9 Comments Add your own

• 1. Jennifer LeClaire  |  September 18th, 2008 at 9:15 pm

  Microsoft seems to think it’s about the ad or the artist (like when
  they used the Stones song, Start Me Up). They don’t “get” that it’s about the message.

  Apple’s start up sounds were by groups like Yes because they loved the Mac and wanted to create the sound. When MS went to the Stones for Start Me Up, the popular story is that they didn’t want to have MS use it so they named an insanely high numberand were shocked that MS went for it.

  Now they think having celebs be cutsie will sell the OS. What sells an OS is word of mouth that it’s good. As soon as MS stopped it’s buy the media smear campaign against Apple* the Mac grew in popularity. So the negatives MS put out did hurt Apple but that doesn’t mean they can win people over with commercials that people puzzle over. Most people on the various Mac and tech lists I am on are embarrassed for MS right now.

  *My sources told me that MS lost a lawsuit about copying QuickTime and didn’t want the word out so they had to work the deal with Apple. That was right when Jobs came back in, but I don’t think Jobs is fully responsible for MS laying off of Apple. Those not understanding think MS bailed Apple out. That’s incorrect. It was a legal settlement.

  Deborah Shadovitz
  http://www.shadovitz.com

• 2. Jennifer LeClaire  |  September 18th, 2008 at 9:16 pm

  You know, Jennifer, I questioned Microsoft’s choice of Jerry Seinfeld right out to the gate. His “brand” certainly doesn’t seem to combat Apple’s image very well … an older guy who used to be funny and never has had much of a sense of style. Nothing against Seinfeld – I’ve been a fan of his for a long time – but this was a bad move for all involved. The quick and drastic change is direction is potentially embarrassing.

  Travis C. York
  Griffin York & Krause
  http://www.griffinyorkkrause.com

• 3. Jennifer LeClaire  |  September 18th, 2008 at 9:17 pm

  As I’m sure you know, it is perhaps the most immutable law of branding and positioning: if your competitor owns a key attribute in the consumers mind, do not compete with them on their terms; rather stake your claim to a credible and distinctive position you can own. Microsoft has violated this cardinal rule in spades with its Seinfeld campaign.

  Apple has a monopoly of Microsoftian proportion when it comes to owning cool, hip and funny. Trying to make Bill Gates (and by extension Microsoft) cool and hip is, with apologies to Obama, like putting lipstick on a pig. The Microsoft campaign is so bizarre and clueless that it’s not unreasonable to think that the great Alex Bogusky (of MS’s ad agency Crispin, Porter + Bogusky) is working as a double agent for Steve Jobs!

  John Cregan
  Global Prairie
  http://www.global-prairie.com

• 4. Jennifer LeClaire  |  September 18th, 2008 at 9:20 pm

  I like the move to mix it up. I don’t know if “dumping” is the word I would choose, but Microsoft already got the publicity they needed from their partnership with Jerry Seinfeld. In virtually all advertising featuring celebrities, the campaign peaks and then it becomes old almost the next day. In this case, the peak occurred when the first spot hit, some may say even before the spot hit. Now, in an effort to keep the campaign alive and fresh, introducing new celebrities interacting with Bill Gates (assuming that trend continues) should be a winning move…can’t wait to see Eva Longoria and Bill together…should be a good one!.

  Thanks,
  Jayson
  Corporate Ignition

• 5. Jennifer LeClaire  |  September 18th, 2008 at 9:21 pm

  I think Microsoft’s fundamental problem is that they are (pardon the now political experession) trying to put lipstick on a pig. That is, all the legacy stuff, including Vista.

  They don’t need more celebrities. They need an authentic message that reflects reality. If they have something exciting to launch, for goodness sakes, launch it already!

  Newt Barrett
  Content Marketing Today
  http://www.ContentMarketingToday.com

• 6. Jennifer LeClaire  |  September 18th, 2008 at 9:21 pm

  Microsoft’s Mojave experiment, Seinfeld ads and upcoming ads are an clever strategy for these economic times. Offsetting the humor of the Apple ads with humor of their own, showing Bill Gates as human, rather than a ruler of a “kingdom” as has have been recently portrayed in Apple Ads and taking more time to educate the consumer is likely to prove to be an intelligent key tactic to combating the “sound byte” style ads that Apple has been using to effectively increase their market share. However, having Seinfeld himself helps to gain attention. More importantly, Bill Gates is a fairly recognizable figure as well.

  In reality, Apple has a long way to go to take over more than Advertising and media businesses where they have their largest corporate stronghold. They need the rest of the major corporations to “cross-over” and this is a tough bill to fill with the amount of capital that these companies already have in windows operating environment, related software and programming solutions, and proprietary solutions developed for the corporate office. Apple needs more corporations because corporations hire people (simply enough) and when employees get home, they don’t want to learn an additional operating system/software from the one they have or are forced to have at work. So it’s not like Microsoft has a problem with anything other than consumer perception. Over time, that will lead to increased market share for Apple as they capitalize on individuals inherent need to feel independent and uncluttered, but if Microsoft can successfully launch a “here’s the real Microsoft” campaign, they will have little to concern themselves with long term.

  And yet, it’s impossible to ignore that the Apple ads are ingenious in their simplicity. If you ask the average person what they WANT to have, they are likely to say an Apple. That is what Microsoft’s newest campaign is endeavoring to change.

  Some additional Apple products such as the iphone and iTunes, have helped to give them an edge in working their way directly onto PCs. So part of their marketing strategy of including updates for Apple products that you really don’t need packaged with updates for iTunes, for example, is increasing awareness and market share as well. Thus TV ads are certainly not the only element of Apple’s highly successful campaign. Just the most widely noticed.

  In short, it’s my position that Microsoft has a good long term strategy and Apple has a killer customer perception strategy. If I had to make a call, and nothing changed on either side, I’d say Microsoft is still favored to come out ahead.

  Nicole Vikhlyantsev
  Leading the Web, Inc.
  http://www.leadingtheweb.com

• 7. Jennifer LeClaire  |  September 18th, 2008 at 9:22 pm

  Hi Jennifer – I spent 6 years working for Waggener Edstrom on the Microsoft account. I have worked directly with Steve Ballmer and Bill Gates. I’ve always known that a majority of Microsoft’s success has been because it’s a marketing powerhouse. So, I’m not surprised that when Microsoft ‘s technology (Vista) isn’t making it, they turn to ads and marketing to help it along. In my opinion, the ad campaign, with Gates and Seinfeld, is a good strategy. They are following in Apple’s footsteps – trying to put a warm and fuzzy (with humor tossed in) wrap around the company and product. Knowing Microsoft’s history I have no doubt that they will succeed in moving Vista forward.

  I just upgraded my OS and I didn’t pick Vista

  I’d be happy to share additional history and thoughts.

  Best,
  Rachel Weikum

  Rachel Weikum
  Weikum Communications
  http://www.weikumcommunications.com

• 8. Jennifer LeClaire  |  September 19th, 2008 at 7:34 pm

  I have to say that I’m skeptical that this move is the product of a “phased” strategy to sway perceptions about Vista. It’s an interesting strategy to try to smooth over Windows customers’ confusion and frustration with a $300 million campaign that is confusing and frustrating. But let’s give Crispin and Microsoft the benefit of the doubt, assume this was their strategy all along, and evaluate their goals.

  Goal 1: Build buzz.
  Obviously, mission accomplished here. Not only are people talking about these ads at the water cooler, but the media is having a field day with today’s announcement. That’s to be expected when everyone knows the price tag involved. Apparently “positive” buzz was not as much a goal. In this instance, it didn’t matter that people were having conversations about the merits of the campaign, only that they were talking. Or lambasting.

  Goal 2: Change perceptions.
  Old. Slow to react. Out of touch. Past its innovation prime. Unhip. These are difficult brand identity traits to overcome. You might have expected Microsoft to unleash a multimedia campaign with a variety of young artists using the full power of the web and social media to collaborate on an interactive masterpiece of content that extols the virtues of Vista for the under-30 target market. But no, Crispin and Microsoft choose to show a couple of 50-somethings who haven’t been relevant in a decade clipping their toenails. Now they’re countering with a 60-something quantum healer, an actress whose show is targeted to 40-somethings, and… Pharrell Williams. Hmm.

  Goal 3: Excite investors and the market.
  Microsoft is spending $300 million on this campaign. Let’s think about that number, and how else it could have been spent to reach goals 1, 2 and 3. For instance, they could have grown a new generation of test tube babies in a lab, then built a fleet of spaceships to transport them all to another planet, where they could be raised on Vista as the only operating system they have ever known. And you’d still have money left over for a hip Pharrell Williams campaign back here on Earth. If I’m an investor in that company, I at least see where my money gets spent (and potentially get to ride on a spaceship), and the market congratulates Microsoft on its innovation. Everybody wins.

  We’ll have to wait and see how this campaign plays out. Perhaps Microsoft has something up its sleeve to prove all the naysayers wrong. Because for the past few years, they’ve only proven us right.

  Matt Bledsoe
  Big Fat Brain

• 9. David Walbridge  |  September 20th, 2008 at 4:55 pm

  And the tag line is .. ” I’m a PC.”

  Wait – don’t you mean “I use a pc?”

  Or are you saying that you are a grey plastic box, sitting under my desk and delivering my email?

  Bitt odd, that

  Or is it that you are “PC” which is something else entirely…

  Another confusing ad. From the folks that brought you Vista.

Leave a Comment

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed