Apple demanded Microsoft pull laptop hunter ads

Apple demanded Microsoft pull laptop hunter ads

After years of having a go off Microsoft in its adverts, Apple threw its toys out of the pram when Microsoft reversed the roles

Apple's lawyers ordered Microsoft to stop running the "Laptop Hunters" ads. The "unscripted commercials" were based on the idea of giving people US$1,000 and seeing what laptop they could buy.

Kevin Turner, Microsoft's chief operating officer said that he knew the ads were working because two weeks ago he got a call from Apple's legal department saying the adverts had to be pulled because "Apple had lowered its prices".

"It was the greatest single phone call that I've ever taken in business," Turner said.

Turner thought the call was a joke, and when it turned out not to be, he thought Microsoft would just "keep running them and running them and running them".

Advertising experts say that since Microsoft launched the ads, which are in response to Apple's "I'm a Mac" ads, there is evidence that the campaign may be radically altering value perceptions of PCs.

BrandIndex has reported that Microsoft's value perception has risen steadily since the campaign began in March, while Apple's has fallen.

No wonder Apple is throwing its toys out of the pram. But we think threatening Microsoft with legal action just shows how Apple's sense of humour is really as paper thin as one of its airbooks.

 

 

Source: theinquirer.net (c) 2010 Incisive Media

See more about:  apple  |  microsoft
 
 

Readers of this article also read...

New Apple iPad loses '4G' label 

New Apple iPad loses '4G' label

 
First impressions: Samsung Galaxy S3 vs iPhone 4S 

First impressions: Samsung Galaxy S3 vs iPhone 4S

 
The Samsung Galaxy S3 has landed 

The Samsung Galaxy S3 has landed

 
Nvidia GTX 690 unboxing 

Nvidia GTX 690 unboxing

 
Apple's security "10 years behind Microsoft," says Kaspersky CEO 

Apple's security "10 years behind Microsoft," says Kaspersky CEO

 
Comments: 8
lawrence_o
17 July 2009
I've seen the ads and quite honestly, they are very misleading. Why? Because it compares very solidly built macs (aluminum bodies with screen mounts that never ever break, not even after 10 years) with plastic buckets that break within 3 to 5 years. I've had it with 2 DELL Inspiron 8100 models and here at work, they have it with the newer Dell models as well as HP and Acers. On top, Apple are depicted as a brand who always come last implementing new technologies while in fact its quite oftenly the other way round. What microsoft did with the ads was saying like: here is 20.000 USD and let's go out and see what car you can buy. Et voila! Here you have a nice VW Golf, leather interior, it's got airco, GPS, sound system, electric windows etc. Hahaha, and see over there, at Mercedes, if you want all that it costs you 10.000 more. Microsoft conclusion: you're better off buying a VW Golf than a Mercedes. ANd that's what it is. Microsoft builds VWs. Their not bad. THey run. The materials used are not as exclusive as those in a Merc but descent all the same. THe engine usually doesn't last as long as that of a Merc but it's descent nevertheless. ANd if you sell it after a year you'll probably end up losing more than when selling a Merc. Well guys, it's the same with Apple and a Mac.

I have 2 macs and after resp. 4 and 3 years, they're still running as fast as the first day, I haven't had any viruses or spyware. I won't talk about stability because I feel that Windows XP has become a very very stable system that I like most of all Microsoft OSses. But my workflow has improved considerably when working on OSX. I have to click less icons to achieve the same.

I pay only 79euro for an office suite that is indeed not up to MS Office but it does what I need and does so better than office. The latest Office is extremely unstable I feel. I get iLife for 79USD. Compared to similar software for Windows, you pay wayyy more!

OS X Updates were presented as "merely patches" with some new features while the core OS was the same. Hence, according to the MS campaign, you paid actually more for your OS than for a MS OS. This proves that MS are really total idiots to me! BEcause the power of the apple strategy lies in the fact that the core user flow remains the same! When upgrading a version of OS X, you get a lot of new features and improvements, support for new technologies etc BUT your workflow remains the same! THis last point is bitched on by MS while in fact it saves the users froma having to learn everything all over again as it is with Vista!!! Vista has everythign rearranged, hidden in other places and every user had to learn everything again!

You'll probably accuse me of being a windows hater and a Mac freak. This is not really so. I have been working for 12 years almost solely with Microsoft. Sure, I had a Mac 9300 at home but hated it! I really hated OS9 while I loved my PC. Until OS X came along. That changed everything. If tomorrow, MS comes with an OS that outruns Apple's in workflow and ease of use and pricing, I'll go back MS instantly. Till that day however...


Comment made about the PC Authority article:
Apple demanded Microsoft pull laptop hunter ads?
After years of having a go off Microsoft in its adverts, Apple threw its toys out of the pram when Microsoft reversed the roles

What do you think? Join the discussion.
Nato
18 July 2009
U cant compare computers to cars. Because the little VW would be a lot faster for half the price. And if i wanted to go out and buy the best quality computer and also the fastest then the macs dont even come close the the fps that pc's are getting in games so thats just baseless.
Slatts
18 July 2009
Nato wrote:
U cant compare computers to cars. Because the little VW would be a lot faster for half the price. And if i wanted to go out and buy the best quality computer and also the fastest then the macs dont even come close the the fps that pc's are getting in games so thats just baseless.

There are games for macs?:-k
ozofriendly
20 July 2009
I'm no fan of Vista, nor am I particulalry enamored of OSX; each has their strengths and weaknesses, but I think Microsoft's ad campaign is a fair play. It is entirely reasonable to compare the real-world value of a PC running a Microsoft OS with a Mac running and Apple OS and it seems that the majority continue to conclude that the former represents better bang for their buck. Lawrence has expressed a very typical bias, but fails to appreciate the breadth of the notebook market in which Apple fields a relatively tiny number of products.
OS notwithstading, it's actually quite hard to force a value-win for Apple on hardware alone. That aluminium shell may seem like a strong selling point, but after a year or so, the surface tarnishes to a grubby grey and suddenly it doesn't look as nice as your colleague's Asus N-series, for example, after the same period. For less money, they've get newer, faster and more components than you'd get in the MacBook Pro, BluRay, native HDMI/VGA, e-Sata, Bio-Metric security, support for more than just SD flash drives etc.
If Apple is serious about selling it's OS, it should simply de-couple it from it's hardware. That would really shake Microsoft's tree.
lawrence_o
20 July 2009
Well Mac joked first about PC s so yes they should expect to get it back. What goes around comes aound, true but at least Apple did it with REAL arguments meaning they joke about issues all pc users know are true. MS did not do so the other way round and that's not so fair. Anyway I think it won't make a difference. THe only reason the MS add seemed to work is due to economic recession that makes people buy cheapest and not best gear. Anyone should decide for themself whats best for them. ABout the car, I would't day the small VW is faster. Ever driven a Merc 240compressor with automatic sports gearbox? No manual shift can lift off faster than that! And let's not even consider AMG... Anyway you'll pay a hell of a lot more but as said, it all comes down to what you need/like/want. The VW will get you there, as will the PC with Vista. The only question is, when and how comfortable. Last weekend my niece, aged 10 asked me: "uncle, how come I loose my internet connection? (wireless). Uncle, my mouse doesn't work that good. (The USB connector on the laptop was completely worn out! It's not even 1 year old! It's a pckard Bell) etc etc. As an IT professional it is my humble experience that a PC still has wayyyy more applications written for it but in terms of maintenance and long term cost of ownership, a Mac outperforms it by factors, really. No viruses (yet) no Spyware (yet) alone makes a difference in maintenance. Then there are the ease of use, the tools that make you find back all files so rapidly and easy, the workflow, it's just that much more intuitive but as said. If MS delivers something better than OSX tomorrow, believe me, I WILL make the switch back! I only want best and frankly I don't care who provides it.
Kind regards to all.
Robnoxious
21 July 2009
Apple, taking the bat and ball and going home. Hilarious
ozofriendly
22 July 2009
Um... Lawrence, I'm pretty sure Nato was actually suggesting that if you *were* to compare the Macbook with a PC notebook, the VW in your inappropriate analogy would have to be faster than the Merc. The point being that a. you really cannot compare computers with cars and b. if you could, you might well argue that the Macbook is built like a Merc, but it still performs more like a Prius.
Don't get me wrong. Macs are innovative in design and impressive in terms of battery life and their green credentials, but whatever your experience of Vista (or XP or Windows 7 etc), the fact remains that in terms of performance/buck, PC notebooks win easily.
lawrence_o
26 July 2009
ozofriendly: With all due respect, I think you've been missing a lot of reading. I remember an article somewhere that read: Windows XP runs fastest on a Mac... Need I say more? There is NO PC on earth running windows that will outperform the fastest Mac running OSX. That is not the same as saying that Mac hardware is faster than PC hardware. To decide on that would mean testing the fastest of both worlds with the same OS and software. I only know of one test, the one I mentioned above where as said, XP was installed on the Mac and ran faster than on the fastest PC hardware at that time. But one test is not conclusive to me.
I hear you argue: the graphics board options. Apple offers pretty fast graphic boards. But true, you shouldn't buy a Mac when you're a games freak. However, for daily tasks such as eMail, internet surfing, even developing software, writing letters, watching movies and making your own films and audio tracks, the display provided is waay sufficient.

So your only real pro-PC argument remains its costprice. Now I just did the effort of configuring a Hewlett Packard d7t series 17,3 inch with the options comparable to a Mac:• Moonlight White
• Upgrade to Genuine Windows Vista Ultimate with Service Pack 1 (64-bit)
• Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo Processor T9900 (3.06 GHz, 6 MB L2 Cache, 1066MHz FSB)
• 6GB DDR2 System Memory (2 Dimm)
• 500GB 5400RPM SATA Hard Drive with HP ProtectSmart Hard Drive Protection
• 512MB ATI Mobility Radeon(TM) HD 4530
• 17.3" diagonal HD+ High-Definition HP BrightView Widescreen Display (1600 x 900)
• LightScribe SuperMulti 8X DVD+/-RW with Double Layer Support
• Webcam Only
• Intel Next-Gen Wireless-N Mini-card with Bluetooth
• No TV Tuner w/remote control
• HP Color Matching Keyboard
• 50% OFF!! Extra 8 Cell Lithium Ion Battery
• No Modem
• System Recovery DVD with Genuine Windows Vista Ultimate (64-bit)
• Microsoft(R) Works 9.0
• $30 OFF!! Adobe(R) Photoshop(R) Elements 7 & Adobe Premiere(R) Elements 7
• Syncables Desktop v5.0
It costs 2222 USD including a reduction. However some notes: the 2,8 Ghz cpu is unavailable in the HP so I had to select a 3,06. It is also impossible to have 4GB memory so I chose 6. I think that is somehow unfair but defendable because Vista is heavier than OSX both in CPU usage as memory usage so slightly faster hardware is necessary. On the other hand, the Mac has a way better battery so to cope with that I ordered an extra battery too (30USD only).
So it's about 500 USD cheaper than a more or less comparable Mac.
For some that will certainly be an argument. However, My first Powerbook G4 cost about 2500 USD. After 1,5 years I sold it for 1500USD. I lost 1000. This HP costs 2222 USD. After a year and a half you'll get what, 500 at most? A difficult comparison, true. So the cars do come in again. A Merc, costing more and providing more luxuary (better interior, stronger bodywork, better software) can be sold for more second hand than the VW. Arguing about that will be difficult I think.
Comments have been disabled for this article.

Latest Comments

Ads by Google

From our Partners

PC & Tech Authority Downloads