A couple of years late, Microsoft decided to strike back with a baffling series of advertising messages that employed everyone from Bill Gates and Jerry Seinfeld to Pharrel Williams and a bunch of cute little kids. Their newest commercial is a lame version of a reality show/mini documentary where they're following a girl with very specific needs in a new computer.
This redheaded lady, ostensibly chosen because of her slightly geek-ish, unassuming look, desires a 17" laptop for under $1000 dollars. Hmm. How many people are looking for 17" monitor on their laptop (full disclosure: I'm writing this on a 10" HP Mini)? Well, typically those are going to be designers or video editors i.e. people that buy Macs. After we get the setup, the first place the girl goes to look is, shockingly enough, the Apple store. The next big shock is that Apple doesn't sell a 17" laptop for under $1000. In fact, they only have a 13" for that price.
Then comes the big line, the "stinger" for Apple: "I guess I'm just not cool enough to be a Mac person." So the coolness quotient is directly tied to the amount of money you're willing to spend on a computer? The next obvious question: why would Microsoft directly support the claim that Apple has made for years?
Ah, that's because their operating system comes on cheaper computers. Its okay to not be cool if you're cheap. Am I right?
Here's my problem with this whole strategy: if Microsoft wants to talk price, where it certainly has an advantage over Apple, why make it sound like you have to sacrifice being cool in order to save money? Why not address the only growing segment of computer sales (read the full disclosure above) and talk about netbooks? Why not have some cool kid who is looking for a cheap computer to get on Facebook and Twitter and do all the cool shit kids do on the web and say, "Hey, kid, here's a netbook with Windows running on it and its $300. How about that shit?"
Okay, that's enough I think. Back to watching Duke get manhandled in this game.
Posts
