Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

I'm a PC.

Again, this is pretty much how the general public saw it.

What's this based on? Honestly, the only brand tracking exercises I've seen in this area have seen a resounding 'meh' for MS. What does it say that's new or that differentiates the OS?

Not a huge fan of the workmanlike 'I'm a Mac' campaign if I'm honest, but it's coincided with a rise in mac sales (not so much of late) and got across practical advantages of the platform. It clearly got MS rattled enough to fire off a derivative campaign and splash the cash.

Meanwhile Vista sales remain moribund and the battleground's quickly been shifted to Windows 7. Hardly points to a great success with the general public.
 
What's this based on? Honestly, the only brand tracking exercises I've seen in this area have seen a resounding 'meh' for MS. What does it say that's new or that differentiates the OS?

Not a huge fan of the workmanlike 'I'm a Mac' campaign if I'm honest, but it's coincided with a rise in mac sales (not so much of late) and got across practical advantages of the platform. It clearly got MS rattled enough to fire off a derivative campaign and splash the cash.

Meanwhile Vista sales remain moribund and the battleground's quickly been shifted to Windows 7. Hardly points to a great success with the general public.

Well, firstly it's brand marketing not product marketing, and secondly they had to respond or otherwise appear fine with the 'boring, fat and old' tag that Mac had applied to them. As a response it achieves it's aims. Why wait for Windows 7 to improve brand perception?
 
Meanwhile Vista sales remain moribund and the battleground's quickly been shifted to Windows 7. Hardly points to a great success with the general public.
In terms of overall sales, Vista has outsold Mac by a truly colossal margin.
 
Well, firstly it's brand marketing not product marketing, and secondly they had to respond or otherwise appear fine with the 'boring, fat and old' tag that Mac had applied to them. As a response it achieves it's aims. Why wait for Windows 7 to improve brand perception?

No it doesn't. What does it achieve as a brand campaign?

Brand rule No.1 - don't defend your brand by making a derivative campaign that pits you as needing to respond to a much smaller competitor. it's a stupid position. Secondly the proposition - that lots of people use windows - is simply daft and totally obvious given the market context. It's the equivalent of protesting too hard - of a ginormous monopolistic corp trying to appear cool.

It's brand marketing because they haven't got confidence (or more formally the public haven't and won't get confidence) in the product Vista rather than proper brand advertising. When it comes down to the brand tracking exercises what are the lasting values and differences that this campaign gets across?

I'd wager absolutely sod all. There's a reason why the ad world have uttered a resounding 'meh' despite all the spend, and it's not solely because they tend to use macs.
 
To me that campaign fails completely, because 'I'm a PC' sounds like 'I'm a robot'.

who wants to be a robot? (unless it's Bender, I suppose, but even then, I'd like a robot like him but wouldn't want to be him)
 
No it doesn't. What does it achieve as a brand campaign?

Brand rule No.1 - don't defend your brand by making a derivative campaign that pits you as needing to respond to a much smaller competitor. it's a stupid position. Secondly the proposition - that lots of people use windows - is simply daft and totally obvious given the market context. It's the equivalent of protesting too hard - of a ginormous monopolistic corp trying to appear cool.

It's brand marketing because they haven't got confidence (or more formally the public haven't and won't get confidence) in the product Vista rather than proper brand advertising. When it comes down to the brand tracking exercises what are the lasting values and differences that this campaign gets across?

I'd wager absolutely sod all. There's a reason why the ad world have uttered a resounding 'meh' despite all the spend, and it's not solely because they tend to use macs.

You seem to have totally forgotten who the advert was aimed at. It's already been pointed out by kabbes and k_e why this campaign is being touted as a success.

Firstly, this is clearly targetted at home users, the average person in the street. In this marketplace Apple aren't much smaller in terms of brand awareness and brand association. The iPod, the iPhone, etc all form part of the Apple brand and as such MS have to compete against the whole lot.

Apple's campaign probably left PC users feeling patronised and a bit miffed. MS then come along and reassure them that 'actually, it's all good! PC users are all over the place! Ignore those wankers!' and people feel better.

If you were talking about Coke vs Pepsi, you'd be right. But we're not. you also seem to credit the worldwide ad consuming public as caring about this shit more than they do:

Mac: "PC users are fat geeks!"
PC user: "Fuck off!"
Mac user: *snort" "Haha, damn right Steve!... hey guys, did you see what Steve said? He's so cool! High five!"

Windows: "PC users are people from all walks of life!"
PC user: "Uh huh"
Mac user: "OMG!! That is so gay!"

Basically, Windows don't exactly set the world alight, but they do reassure their customers (90% of the market or whatever) that they aren't losers. Mac just reinforce the Mac user's view that they're superior.

As for your last point, it's probably almost entirely because the ad world is Mac based.
 
When LuisDS checked on the photos again this morning after publishing the metadata details on Flickr last night, he found that Microsoft has scrubbed the revealing details from the work, an effort that also resulted in the 272 KB photo ballooning to 852 KB.


:D:D
 
That's a very hopeful view of an informed general public there Mr Filter. You know, as well as I do, that the best advertising tends to be based around simple, clear propositions and joe public sadly only gaining a glimpse of your intended messages. As a existing mac user I've no love of the 'I'm a mac' campaign - arty coolness and turtle necks ftw - but it did its point in getting platform advantages over.

I think the 'meh' answer is far more likely than an informed conversation in the viewers' heads. Playing second fiddle with another wooly variation of the 'everyman' theme isn't a winner, how ever you wrap it up.
 
But in terms of ROI on advertising spend and perceptions of brand value, Apple destroys MS by a even wider margin.

I thought Mac had been taking a hit in profits recently because preening twats have less money to play with than before, so that ROI looks likely to drop.
 
Do people really take this rivalry this seriously? They're both just making loads of money.

In my mind Apples are good for publishing/design
PCs are for everyday use

Apple never became as widespread as the PC due to its cost and the fact that most people's first experience with computers would have been with a PC.
 
Do people really take this rivalry this seriously?

Only nutcases (I think there's a film called Macheads about some of them).

I started out with Macs but my needs changed. I think their smug stance in recent years is born from their awareness of their position of weakness. I used to think the formats would have merged by now but I was well wrong on that count.
 
I think their smug stance in recent years is born from their awareness of their position of weakness. I used to think the formats would have merged by now but I was well wrong on that count.

Not sure that really holds water. They're in a far stronger market position that they have been for years, buoyed by the ipod and then the iphone. Mac sales holding up alright, accelerating away where product updates made (laptops) Whopping cash reserves in the bank and secure financially. At one point their market cap was well above Sonys. Jobs health problems are their worst issues really.

We'll see in recession, but to say they've been in a weak position seems weird.
 
That's a very hopeful view of an informed general public there Mr Filter. You know, as well as I do, that the best advertising tends to be based around simple, clear propositions and joe public sadly only gaining a glimpse of your intended messages. As a existing mac user I've no love of the 'I'm a mac' campaign - arty coolness and turtle necks ftw - but it did its point in getting platform advantages over.

I think the 'meh' answer is far more likely than an informed conversation in the viewers' heads. Playing second fiddle with another wooly variation of the 'everyman' theme isn't a winner, how ever you wrap it up.

But my whole point is that the PC user isn't informed. All they know is that Apple said they were fat geeks, whereas Microsoft said they were whoever the hell they wanted to be.

The Mac campaign probably swayed a few PC users who'd been looking in that direction anyway. The Windows campaign probably didn't sway any Mac users, but that isn't the point. The "I'm a PC" campaign was about reassuring people that using Windows doesn't make them a loser. In other words, securing their market.
 
The "I'm a PC" campaign was about reassuring people that using Windows doesn't make them a loser. In other words, securing their market.

reassuring people by using a parody of a much smaller competitors successful campaign is full of fail, all it's done is advertised macs through the back door.
 
reassuring people by using a parody of a much smaller competitors successful campaign is full of fail, all it's done is advertised macs through the back door.

And we're back to page one :D

A) Not a parody.
B) Not full of fail. It's been very successful in fact.
C) No, it really hasn't. It's more than different enough in look and feel to avoid negative associations that would push people towards a Mac.

As others keep doing, you're totally ignoring who the ad is targetted at; people who don't know and don't really give a fuck about the rivalry or the campaigns.

The exact opposite of geeks like us, in fact.
 
The exact opposite of geeks like us, in fact.
And that is why an internet argument about the advert is ultimately doomed to utter failure. Almost by definition, we are precisely the wrong people to be opining on its appeal.
 
Another thing that is worthy of note as to why this ad and its success or otherwise has nothing whatesover to do with this thread and showing why Chrisfilter is completely right -- nowhere in the "I'm a PC" ad do they even mention Vista! (With the possible exception (I can't actually remember) of a discrete logo at the end). It isn't a sales pitch for Vista or even for Windows, at least directly. It's purely an advert for the PC as a platform. Which means that it is all about reassuring PC users that they are not a bunch of drones for their choice in using PCs. That's it.
 
Another thing that is worthy of note as to why this ad and its success or otherwise has nothing whatesover to do with this thread and showing why Chrisfilter is completely right -- nowhere in the "I'm a PC" ad do they even mention Vista! (With the possible exception (I can't actually remember) of a discrete logo at the end). It isn't a sales pitch for Vista or even for Windows, at least directly. It's purely an advert for the PC as a platform. Which means that it is all about reassuring PC users that they are not a bunch of drones for their choice in using PCs. That's it.
Which strikes me as a perfectly reasonable response to Apple's high profile attack on Windows users.

Notably, they didn't attack Apple at all in their 'I'm a PC' campaign. Or even mention them at all, in fact.
 
Which strikes me as a perfectly reasonable response to Apple's high profile attack on Windows users.

Notably, they didn't attack Apple at all in their 'I'm a PC' campaign. Or even mention them at all, in fact.

Exactly. If they had, then it would have been a parody, a direct nod, a direct response. As it is, they avoid that.
 
This is interesting:
Yup, Apple’s Advertising Budget Is Bigger Than Microsoft Vista’s
107 Comments

by Erick Schonfeld on November 21, 2008


When Apple started running the anti-Vista commercial (above) mocking Microsoft for spending $300 million on Vista’s own ad campaign instead of on fixing its problems, I called it hypocritical:
Apple’s advertising budget is also pretty massive. I mean, I see more Apple commercials on TV than ads for Barack Obama. Apple is on track to spend more than $3.5 billion on SG&A (selling, general, and administrative expenses) for its fiscal year that ended September 30. How much of that was spent on advertising? I don’t know, but 10 percent doesn’t seem unreasonable.
It turns out that I underestimated Apple’s advertising budget. Lindsay Blakely at Bnet (a former Business 2.0 reporter) found the actual numbers in a subsequent SEC filing. In its 2008 fiscal year that just ended last September, Apple spent a whopping $486 million on advertising. (In fiscal year 2007, it spent $467 million, and in fiscal year 2006 it spent $338 million).

Half a billion dollars on marketing. No wonder I think Apple products are so great.

Update: Microsoft spends more on advertising across all of its combined businesses than Apple does, but its Windows business is what competes most directly with Apple. Microsoft’s total advertising budget across all of its businesses, including Windows, Office, Xbox, and all the enterprise stuff, was the following (from the 10K): “Advertising expense was $1.2 billion, $1.3 billion, and $1.2 billion in fiscal years 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively.”
Microsoft’s fiscal year ends in June, so these numbers do not reflect the $300 million Vista campaign. But that would have eaten up 25 percent of Microsoft’s entire ad budget for any of the previous three years.


http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/11/21/yup-apples-advertising-budget-is-bigger-than-microsoft-vistas/
 
I'm a PC
crosseyed.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom