SuperSite Blog

I thought this advert was just brilliant. (As a Mac and Windows user.)

It's a very positive campaign which doesn't come across as yet as snarky, negative or pompous. The Get a Mac ads just look somewhat immature in comparison.

It was also very funny. In trying to 'soften' up the perception of Microsoft and giving it a personable side, I like these ads so far.

And I think the girls hiding the giraffe, a metaphor for Apple setting up Microsoft? Who knows. All I know is I can't wait for the next ad and hope Apple will take something from this rather than its rather tired jabbing in the Get a Mac campaign.

"This second one is just excellent. You have to be a special sort of curmudgeon not to see that."

Sure, Paul. Whatever you say. I guess if I disagree, I'm one of the "bad" ones.

Wow.  Just not feeling the purpose of these ads.  I found the giraffe bit amusing, but I really don't think Microsoft hit the mark with this ad strategy.  

I showed a couple of non techie friends the ads, and they didn't see the point, or understand what Microsoft was trying to achieve.  I suspect that is the common view outside of tech circles.

To Microsoft's credit though, they certainly have generated some publicity and "cooler talk" among tech folk.

Most I've talked to feel the ads show how out of touch the company has become though.

(Still laughing my ass off as I write this.)

Now that was insanely hilarious! That was quite literally the funniest commercial I've seen all year! Gates and Seinfeld are the new comedic duo! I got more out of that commerical than the silly, I'm a Mac, I'm a PC commercial. So many different levels as you go through it.

I guess you have to Think Differently when you view the commericial.

This was funny. I think the point of these ads is that there is no point. It was just a teaser, like the first ad. Good job!

I'm sure the ad agency are laughing anyway.

I thought it was funny as heck, mostly because of the situation with two wealthy guys with this average family and their everyday problems.  While really funny, I did not really see anything that made me feel one way or the other about Microsoft, or Vista on anything even related to technology other than the small part when the kid was playing a game on his PC.

I sure hope they are able to deliver on this buildup everyone is talking about, or the ad campaign will be a flop.

I don't watch much TV so the chance of me seeing this ever is slim to none.  Did this almost 5min commercial really run its full length?  I thought long commercials were a bad thing, people loose interest or whatever?

From the way the ads end, it's clear they're just teasers. I don't know how most people don't see that. I will say this: A certain percentage of the people who dislike the ad, would've disliked it no matter what.

What do I know, though. I come from a family of j@k a$$es according to bettieblu here.

I thought it was good.  For those that don't think it talks about Vista, well, you are right.  But it does talk about MS in general, just not directly.  The 1 billion reference thrown in there and the bit about PC standing for perpetually connected.  It does tie in the "big, bad, evil" guy just hanging with regular people, which is all about the softening of the image.

shark, you are right in your assessment.  Some will dislike it no matter what, and MS knows that.  What I find weird is that many say that they should have attacked Apple head on.  Does anyone feel that would have been a good idea?  Of course, they would have been blasted for doing that, probably by those same people that say they should be making attack ads.

Now watch for the false outrage about the iCabal term from John in 3...2...1

I don't see how anyone could be missing the point of these. They aren't trying to sell you a product or service with these ads, but rather improve your views of MS. You get to see a nice little skit and then associate it with MS at the end. Even if  you don't realize it yet, that is improving your image of MS.

Major Apple Supporter & Marketing Specialist:

The ads are excellent.  They're putting a positive face on Microsoft that is more approachable and less cold/sterile.  At the same time, they render the Apple ads ineffective, and seemingly "aggressive" relative to how they seemed before.

I think depending on  how the next ads develop, this could be a very successful campaign.  If for no other reason, it will get Apple to stop their current very highly successful campaign.

I don't care what anybody says about Jerry, I love that guy!

I think so far they are pretty funny.  In a way, it's like a mini-episode of Seinfeld with each one.  Mostly whacky stuff designed to soften the perception of a perceived large, evil empire.  You can tell that Jerry has had a lot of input I think into the way this story is being told.  The dialogue is too whitty to be otherwise.  Bill's no Kramer, but it's still funny!

As for attacking Apple directly, any first year business marketing major knows that if you are the market leaders, you NEVER MENTION the lesser guy.  It makes you look stupid, and it gives them even more credibility.  When you own 90% of the market you live and die on your own merit, not cause you can talk smack about a much smaller compeitor.

When was the last time you heard Intel talk about AMD in a commercial?  It's just not done that way.

Dipsh

"[...] many say that they should have attacked Apple head on."

Consider the year...

Leopard install problems

SnowLeopard announced as just a bug fix

The MobileMe disaster including losing user data

The huge problems with iPhone 3G

iPhone 2.01 not fixing the problems

iPhone 2.02 not fixing the problems

The "F'ing NDA" embarassment for developers

The arbitrary rules on which apps will be distributed insult to their developer partners

The "we'll get your bug fix out eventually, stop asking" insult to their developer partners

The "no way to distribute demos" insult to their developer partners

"Safari's an update to QuickTime"

"MobileMe's an update to QuickTime"

Throw out all your nano accessories because we were just kidding about the "fat nano" form factor

Throw out your nano because we're now nano-chromatic

The "$20 license fee on a $5 cable" lock in scandal

The whole iTunes 8 fiasco that we're still seeing

It's probably fair to say that Apple's been doing a good enough job of "attacking Apple head on".

"What I find weird is that many say that they should have attacked Apple head on.  Does anyone feel that would have been a good idea?"

No. Please, no. Thank God they didn't and I hope they continue that. You're right. They'll be blasted for it. And I don't think negative ads will work for MS the way they did for Apple.

I am glad Apple is not mentioned or attacked. Because for me personally, the Apple commercials look tacky and childish (yet still funny). This most recent commercial appeals to the entire family and to me makes MS seem like a company for the whole family.

As for the teaser at the end, "perpetually connected", it really got me excited about Live Mesh and how all of these products (OS, Home Server, Media Center and Extenders, Windows Mobile) will all be able to talk to each other.

I liked the first one.

That 2nd one was hilarious.

Gates doing the robot sealed it

"power down" - I'm still sweating from laughing at that.

The tagline at the end DID tie it together brilliantly.

@shark do you some narcissistic urge to argue with people?  Why start cr@p already?  To clarify something from a few days ago, I asked if it ran in your family, not that your family actually was.  I also asked if it was just having your panties in a knot.  Clearly its one of the other, since you must continue down this path.  All of which started when you said that my socialist friends would like my post.  

Again if you cant take it, dont start it.  Or better yet grow up.

I see that ads as teasers, they are funny.  They are building to something better/ a real point that hopefully they can deliver on.  

Delivering = Average User gets it and gets it with out much effort.  We can as IT/Geeks post analyze this all day long and try to infer what we think they are trying to convey, which is all fine and dandy.  The "Average User" will give it 5 seconds of thought all focused on what are they trying to say.  If it takes 6 seconds forget it the message is lost.  Like them or not (I dont care for them) the Apple adds, in each add have a simple quick message that the Average User gets in that 5 second period.

I thought this one was hilarious and it does give you an overall "good feeling" about Windows.

Still, my contention is that it doesn't combat Apple's ads. Each Apple ad has a take-away value. Each one is focused on something: PCs have viruses, Vista doesn't work, Mac is better for college students, etc. They leave the average consumer believing that point may be true.

These new Windows ads do nothing to combat that propoganda. People will think they're funny, maybe more "in touch" with the average Joe than they originally thought, but a Mac is still cooler, still doesn't have the "problems that plague the PC." This is what I always hear even though I don't believe it's true.

Only time will tell if this works, but I really don't think they're on the right track.

"To clarify something from a few days ago, I asked if it ran in your family, not that your family actually was."

OK. Does stupidity run in your family? Idiocy? Lunacy? What about retardation?

That's not offensive? All of those things mean that in addition to you, some of your family members may be one of those things? So, stop giving me this crap about me having to grow up. As if it's not bad enough to insult people when you disagree with them, you insult their family too. Here's a thought. Instead of me having to "grow up", why don't you actually learn to speak/write English so that you at least understand the meaning of the words that you write.

And before you go on another offensive, I didn't mean any of these things. I was only trying to prove a point. All right. That's it from me on this topic. I expected an apology from you and now I know instead of apologizing, you're only attacking me further.

I apologize to everyone for my rant. Hope this post doesn't get locked because of that.

I saw Jobs on a CNBC interview, I guess after the iPod event.  

The interviewer asked him what he thought about this new add campaign and if it was effective, he did comment either way.  He only said "I am not the one to judge these types of things"  The interviewer pressed him and said "sure you are" but he just smiled and would not comment and moved the conversation on.

"Hope this post doesn't get locked because of that."

*Thread*

Jobs behaves during interviews. He will attack the ads the next time he is on stage for a keynote in front of a fanatical user base and the fawning media.

Mike Galos -- you should write a blog.  I'd read it...

Ocean - I would too.....

I think this latest ad will make everyone want to buy Vista.

will this ad really air? it is awfully long for a commercial.

Man, the long version is 4:30. I actually like seeing Gates in these commercials...which really aren't commercials at all, at least not yet. But, do you guys think this is going to sell Vista? To nearly all viewers, these videos are a series of unconnected non sequiturs. I'm not sure who the audience is supposed to be or what they expect to accomplish with these.

As for these being "teasers" before they get to the real stuff; I'm afraid the marketers are seriously over estimating the attention span of the public (to paraphrase P.T. Barnum)

MS hired Crispin and (whatever) to do something iconic.  This has a very, very good chance of doing that.

As someone said, its a teaser that makes you look forward to whats next.  I never in a million years would have imagined Bill Gates could have done something like this.

I don't think it cancels out the Apple ads, but it does 'put a face' on MS, and a good one.  That makea Apples ad efforts a bit more difficult.  But Apple has always done well with ads, and so I look forward to 6 months to a year from now to see how they've adjusted.

OT:  I asked for a recent MS book recommendation recently.  'Breaking Windows' seems to have been highly recommended...

This is pure emotional advertising. It is designed to invoke an emotional response. The goal is that the viewer would associate the ad with an emotion. The risk is that if the ads are not funny, the brand gets tarnished in the eyes of the viewer.

So if one thinks that these ads are not specifically targeting Apple, or pointing out something specific about Windows (the user gets a take-away), maybe if you think about it from the stand point that these ads invoke an emotion, we can see that these really are having an impact.

The reason people are talking about these commercials is because they invoked an emotional response.

It seems to me that their approach is to put the viewer at ease about the brand before they start talking specifics about the product.

"I'm afraid the marketers are seriously over estimating the attention span of the public"

I could not agree more.  In our time of Tivo/DVR/PVR, commercials are viewed less and less.  When they are viewed, they need to get the message across fast.

Jerry Seinfeld. Still not funny.

Got a few laughs out of Bill Gates though.

I guess I'm a special sort of curmudgeon.

Once again, Bill's performance outshines Seinfeld.  A laughed a few times... though far too few to warrant a 4:30 minute viewing.  Best line "I got nothin...".  Bill is pretty awesome and clearly takes better direction than Seinfeld, whose performance is what it is... and got stale long ago.

If this campaign doesn't lead to some kind of brand idea, though, it will be quite a big, expensive, reel-building exercise for the director and not much else.  Clearly it's built on the premise that Gates' personal brand and the brand of the Microsoft corporation are one-and-the-same.  That sure may be true.  It's true for Jobs, obviously. I wonder though.  Much was made of the "departure" of Bill Gates from Microsoft this year.  That PR campaign undercuts this Gate-brand-is-Microsoft-brand link somewhat.  Or maybe not.  Brand isn't about what a company says or does.  

It's about what the consumer feels or thinks about when considering the company.

Seinfeld is feeling a bit washed up in these spots, I must admit.

This is pretty experimental stuff.  It's certainly open to broad range of interpretation and I think it's going to be very hard to determine the effectiveness of the campaign.  Our business has a hard enough time as it is drawing convincing cause-and-effect links between advertising and product sales or brand perception.  

If a year from now, Microsoft's brand surveys aren't any different, will this be considered a failure?  Who knows.   I strongly doubt this campaign will move more product.  I don't think that is it's intent, so that's fine.  Microsoft is moving plenty of product without any advertising.  So this is all about brand perception.

As for Paul's nutty (and oh so predictable) "iCabal" slam.. huh?  Seriously.  I put more honest thought and reflection in this post than you did into yours. This campaign doesn't (yet) have anything to do with Apple.  And if you think that something this unique and experimental doesn't have legitimate room for differing opinions and reactions, well, we already know your deal.  Anyone that doesn't see the world through Paul's eyes is a bad human being in a secret society.  Scornful, bitter and biased.  How super.

john,

Good post. Irrespective of who is at the helm, at the heart of it, Microsoft will always remain Bill Gates' company. It's probably like Lee Iacocca and Chrysler. Mary Jo Foley once commented that she hoped these ads didn't turn out to be like the "goofy" internal videos that Bill G acted in. I don't see why not. A lot of people liked those videos because they portrayed Bill as more than just a businessman. I think that's the objective with these ads too. I agree with you that this probably won't move the product, but then again, like you said, that probably is not their objective either.

I like Jerry Seinfeld and thought he was funny. I loved his act in the AMEX ad too. "That was a wicked googly!" (For those of you who've seen the ad, that wasn't actually a googly.) :-)

As far as Paul's reference to the iCabal goes, have you seen some of the comments on Gizmodo? Even the author of the post couldn't help taking a dig at Vista and remarked that the ad campaign was as bas as Windows Vista itself. The campaign doesn't have anything to do with Apple, but that doesn't stop some of the Mac fanatics from commenting on it. And, like I said earlier, a lot of people dislike this ad simply because it's a Microsoft ad.

By the way, I still don't think the term "iCabal" is as derogatory as "WinJihadist" or even "jackass".

@johnpapola:  Bravo. Well put all the way around.

The ad is great...whatever the meaning...more importantly - Good luck and Godspeed to anyone in the Galveston/Houston area this weekend. You have my thoughts and prayers for safety.

--tayme

@Shark,

Thanks on the compliment.  We are in agreement.

Here's my question for you.  This is "the supersite for windows", right?  This is the launch of a big campaign for Microsoft.  It makes no mention of Apple in it so far.

So... what does Paul have to say about this here?  "THE ICABAL IS AT IT AGAIN!!!".  As if that's news.  As if that matters. As if diehard partisans being partisan is somehow worth pointing out each and every time he posts.

As I said, he could (and should) have spent the time to, I don't know, consider the campaign.  Right? Maybe he's done that elsewhere.  If so, fine.  Link to that.

I'm not a fan of dishonesty on either side.  But Paul feigns umbrage with every damn post that's even slightly related to Apple (or not in this case).  Come on, man.  We get it.  There are some people that will slam anything Microsoft does.  There are also, obviously, plenty that do the exact same thing to Apple... and Sony, and Nintendo and every other strong branded company. The sun rises.  The sun sets.  Maybe there's blog cataloging that daily event.  It may read allot like this one regarding Apple.

Pointing this out continuously doesn't make Paul a "counterbalance" or even a critic.  It makes him obsessed.  And since he rarely points to specifically egregious commentary, his iCabal is nothing but a bigoted strawman.  A fake construct whose use has been applied so broadly by Paul (remember that Pau said anyone with .mac was in the iCabal) that it is truly bigoted.  

Paul's obviously deeply biased against Apple, it's employees and it's users and obsessed with "proving" his biases correct.  (why else would he call Apple the "bad guys" in their negotiations with NBC without knowing the details).  

Well, anyone with an opinion seeking confirmation can easily find it.  it's called the confirmation bias. Luckily, the brilliant philosopher and skeptic Karl Popper gives us (though he didn't invent it) an easy tool for tearing this approach apart.  

It's called "falsification".

Here's how it works.  Paul clearly defines the iCabal as a monocultural, sycophantic collection of drones that ask "how high" whenever Apple says "jump".  He treats the vast membership of his iCabal as if everyone in it holds the same opinion and acts in unison.  That's how he uses the term here and in every post.  That's the whole point of his rants.  He also clearly considers someone like John Gruber a key member of the iCabal.  The problem, of course, is that John Gruber is very highly critical of Apple all the time.  This single example falsifies the homogeneity of the "iCabal", rendering it a meaningly term.

Now, I'm taking things to a silly extreme in one sense, calling on philosophy and thinking and all.  But as a writer and director, I take words seriously.  I take their use seriously. We all should.  Paul certainly should as a writer.  Since the iCabal is demonstrably a bigoted strawman, it's a term worth of my scorn. I don't lose sleep over it, so don't worry.  This long post isn't proof that I need to "chill out".  I could care less.  I'm just trying to very precisely articulate why Paul's biased and bigoted rhetoric, which clearly is meant to demean the criticism of people like myself, irks me.  This is why.

Now, off to a meeting that got delayed, leaving me the time to write this silly post.  Enjoy it or not.  I'm happy either way.

Gees guys, if you want to know what Microsoft is up too and their whole basic marketing philsophy, all you had/have to do is read the Vista blog.  

Two posts about the current ad campaign by the guys running it:

1.  Seinfeld and Gates - not about Vista, but ALL Windows

windowsvistablog.com/.../what-s-up-with-those-ads.aspx

2.  Look at Vista, look to Mojave

windowsvistablog.com/.../mojave-the-experiment-continues.aspx

This ain't rocket science, and MS is getting exactly what they want, whether you like the ads or not.  If your talkin', their happy.

A post from that microsoft blog.....

"If you keep having to expain yourselves and defend  the ad's intent (which you've already had to do with the media to no end), then doesn't that tell you right there the state of things? People just aren't getting it. You are being either too clever or too esoteric.

Let me ask you this, what other ad campaign did the company have to come out and try to explain (twice now) and was successful?

The next ad better be screaming BRILLIANT that's all I can say because it's bordering on idiocy at the moment."

We shall see.

john,

I cannot speak for Paul and can only assume that he put Gruber in the "iCabal" category simply because he put Paul on his "Jackass" list. I do know that there is a vocal group of computer users out there that fits Paul's description of the iCabal. I think it's a stretch to say anyone with a .Mac address belongs to that group, but it wouldn't be an exaggeration to say that a percentage of those with a .Mac address do. (Of course, in my opinion, the iCabal is not restricted to Mac users.)

That said, I do agree that there are Windows fanatics too (or "WinJihadists" as some like to refer to them), but their number is way to small to be of any importance. The Zune is often given as an example of a product that appeals only to WinJihadists and anti-Apple fanatics. Well, I read posts on many Zune related blogs and strangely enough, most articles are not about the iPod. And the tone in the ones that do mention iPods is respectful. It's only when the "other side" makes comments like "lipstick on a pig" that it changes. As a Zune owner who actually likes it, I find such comments offensive. But, I digress.

Of course, I think it is presumptuous on my part to assume what people do and do not find offensive. I think Paul has adopted the O'Reilly/ Olbermann style of commentary that some people might find offensive, while others might cheer on. That said, a lot of people on the "other side" have been using that style of commentary for a long time when talking about Microsoft and Windows. Name calling, whether its calling someone a "jackass" or a "WinJihadist" or an "iCabalist" is probably childish. (Oh, and while I'm at it, let me add "family of j@ck a$$es" to the list.) I agree that I've been guilty of it too. But, in this age of the anonymity of the internet and provocative commentary, I think it's becoming acceptable.

bettieblu

Just to clarify, what you quoted was not a post on the Windows Vista blog, it was a comment by a reader.

While I'll admit that "post" versus "comment" may seem obscure, it really should be made clear even with explicit explanation in the same way as if someone cited one of Ocean's or Lindy's or your comments here as "a post on Paul Thurrott's blog" otherwise people think that the quote was from something the blog author wrote.

Well, I'm a big fan of these comercials (even if I'm in Portugal and they do not air on TV...) and from the first one I really can see were this is going - and I can't wait to get there!

The first one made me smile; this one made me laugh!

I agree with lilserenity, with this campaign the "Get a Mac" ads just look somewhat immature in comparison.

@mike, sounds fine by me, comment it is.

Dont forget socialist:)

"Didn't we have this yesterday?!"

"....put some cheese on it."

Mac OS X.  To.  A.  Tee.

The ads are funny, but the second ad at 4:30 was a bit too long, there just wasn't enough there.  That being said, I actually think that Bill G, is funny, and that alone is worth the price of admission.  I mean really, I was fully expecting the autistic Bill from the Anti-Trust trial.  He actually seems to be a pretty decent guy.

That being said, My main problem is the ads seem to be focussing on the future way too much.  At the end of the first commercial, Seinfeld asks if in the future computers are going to be all soft and chewy and yummy.  At the end of the second commercial, Seinfeld asks if the computers are going to have a frog with an email and a few other silly things to which Gates does the robot.  

Both actually quite funny, but that is in the future, I want that NOW.  The apple ads, seem to be selling what the computer can do NOW.  

Like others have said, it sure makes gates look far more human, and I suppose it will put a better face on MS.  Since MS isn't really looking to increase sales, that may just be what the doctor ordered.

Regards

Joe Dokes

I will admit to being a Dvorak-style curmudgeon, though I try not to let that come out in my writing.  My reaction to this is the same as my reaction to the first one.  

The commercial is funny and  I would *love* to watch the TV show, but I think it's a terrible computer commercial.

"As for Paul's nutty (and oh so predictable) "iCabal" slam.. huh?  Seriously.  I put more honest thought and reflection in this post than you did into yours. This campaign doesn't (yet) have anything to do with Apple. "

Yah, any criticism of any sort from anywhere about Microsoft is the "iCabal" in Paul's universe....and there's a communist under every rock.

And, of course, the campaign says nothing about Apple.....and nothing about Windows/Microsoft either, which is the major failing.

Oblique and unintelligible are the main things that stay with me. Funny, yah, a little, but the laughs/minute is pretty low.

I dont see why it is hard to see that MSFT is not looking to copy the MAC vs PC ads.  The switcher adds are great even if they are a bit childish and overbearing. MSFT says they are launching a campaign to combat the switcher ads and just because they don't stand Jerry Seinfeld in a white room with some Mac Nerd so he can embarrass him with hit witty banter people say MSFT's new ads have no point.  

Maybe MSFT doesn't want to get into a mud slinging contest here.  Maybe they are after something else.  Its like commercials for laundry detergent.  Every one you watch, no matter which company makes it talks about how their brand is the best and outperforms the competition.  It is so repetitive that the meaning is lost and in the end no one remembers which was which or cares which one they get because they have head so much positive and negative about both that they all seem the same.

By differentiating their approach for marketing MSFT is also setting its brand apart from the Mac.  While the Mac commercials try to beat it into your head how ignorant you are for not switching by insulting the PC guy all day long, the new MSFT adds are trying to just show the positives of their own platform by equating real life situations to your OS decisions.  Its weird, hard to follow, but funny, different and exactly what they needed to do.  

I forgot to mention in my previous post that Bill O'Reilly and Keith Olbermann have the highest viewership on their respective networks.

I do think that Keith Olbermann's equivalent on Fox is Sean Hannity.

"And, of course, the campaign says nothing about Apple.....and nothing about Windows/Microsoft either, which is the major failing."

No. No. No. The campaign doesn't have anything to do with Apple. This is not a tit-for-tat political advertisement. I would consider it a major failing the day they start taking (obvious) pot shots at Apple. The campaign is not about making Apple look bad but at making Microsoft look good.

Also, the image of Microsoft among techies is pretty well defined and is not going to change. It's the non-technical average Joe that this campaign is aimed at and I thought this was a good way to start the conversation.

bettieblu:

yeah, but picking just one comment from a blog post is cherry pickin.  ;)  There are equally as many supportive ones too.

I'm not saying it's right or wrong, all I'm saying is that it's not like Microsoft is being opaque about the intent.  These commercials are 'buzz' creators at the moment, and nothing more.  Microsoft freely seems to admit that they will not sell product or change misconceptions.  

You like em, you like em, you don't, you don't.  Worse case you gave about 4:30 of your life, which I'm sure is a little less long than most of us have given to reading and posting on Paul's blog.  *laughs*

@Shark,

Listen, I'm not claiming that there aren't many many people who fall into the mold that Paul has vaguely painted as "the iCabal".  I'm saying the absolutist and very broad use of it by Paul is bigoted and biased.  It's a generalization and Paul has defined it in a way that is just plain wrong.

I consider myself a skeptical empiricist.  That means that at my best, I try not to draw conclusions with inadequate data.  For example, niether me, you nor Paul has any information to conclude that "there are fewer Windows fanboys than Mac fanboys".  I've seen plenty of Apple-bashing online and in real life.  But that proves that both exist.  The number and percentages aren't possible to determine and acting like you "know" is called hubris.  

Anecdote is not data.  People being stupid and bashing the Zune isn't data.  I like the Zune.  But demonstrating that stupidity happens does not confirm that everyone is stupid.  

"I think Paul has adopted the O'Reilly/ Olbermann style of commentary that some people might find offensive, while others might cheer on."

You are 100% correct, there.  This would all be fine and understandable if Paul didn't continually claim that he's not a partisan cheerleader.  Everyone thinks they're right.  That's the nature of things.  Rush Limbaugh doesn't claim to be a centrist though.  And neither should Paul.  He has no need to as it is contradicted by his work and his rhetoric.

He surely finds my commentary over-the-top.  He claims that all of this is just "obvious", which I think is Paul's favorite word (what does that say about arrogance?).

@JP - I still have yet to see where Paul claims to be non-partisan. Keep in mind...I totally agree with you that Paul has lost his marbles with his all out attack on Apple...and I have to continue to wonder if he is a part of the $300Million onslaught that they have began. If so...that is fine...I plan to get my real tech info elsewhere from here on out, anyway.

--tayme

shark, you are nailing it today.  Like I've said earlier, if they create Apple attack ads, as many seem to think that MS should do, the rage and ire of the Apple community would be set to a boiling point, and I think we all know it.  That's a dead end to pursue.

It is worth mentioning that while this entire ad plays like a mini episode of Seinfeld, the actual ads are split up when played on TV.  Advertising on a one hour TV show will give you plenty of time to split the bits up in to manageable parts.

"The campaign is not about making Apple look bad but at making Microsoft look good. "

Exactly!  And quite frankly, it is extending a theme of not only comedy, but also of humility.  And Seinfeld even explains why they are doing this, to connect with average people.

John, saw this today, thought you might get a laugh:

graphjam.com/.../song-chart-memes-spike-tv-programming

Well, I have to say, I did find that quite amusing. Certainly moreso than the first advert.

Still not a Seinfeld fan though.

"I do think that Keith Olbermann's equivalent on Fox is Sean Hannity."

We agree! Of course I think they both lean way, way to their respective directions (left/right)  Not a fan of Keith's delivery at all, but he has some valid points.  Hannity is a complete and utter moron.

@ tayme - Lets keep in mind that Paul does own several Mac products including the latest Macbook, iPhone 3G etc. His reviews on Apple products have been overwhelming positive nor has he unfairly slighted any product that has not deserved positive or negative criticism. What Paul is attacking are three areas.

1. Mac fanatics who cannot take any level of criticism and constantly attack Thurrott. I think his restraint is more than admirable consider what has been said here and over the years at windowsitpro. Month and after month, year after year of trash talk, its honest about time he fought back. Many of the respondents in here have debunked a lot of the Mac fanatics in here. Sometimes Paul is wrong and you're within your rights to hold his feet to the fire. Many users have more than crossed the line and he has a right to jab back with no apologies. The problem is that when we debunk and argument, all we get is personal ad hominym attacks. How many times have heard shills, strawman attacks, calling people "boy", and other nonsense. If I may respond back to all the BS that has been said in here, I shall quote Senator Obama , " Spare me the phony outrage."

2. Mac biased writers. For those of us not absolutely devoted and loving of Mac, we can see a very clear Mac bias in the tech media. Just like a lot of us who are more independent and liberal in our politics see Fox News as propaganda for the Administration and the GOP. I'm sure many will disagree with me. This year alone there have been so many misteps, blunders, distortions, and flat lies coming out of Culpertino. Yet the majority of the tech media does not holds Jobs and Company to the fire. Safari needs greater security, but the heat is off Apple. Mobile Me has been a trainwreck, yet a measly 90 day trial is given and all is forgiven. The latest iTunes 8 debacle is clear evidence of a need for an extended beta program. Yet I don't see Mac users flooding Culpertino's website for such a program. Yet thousands of people are participating in Steven Sinofsky's blog about Engineering Windows Seven. The National Vulnerability Database has rated both XP and Vista as having the least vulnerabilities in 2008. Yet none of that made press headlines.

3. False and misleading advertisements. Mac "switcher" and "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ads are bogus. They're talking about previous problems and make brash generalizations. Yet Vista and XP use is a highly touted feature of Leopard and Tiger. How can something thats so bad also be a touted feature at the sametime? Its clearly a double standard that doesn't fly. But does anyone report this? Paul Thurrott. He's the only one I've seen who has mentioned this. So if you leave thats fine. I'll stick around. He's done the job well for me for 11 years and I"m not going anywhere. Yet I soley do not depend on the Supersite for my tech news. I go to a number of different sites to get varying opinions. ZDnet, Ars Technica, PC World, G4, etc. I also don't let advertisements fool me to buy something. I do my own research for days before I make a buying decision.

Now back to the subject at hand. These ads are supposed to be lighthearted and humorous. The idea is that after a few of these, besides their general message, is that you'll see how condesending the Mac ads are. Sometimes to wake people out of apathy you have to have dramatic examples. These commericals are to such a degree that it really does contrast with the Mac ads. Then people will see the Mac ads and say, "Ouch, thats harsh. I really don't think Microsoft and Vista are that bad. I use Office everyday and I get the job done. Maybe they're wrong? Perhaps I should try it for myself." I think thats the point but sometimes people have to be handheld and brought to that point.

bettieblu

"Hannity is a complete and utter moron. "

See. We CAN agree on something.

@Dip,

Love that graph.  "Other crap" is a much much bigger slice now, though.  ;)

@sub, This blog is pretty new to Paul if I am not mistaken, 2008 only?  So where are you getting that year after year?  The winsupersite has been around for a while, but you could never post....or at least I thought it was that way.

Paul gets lots of flak, but I agree with many, he invites it with his comments.  His tone in this blog is sarcastic, and its funny he just cant resist taking a jab whenever he can.  He puts a lot of time into covering Apple products, and digs up crazy stuff that is old news, like comments from Mozila about Safari.  Closing threads after he drops sarcastic bombs, and gets major negative flak.   Pulling that kind of stunt, makes him look worse and just adds to the negativity.

I personally think he does it to gain readership, by stirring the pot.  It works for TMZ or whatever its called.  Trash talk and get viewers/readers.

subzero

Excellent post

I'd point out an example on point 2

Many of the people here say that when Paul is working with Leo Laporte on Windows Weekly he and Leo are much more neutral.

A little comparison:

Paul has put up with a buggy iPhone 2 through three software versions (not counting today's 2.1) and is just now considering dropping the iPhone (well, throwing it, actually) if 2.1 does't fix the problems.

That seems like somebody bending over backwards to try and like the product.

Leo, by comparison, admits he carries a second phone with him since the iPhone 2 is so unreliable that he can't count on it for basic phone functionality. He also laughs at himself as a fanatic for being willing to do that to keep using the iPhone.

That sounds like a person with a strong bias (but with a reasonable understanding of his biases)

I'd hardly call Leo part of the iCabal. After all, he's biased but not blinded.

A better example of the iCabal are all of those people ("journalists" and regular users) who spent the last few months saying that the problems didn't exist, or were vastly overblown, or were purely the fault of AT&T. That is, until Dear Leader admitted the problems were about to be fixed. Then, it was OK to talk about them by praising Apple for fixing them.

@Mike, I cant believe anyone would buy the garbage that Hannity spews out.  It has to be an act, no one and I mean no ONE can really believe what he is saying can they?  

I bet his wife is embarrassed to admit she is married to that buffoon.  Then again she just counts his money and puts up with it.  The sound of his voice makes irritated.

bettieblu

I think you'd be surprised and perhaps horrified at how many people use Hannity as their primary or even only news source.

@subzero - You misuderstand, I think. I am only saying that Paul's suden change to attack mode is odd...I think that he is either using it to drive hits to his sites OR that maybe he is a paid spokesman for MS now. I don't plan to go away...I find this type of discussion and debate entertaining...but, like you, I research facts before making any purchase...well, that is unless it involves sugar and caffeine.

Oh, regarding Sean Hannity....he is only as much of a moron as Al Franken. I prefer Glenn Beck...he is fairly conservative, but is not afraid to say when the far right is out of line....plus, he is hilarious!!!

--tayme

@bettiblu - Paul has been around for a long time over on Windows IT Pro and before he went commercial, he had a site and email newsletter called WinInfo Digest. Ther are others, probably as well. I have been reading Paul's stuff since the mid 90's, I think.

--tayme

"Leo, by comparison, admits he carries a second phone with him since the iPhone 2 is so unreliable that he can't count on it for basic phone functionality."

Really?  I listed to him, think he is a pretty cool guy and I know he mostly Mac.  I never heard him say that but I dont always catch him.  I did hear him say that he had lockup problems at first but it was because he downloaded over 100 apps willy nilly and most OTA.  He then reset the phone and installed only what he liked via a sync and it was solid.  Also he said that were he lives there is no 3G at his house, which would affect any 3g phone.  That is sad if true.

I know a few people with the 3G version, they have never complained about it, but I have never asked either.

I dont own one or plan to get one soon.  Never buy a 1.0 Apple product, and the iPhone 3G is 1.0 being its their first 3G phone.  I had a original black jack that would kill the battery in a few hours.  I got a free replacement that came with a fat and slim battery.  It was at the time blamed on 3G eating up the battery.  It even came with a slip of paper that had a cheat code that would walk you through this twisted set of commands to turn off 3G.  With the fat battery and edge the battery would last 3 days or more.  The call quality was less.

Yeah I have read his stuff for a long time in Windows NT mag or whatever the name of it is now.  I have read articles on this site for a while now, but the blog is pretty new or I thought so.

""Didn't we have this yesterday?!"

"....put some cheese on it."

Mac OS X.  To.  A.  Tee."

Not even close. It's XP yesterday, Vista today.

@bettieblu,

Paul runs the WinInformant out of Windows IT Pro, where he allows comments on many of his stories there to. He's gotten a lot of comments there and emails about that too.

Thats what I mean by years and years.

@tayme - Hannity is banned in our house. We've blessed the house with holy water to keep people like him far far away.

But I have to respectfully disagree with you about Glenn Beck. He's said some nutty things too.

However, I actually respect conservative senators like Richard Luger, Chuck Hagel, John Warner, and former Senator Lincoln Chafee. Those guys always earn my respect and gratitude.

bettieblu

Leo talked about carrying the two phones on, I think, one of the recent Mac Break Weekly episodes. I played catchup on a few over the last couple of days so I'm not sure which.

subzero

I'd tend to agree with your appraisal of both Beck and with Luger, Hagel, Warner and Chafee.

I'd also put in (to counter tayme's comment) that Al Franken is one of the most well informed policy wonks ever to run for office. Agree or disagree with him, his facts are very solid and very well researched. Much as I'd like to see him as the junior Senator from Minnesota, there's a part of me that would be saddened by that because I wouldn't get to hear him discuss politics outside of the venue of CSPAN.

Thanks, Dipsh.

"It is worth mentioning that while this entire ad plays like a mini episode of Seinfeld, the actual ads are split up when played on TV."

You mean the second ad itself? That's interesting.

Did anyone notice that the Chi