On Jan 21, 5:16 pm, George Barca <georgebarca1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 00:46:01 +0000, Roy Schestowitz
>
> <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >Hash: SHA1
>
> >____/ Terry Porter on Wednesday 21 January 2009 23:28 : \____
>
> >> Windows was always hype and advertising as it's never been overly suitable
> >> for use anywhere, including home or business.
>
> >Apple too spends over $300,000,000 per annum on propaganda (aka "marketing").
>
> >You must always assume that what you hear about Microsoft and Apple products is
> >mostly lies and exaggerations. That's how the PR industry works -- an industry
> >worth 1 trillion dollars _per year_ (costing, on average, 20% of anything you
> >purchase).
>
> Microsoft's get the facts campaign is a very good example of
> this. The entire campaign was constructed of cherry picked
> scenarios that of course showed Microsoft and Windows in a
> positive manner. The question really should be are these accurate
> samples? In most cases they are not. Apple is a different animal
> altogether and their methodology is to create an emotional bond
> between their products and the consumer. Subaru uses a similar
> style of advertising. I do feel you are being harsh though in
> your criticisms of Apple. Advertising in general is the art of
> selling something to a person who neither needs, wants or can
> afford that something but is still emotionally attached to it and
> will go out and buy it. I don't find Apple's advertising to be
> deceptive however past experience has educated me to the danger
> of buying version 1.0 of an Apple product. It's best to wait a
> few months for the new improved version.
> George Barca
> georgebarca1...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I don't feel negative about Apple's advertising the way I do about
Microsoft's (like Get The Facts, give me a break, can't they do
anything but put out lies?), partly because Apple has done a good job
over the last couple of years explaining to people that malware is not
just a fact of life, or something that is inevitable with computers.
This has had a tremendous impact on the public perception of Windows,
even for people who have stayed with Windows. Windows has been
copying Apple for so long that many aspects of the UI are nearly on a
par, but still the Apple experience for most people is better than the
Windows experience. I base this on the testimonies I've read and
heard. A lot of people don't mind XP too much, but they positively
love their Macs.
Also I don't mind the iPod ads with the dancing girl with the wires
hanging from her ears. Not because it's sexy, but because it's
elegant and effective, and I'm glad to see people buying iPods rather
than Zunes (fortunately, that's what they're doing). I wish Apple
weren't tangled up with DRM, but it's not as bad as Vista where DRM
seems to be the main purpose. And I've got to hand it to Jobs and
Apple, they do a great job of design. Remember Jobs said that he
didn't begrudge Gates's success in marketing, but what he couldn't
forgive is that he had no taste.
Apple has also shown that Microsoft doesn't do so well when it has to
compete on the basis of quality, rather than exploitation of their
monopoly position. An awful lot of what comes out of Redmond is some
latest scheme to lock people into Microsoft products, to avoid
competing on the merits of the product. Apple doesn't do that (they
can't, they don't have a monopoly position), instead they've just
created some high quality products.
|
|
