the party and people will be laughing at you behind your back"

Pingback from  Forget Seinfeld. Can Windows gurus help the Windows brand? | All about Microsoft | ZDNet.com

Yuppers. Its a CAMPAIGN not just a commercial. I think the intelligence we got told us that, but the iCabal can't get that through their skulls.

Mojave was to prove that Microsoft needed the campaign (it did). This campaign is to fix the problem.

And trust me, it's a marketing problem whenever you have two outcomes panned at you by the "Tech Press" one being, you suck and will go bankrupt, and the other being you copied someone else; even when its not true.

So we can debate Microsoft endlessly, I guess, but if you're not aware they're a different company now, you're not paying attention.

I would put things a bit differently:

Apple: Windows sucks, and we're cool. (Barely mentions own product. But remember, Windows sucks. Look at the buffoon! He uses Windows.)

Microsoft: Windows does what you want it to do. Here's how.

It's the difference between smugness and humility, really.

yert, the iCabal descends on every little tidbit they can, blows it out of proportion, and makes a mess of it. It's like politics and religion for them. That's why what Microsoft is doing is important. 1 billion people use Windows. Not 25 million of the "best" people.

http://msw as a way to hide YouTube, indeed. ;-)  Why burden our servers when we can burden Google's (free)?

Looks good.  The campaign can't hurt and will very likely help.  If it does, it will be $300 million of petty cash well spent.

johnbaxter

http://msw is an intranet site at Microsoft. Remember the mail was meant for Microsoft employees and the link to msw was so they could watch it at work.

johnbaxter

Paul (but possibly some web person with Penton - but probably Paul) changed the otherwise unreachable msw intranet link tied to the external link for this blog post.

johnbaxter: that is correct. You can't hit http://msw externally, so rather than explain it, I linked to the one you can hit.

>>what Windows uniquely makes possible<<

I look forward, as a consumer,  to learning what I can do with Windows that I can't get done any other way.

<<The bad guys have owned this conversation for too long.>>

Wow.

Good guys?  Bad guys? Really?  Sheesh.

"life can be better, here's how" - The irony is that this is exactly the message of Apple's Get a Mac ads.  Exactly.  you may not like how the deliver that message, or whose ox is gored in the delivery, but that's the message.  All the rest is inference, and interpretation. Believe it or not, others may view it differently.

I actually like the Shoe store ad.  I think it's a perfectly good opening paragraph in a story that will obviously play out over months or years.  It aims to leave you with a warm fuzzy about billg, and by association, Microsoft, and I think it achieves that aim.  It'll be interesting to see what follows.

Microsoft's real issue in trying to mount a big campaign like this is that 95% of computer users already use their product.  So what is the message?  That message needs to be very carefully crafted to avoid coming off as either strident on the one hand, or irrelevant on the other.

The message that "Windows enables a billion people around the globe to do more with their lives today" is okay, but it lacks context.  More than what?  More then a Mac?  More than someone without a computer? The success of the campaign will ultimately depend on how well they refine and articulate that message.

Anyway, I'm heading down to Shoe Circus.  Those Conquistadors looked sweet.

Why not tell the story of Windows? The story about a Harvard dropout who steals the PC industry from the big whigs like IBM, HP, and Apple? How one of the greatest fortunes in modern history happened? How Gates legally obtained the rights to the OS right under Apple's nose(Thanks again, John Sculley!)? How Microsoft made computing affordable and accessable for the average Joe? How the PC revolution powered by Windows powered the digital revolution? How millions of Windows machines brought the internet to the masses? How Bill Gates saved Apple from death and help usher Apple's rebound? How Windows influence changes in every Linux variant?

Keep in mind that without Microsoft and the success of Windows, Apple wouldn't be here today. I think every Mac user should be greatful for what Bill Gates did. He could have let Steve Jobs and Apple rot. Apple could have become some subsidary of many companies and faded into PC history.

Bill Gates saw something good and wonderful in both Steve Jobs and Apple. He reached deep into his pockets and saved Apple from death. Without that $150 Million dollars to save Apple, Jobs would not have turned Apple around. Yet Windows users are still ridiculed by Mac users. What ingratitude and hubris.

So tell the story. Just don't forget to mention Macworld 1997 and all the details of Steve Jobs keynote address when you tell the story.

And I bet I'll be attacked once again for this point.

Paul

"the iCabal descends on every little tidbit they can, blows it out of proportion, and makes a mess of it. It's like politics and religion for them. "

That's an inherent result of negative selling. You have to have something to keep the percieved negative of not buying the product/candidate/policy going.

With a positive ad model, you either have to deliver or you lose customer confidence.

With a negative, fear based marketing model you have to keep the perception of threat alive. If the threat you're "saving" the customer from is real, you're all set. If it isn't or is vastly overblown the job is trickier.

Say it's "buy our product or elephants will trample your yard" (assuming you don't really have a problem with rampaging elephants in your neighborhood)

For a while, the advertiser can answer the claim of "but my neighbor bought the competitor's product and his yard looks fine" with "sure, it looks fine now but those elephants are lurking"

Eventually, though, you need to start changing perception of reality to produce the threat with things like "hey, I heard a guy in the next neighborhood had his yard trampled" or "Coming up at 11, Are your kids safe from rampaging elephants?" or "almost every Windows machine is infested with tons of viruses" or "the terrorist threat level is orange"

The "Get a Mac" ads are designed to keep that perception of the threat visible.

Where it translates to the user and turns rational, if fearful, people into members of the iCabal is when they suspect they've been conned and that the fear that drove their decisions wasn't real. At that point, some will admit they were taken in and some will defend the reality of the fear to justify their decision.

If the fear based marketer did their job well, the second group will launch such a loud defense of the fear that the marketer's job of maintaining the fear level is pretty much done for them with only minor reinforcement.

"With a negative, fear based marketing model you have to keep the perception of threat alive. "

It's worked for the Republicans...

;-)

Paul: You're somewhat right, of course, regarding Apple's advertising, but you need to clarify a bit: You're only talking about Apple's ads for the Mac. You're completely leaving out Apple's iPhone ads, which never mention the competition, show off the product, and show you exactly what they can do. iPod ads never mention the competition (not that there really is any) either.

There are more than a few Apple enthusiasts that wish the Mac ads did the same.

Look guys, I see that windows alternatives advocates are blinded in some way but their own abstract idea of "what it has to be" but they constatly forget what IT IS.

The reality IS that a so widespread Windows has changed the way we work and gave us, in 15 years, many instruments to do our jobs better.

It's a a reality that enterprises, labs, science researchers do use Windows for their jobs.

Microsoft did really, in my storu which is similar to millions of common people, get me closer to the world of computers and really got me going to find my pathway in my jobs a lil faster.

If it was not MS it would have been someone else. Surely not Apple which has always been looking like "cool machine for cool people".

But common people makes the difference.

Underestimating ot not realizing this, is a big error.

Microsoft now has become finally a company aware of the complexity of what a computerized world is.

But you still don't get it. You still are strangleholded at 1995, at the horrible behaviour of MS vs Netscape and things like that (for example the BSD avatar, provocative but incredibly not nowadays).

You are so busy complaining by looking in the past that you don't see real bad behaviours of today's giants - "ads by google" everywhere, huh?.

So, complaining about MS it's soooooo easy.

Trying to see things in a more complete perspective is, on the contrary, "unappealing" od hard at least for the most of "Ms alternative advocates".

And, Ocean, your sentence can be sended back to you by reverse: "what can I do with others that i've not been doing perfectly on windows?"

Or do you really believe I can design an A380 or a B777 on Linux or on Mac? Then I go home and I use my pc which has the same os which let me do entertainment as a home user. Don't you see that?

When MS did SP1 for Vista was not forced by any law to adapt its beautiful search indexing and routines to the absurd and childish complain google did.

But they did it the same. Just this is an example of how things are different now.

Men, take out your blankets, take a deep breethe and then see things in a more complete fashion.

It's good, you know?

"The bad guys have owned this conversation for too long"

I've heard these type of phrase ... where ... ??? Ohh yeah reminds me of the RNC speeches !!!!

For someone supposedly literate and keen on computers and who travels and lot, that's a disappointing statement...

"will always be marked by humor and humanity"

Good to see that my post in the last thread was totally in line with what their creative objectives are.  It's nice when you aren't revealed to be talking out of your ass in your area of expertise.

@Dave,

100% agree with your criticism of Paul's bizarre moralist framing.  "The Bad Guys"?  Are you kidding me?  The convicted monopoly with 95% marketshare is "the good guys" and the loud but little competitor with 3 to 4% marketshare is "the bad guys".  Just one more ding in Paul's credibility as someone with reason and rational discourse.  

Knock it off, Paul.  None of these people in either organization are "bad guys".  Gates has been known to be just as abusive and belligerent as Jobs.  Both are visionaries that helped popularize technology and improve our lives.  Both platforms have hateful fanboys that spew garbage on the internet.

Grow up.

pthurrott wrote:

"I'm glad Microsoft is finally telling its own story. The bad guys have owned this conversation for too long".

And there it is ladies and gentlemen. Paul whatever possessed you to type that I'll never know.

For a long time  was willing to believe there might be at least some of the no-partial nature that you have shown from time to time. I was alt least willing to try and see that you might have valid points. But no more; with 19 words you have simply outdone almost everyone this side of Rob Enderle.

Dave- add me to, to the disappointed group on that one.... wow. I'm still shaking my head at this one.

@Dude,

Totally agree.  The more I think about that... the more ridiculous it feels.  Maybe Microsoft considers it's competitors "the bad guys", which is fine.  Competitive spirit is the heart of progress and achievement.  But for Paul to lay his deep bias against Apple bare in such a moralistic way is the ultimate reveal.  Paul really thinks this, clearly.  He thinks Apple is "the bad guys" because the attack Microsoft and use hyperbole and have a CEO that's said to be hard and tyrannical.

Paul, is biased to the point of lunacy at the point.  Why else would he ding the iPhone so intensely for lacking Vista Calendar support when few other phones do (if any) and Windows Mobile's very support for sync is mixed and broken.

Paul is in the tank.  I honestly respect mr. Galos far more than Paul at this point.  At least he worked at Microsoft.

"I've heard these type of phrase ... where ... ??? Ohh yeah reminds me of the RNC speeches !!!!"

Guess where people got "WinJihadist" from. Any guesses?

" The convicted monopoly with 95% marketshare is "the good guys" and the loud but little competitor with 3 to 4% marketshare is "the bad guys". "

Firstly, those terms are relative and depend on the context in which they're being used. It's easy for you to dismiss a "convicted monopolist" as being the bad guy and that's what a lot of people do. Secondly, "bad guys" does not necessarily refer to Apple here.

Stop being so obsessed with Apple. It seems like you guys search for the word "Apple" in Paul's posts and bash him every time the word comes up. Otherwise, you try to find hidden meanings in his sentences. The world does not revolve around Apple and neither does this blog. I didn't hear any of you complaining when Paul had 5 or six posts in a row about Google.

Are you people serious? Dear lord... You take one little light hearted statement (as I saw it) dead serious and then begin to attack a man's moral character?? I took his comment to be nothing more than a light hearted jab, a joke, at Apple and all of it's die hard followers who love nothing more than to call Microsoft, and Windows, everything under the sun every chance they get.

And who, btw, have called Microsoft FAR worse and yet easily get away with it (and they are actually dead serious when they say it).

PS. Stop injecting your own political views into these comments. It only emphasizes how predisposed you are to hardline thought and an inability to see the whole picture, even when it doesn't fit into your own little world view.

How are you all so sure who Paul meant by the "bad guys"?

Paul, maybe you should comment on that...are you talking about the company, Apple...the CEO or said company, or the bloggers that you have referred to as the iCabal over the past several months?

As for the speakers at the RNC going on the offensive against the big 3 networks and CNN...its about time. Did nobody else notice the way that most of the anchors were gushing over Obama, and the yway that they used sexist generalizations against Palin? I mean, come on...did they ask JFK if he could raise his young kids while serving as a great president? And who cares if Palin used a speech writer? Is that the best hit that they could take at her after her rousing speech Wednesday night? Does Obama write all of his own words? I don't think so. And yes...I'm a Republican.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled program...

--tayme

Shark- Then "bad guys" refers to... the Linux world"? Last time I checked the major or minor distros for that matter weren't advertising on TV to the point that the "good guys" felt they had to counter the "bad guys"....

"The world does not revolve around Apple and neither does this blog."

Correct on the first point; jury's still out on the second.  ;-)

OT

@tayme: "Did nobody else notice the way that most of the anchors were gushing over Obama"

Kind of like the way they spewed their seed for McNasty last night. I was watching PBS, and I thought Jim Lehrer was going to need a towel. It got so bad, I turned over to MSNBC, hoping Olberman would shed some balance, but all they were talking about were the balloons that got in the way of Andrea Mitchell's reporting.

It was a McNasty/Caribou Barbie lovefest everywhere you turned. Gushing is not limited to Obama.

@Sharky

Umm... what?  Paul called Apple "the bad guys".  I didn't.  I certainly didn't call Microsoft "the bad guys".  

And, yeah, Paul is referring to Apple here, and the media he feels in the talk for Apple like Mossberg and his "iCabal".  Obviously.  Have some intellectual honesty people.  Paul's and everyone else including Microsoft has been setting this campaign up as an answer to Apple.

@Brafu

As for us "taking this serious", I expected this kind of non-defense.  I don't take anything of this site as seriously as I do something that's actually important, like our economy or our military or my family.  But why can't we express disappointment at blatant hypocrisy from someone that claims to be evenhanded.  Someone that has called out his colleagues for bias.  Give me a break.

Oh, and Tayme... right there with you buddy on the disgusting, sexist attacks on Palin.  "How will she be a good mother and be VP?"  Yeah.  That's "progressive".  I don't agree with everything she does... but she is to the GOP what Obama was to the Dems when he emerged at their convention a few (short) years ago.  

Bias sucks.  That's the point.  It's partisan hackery and has no value.

Oh... and I should re-iterate that I like these new ads from Microsoft.  They're exactly what they want them to be.  Humanizing.

"Nobody roots for Goliath."  - Wilt Chamberlain.

"Caribou Barbie"? Just because she's a good looking woman? Wow! Talk about sexism.

"Umm... what?  Paul called Apple "the bad guys".  I didn't.  I certainly didn't call Microsoft "the bad guys".  "

No. Paul didn't call Apple "the bad guys". Paul talked about the bad guys. For all you know, he could be talking about Al Qaeda here. And I think it would be safe to assume Al Qaeda doesn't like Microsoft.

" Paul's and everyone else including Microsoft has been setting this campaign up as an answer to Apple."

No. It was an attempt to improve the public perception of Windows. Mac ads, reviews, bad drivers, cheap hardware have all contributed to Vista's negative perception. You're giving Apple too much credit here.

On topic: great ad! I can't hardly wait for the follow-up!

@johnpapola

"As for us "taking this serious", I expected this kind of non-defense."

Care to explain this comment a bit more? I was simply pointing out that the remarks aimed towards Paul were by and large out of all proportion to what the comment might have deserved if one was truely trying to be unbiased and simply wanting to ask for clarification.

"But why can't we express disappointment at blatant hypocrisy from someone that claims to be evenhanded."

People are free to voice their opinions and any disappointments they may have over a comment, but the response Paul got was, IMO, way out of proportion to what he said. IMO, it reeks of past judgment (by a few people) and desire to take any little remark and twist it to serve their own ends (whatever those ends maybe).

I thinking Goodwin's Law is on need of an Addedum to cover Al Qaeda.

OT: McCain hit the name on the head last night: "despite our differences much more unites us then divides us".

Food for thought in this debate.

Braj-

Well.

Not unexpectedly, the guys most offended by this stuff--you know, the guys who routinely root for the Apple squad--take some sort of offense at all this.

Don't be silly.

Yeah, I think Apple is "bad" in many ways. I've often said the same of Microsoft. I do believe Microsoft has turned a big corner, but if you look at the Jobs era of Apple, you see great products, sure, but served with a heaping mountain of scorn for anyone who doesn't agree with them 100%. They're not perfect. And their ads are deceptive. Yeah, I know. Sorry. I have an opinion.

Anyhoo. You can get silly about this all you want. But the humanizing of Microsoft is a long time coming. It's OK to want them to tell the story better. And it's OK to at least respect your opponent. It's not OK to lie. And to denigrate people you don't agree with. If you want to call someone on their hypocrisy, go nuts. If you're just being a jerk, spare me. It's getting old.

Speaking of which...

Ocean  said: "Wow."

Wow indeed.

shark, I *was* talking about Apple. And their most mindless fans, the iCabal. They're bad people. They're people who lie and lie and lie, and the fanatics just suck it up (cheer them on even) and put up with problems that would never be acceptable on the Windows side. And then they make fun of their competitors on that Windows side, all while their own OSes are being patched regularly to fix a cavalcade of problems and their cell phones can't even make calls. And god help you if you actually disagree with anything they say. That's when the whining really starts.

Bad guys? Yeah. They're bad guys.

That said, good products often come out of this kind of genius. But so does hubris and arrogance. It's a bit much sometimes. More than a bit, really. But it's the mixed bag you get with Apple.

With Microsoft, it's conservative, slow and often boring. Apple is never boring. I'll give them that.