“In its ad blitz announcing the first ever Intel-based Macs, Apple skewers PCs — which happen to be Intel’s biggest customers,” Amanda Cantrell writes for CNNMoney. “While Apple is known for controversial ads, the newest spot puts Intel in a potentially uncomfortable spot. Clearly, Intel is happy that its newest customer — one that’s especially rich on cultural cachet at the moment — wants to celebrate the partnership, and gets some free advertising to boot. But the commercial also takes a swing at Intel-based PCs, which some analysts believe could alienate Intel’s other customers.”
“In the spot, an announcer intones that for years, Intel chips have been ‘trapped’ inside ‘dull little boxes, dutifully performing dull little tasks,’ and concludes with the announcement that Intel chips have finally been ‘set free, and get to live life inside a Mac,'” Cantrell writes. “But those ‘dull little boxes’ — PCs — are still Intel’s bread and butter. Intel’s number-one customer is Dell, which exclusively uses Intel chips and it does big business with other computer makers including Hewlett-Packard, Lenovo and Acer. As ‘The Critic,’ Jon Lovitz’s cranky and neurotic animated character, might have said – ‘How awkward!'”
“For its part, Dell shrugged off the ad,” Cantrell writes. “‘As far as their marketing goes, that’s marketing,’ said Dell spokesman Jess Blackburn. ‘We continue to have a very solid relationship with Intel and nothing has changed in that respect. We probably are their largest customer; we shipped 10 million systems in the fourth quarter. I don’t think any supplier is going to ignore a customer that is building that many systems and using that many of their parts in them.'”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: The problem with Apple’s ad isn’t that it insults the likes of Dell, it’s that it insults the very people to whom Apple wants to sell Macs. Apple should show snippets of Mac OS X (a couple of seconds of Exposé here, a Dock ripple there, a Fast User Switching cube effect, a quick iWeb shot, etc.) to the world via their TV ads while they have a chance, before Microsoft covers the world with Windows Vista advertising. Instead, the only thing Apple does is tell people they made a stupid choice and show a blank Mac. Hopefully, the ad will drive people to their nearest Apple Retail Store, so that they can finally see Mac OS X, iLife ’06, etc.
Again, why iPods (and iTunes downloads) don’t come preloaded with THIS is beyond us. Such an omission is criminal. It’d be easily deleted, unobtrusive, and Windows-only users would be able to quickly see what they’re missing.
Advertisements:
• MacBook Pro. The first Mac notebook built upon Intel Core Duo with iLife ’06, Front Row and built-in iSight. Starting at $1999. Free shipping.
• iMac. Twice as amazing — Intel Core Duo, iLife ’06, Front Row media experience, Apple Remote, built-in iSight. Starting at $1299. Free shipping.
• iMac and MacBook Pro owners: Apple USB Modem. Easily connect to the Internet using dial-up service. Only $49.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Corporate IT buyers fuming that Apple has Intel Core Duo Macs shipping while Dell and HP wait – January 12, 2006
Report: Intel didn’t know about Apple’s Intel ad calling PCs ‘dull’ until just before Jobs’ keynote – January 11, 2006
Ndelc,
Apple consider themselves to primarily be hardware maker.. The bottom line is that the bread and butter of their business is Macs and iPods, both are hardware products. Sure , they make the software that runs on both systems, but the profitability for them is not in selling copies of OSX and iLife, it is in the hardware.. That’s why to get a fair understanding of Apple’s marketsshare you have to compare them to other box makers like Dell, HP and the like.
If you want to skip the whole hardware argument and just talk software, then yes, you are right, Microsoft has a 95% marketshare while Apple has a mere 4% marketshare.. But unlike Microsoft, there’s much more to Apple’s business than just software. They have not survived for nearly 30 years by selling just software, they’ve survived by selling hardware..
Justified, your post came while I was typing… I basically said the same thing as you..
Justified and Mike,
I agree 100% with you that the bulk of their profit is in the hardware, but you’re completely missing my point. I’m saying that when it comes to advertising, they need to push the OS, not the hardware. The two are inseparable. If you want Mac hardware, you have to use the Mac OS (excluding Linux of course, but we’re talking about average users here), and if you want the Mac OS, you must buy the hardware, so it’s not an issue of having to decide which makes them more money. My point is that what sets them apart from all of their competition, whether it be on the hardware or software front, is the Mac OS. That’s the gem. That’s why a Mac is so great, but that’s the one part they completely ignore in all TV spots.
ndelc,
It seems that you’re playing too many sides of an argument. But, going back to Windows’ 95% to Mac’s 4%, and how marketing the greatness of OS X might eat into that 95%, it goes back to the statement I made earlier.
Comparing the Mac OS to Windows is a non-comparison. Unlike the Mac, most uses for Windows are unremarkable at best. Dumb terminals, corporate installations (for tedius work), ATMs, etc. — Windows became ubiquitous in very much the same way that toilet paper or corrugated card board did, and it had nothing to do with marketing the Windows OS.
Most people who use Windows at home do so because they use Windows at work and/or it’s the cheaper box to get on the internet. I don’t think showing Mac OS greatness is going to get to these people.
Those who have been using Windows boxes for their entertainment (photos, vids, music, etc.) have been on the switch for a few years now.
Since the return of Jobs and the launch of the original iMac, Apple has stopped competing against the M$ mediocrity and has reinvented itself as a premium brand. They’re marketing strategy is “lifestyle” and “cool” and “hip.” And it’s working.
I agree with you that the OS is what sets Mac apart, but I don’t belieive pointing out advantages or doing a “process’ or “how to’ type commercial is the effective way for Apple to advertise… I honestly really do like Apple’s advertising.. They advertise the way a premium product of any type should… By selling a feeling or a lifestyle.. It has worked for Apple in the past with all of their biggest products from the original Macintosh to the orignal iMac to the iPod.. They have always used this type of advertising.. And yes, it is effective. Apple just needs to do a whole series of commercials and run them consistently.. Not just a random spot here or there…
>MDN wrote: The problem with Apple’s ad isn’t that it insults the likes of Dell, it’s that it insults the very people to whom Apple wants to sell Macs.
Agreed. Furthermore, it shows that Apple has no problems telling lies in a very public way.
How many great things were made and run using Dell computers?
– movies
– scientific research
– business
– banks
– government
– schools
– music
etc….
It’s not always a good thing for a company to believe its own hype… Apple really buys into that BS – “Intel chips are finally free”?
They are neither free (unbounded) or free (zero dollars)!
>MDN wrote: The problem with Apple’s ad isn’t that it insults the likes of Dell, it’s that it insults the very people to whom Apple wants to sell Macs.
Agreed. Furthermore, it shows that Apple has no problems telling lies in a very public way.
How many great things were made and run using Dell computers?
– movies
– scientific research
– business
– banks
– government
– schools
– music
etc….
It’s not always a good thing for a company to believe its own hype… Apple really buys into that BS – “Intel chips are finally free”?
They are neither free (unbounded) or free (zero dollars)!
>MDN wrote: The problem with Apple’s ad isn’t that it insults the likes of Dell, it’s that it insults the very people to whom Apple wants to sell Macs.
Agreed. Furthermore, it shows that Apple has no problems telling lies in a very public way.
How many great things were made and run using Dell computers?
– movies
– scientific research
– business
– banks
– government
– schools
– music
etc….
It’s not always a good thing for a company to believe its own hype… Apple really buys into that BS – “Intel chips are finally free”?
They are neither free (unbounded) or free (zero dollars)!
>MDN wrote: The problem with Apple’s ad isn’t that it insults the likes of Dell, it’s that it insults the very people to whom Apple wants to sell Macs.
Agreed. Furthermore, it shows that Apple has no problems telling lies in a very public way.
How many great things were made and run using Dell computers?
– movies
– scientific research
– business
– banks
– government
– schools
– music
etc….
It’s not always a good thing for a company to believe its own hype… Apple really buys into that BS – “Intel chips are finally free”?
They are neither free (unbounded) or free (zero dollars)!
You’re wrong.. They are now free to run in the best computers with the best OS in the world.. Imagine the possibilities…
MDN’s take is spot on. Whenever I show off fast user switching, Exposé, Dashboard, etc, I get the greatest response from people not familiar with OS X. Sometimes they’re just walking by, and I’ll do one of the above, and they get all excited and say something like, “Wow, how did you do that?”
That video would be perfect as part of the standard install.
Justified,
I don’t understand how I’m playing too many sides of an argument. I think you just don’t understand what my argument is. Regardless of whether the majority of PCs are used for tedious corporate work, or dumb terminals, someone still made the decision to buy Windows boxes for that work, and those are sales that could have gone to Apple. As for your comment about the fact that most people who would switch for entertainment (photos, music, etc.) I think you’re 100% wrong. I have three members of my family who switched recently exactly for those reasons. They were blown away by what you could do with iLife and that’s all it took to get them to switch. Those are the same type of people who are buying because of the iPod halo effect, and the people Apple should be targeting. The beauty is, for many of those people, they need not fear abandoning the library of software they have for Windows because a new Mac might very well ship with all the software they’ll ever need. Apple has always marketed themselves as the premium brand, that didn’t come about when Jobs came back. When Jean-Louisse Gassee was essentially running the show (the Spindler years), he was responsible for setting prices ridiculously high just because he thought that not everyone should be able to buy a Mac. He is almost single-handedly responsible for the misconception that Macs are more expensive than PCs and that happened while Steve was gone.
Mike, I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I hope you’re right though, because unfortunately it doesn’t look as though they are going to change the way they advertise.
“As for your comment about the fact that most people who would switch for entertainment (photos, music, etc.) I think you’re 100% wrong. I have three members of my family who switched recently exactly for those reasons.”
Uh, actually, I think we agree on this issue.
“Regardless of whether the majority of PCs are used for tedious corporate work, or dumb terminals, someone still made the decision to buy Windows boxes for that work, and those are sales that could have gone to Apple.”
Those sales would NEVER have gone to Apple. Period. Apple’s price — in dollars — was way too high. And no amount of marketing would have changed the minds of those corporate and business buyers.
Apple’s computers have always been expensive. But they were never really considered a “premium brand” until the rollout of the Apple retail stores and the iMacs and iPods. (There’s a distinct difference between being expensive and being a premium brand.)
Before the return of Jobs, Apple was still attempting to compete with the corporate Windows juggernaut. Jobs put that to rest by reinvigerating the creative user market. That’s the market Apple is going for. The entrepreneurs. The creatives. They don’t want the corporate Windows market. And no amount of OS-directed advertising would get them into that market anyway.
“Uh, actually, I think we agree on this issue.”
I guess I misunderstood this statement you made earlier, “Those who have been using Windows boxes for their entertainment (photos, vids, music, etc.) have been on the switch for a few years now.”
I took that to mean that everyone who would have switched for this reason already has. I don’t think that’s the case. I think it’s only just begun.
“Those sales would NEVER have gone to Apple. Period.”
My point was that there’s nothing about those jobs that couldn’t be done on a Mac. I agree that that’s not who Apple is, or even should be, targeting.
As for being a premium brand, I couldn’t disagree more. They were considered more a premium brand in the early 90s when Gassee was running the show. For awhile when he was there, the least expensive computer they offered was $2,400, and they went up to nearly $10,000. He purposefully overpriced them because he didn’t think everyone deserved one, only those who could pay the high price. Since SJ returned, I think he has done more to make them affordable, and more appealing to consumers. Top quality, absolutely. Premium? Not anymore. Perhaps what we consider “premium” just differs. In my mind it has a bit of a negative connotation. One of the definitions of premium is, “a sum added to an ordinary price or charge”. This is what I think of when I hear the word. They definitely did that in the past, but I think they are very fairly priced now. If you price a PC box outfitted similarly they are comparable, where in Gassee’s
day they were not. Of course, another definition is, “relating to or denoting a commodity or product of superior quality and therefore a higher price”, and that is pretty accurate.
I also disagree that it’s only been since Jobs has been back that they’ve been targeting creative people. They’ve done that essentially from day one with the Mac. They appealed to creatives from the start thanks to MacPaint, and later the emergence of music programs like MOTU’s Performer.
Regardless, I stand by my opinion that selling the brand won’t work with computers. They are around today in spite of that approach, not because of it. Their best chance to grow marketshare is to show off the gem, their software, specifically OS X and iLife. I do not advocate 30 seconds of cool screenshots of Tiger, but rather a series of commercials that show off the cool things you can easily do on a Mac. I’m certain that it could be done.
If Apple really wants to show off the OS, partner with QVC and then you get to spend an hour showing off the product on the air. Apple would sell a ton of computers this way. Do it once a month.
I stubbed my toe while walking around in the dark last night bare foot, can I sue Apple now?
FINALLY, you mention what the ads are meant to do, GET PEOPLE TO AN APPLE STORE. There is nothing repeat NOTHING that Apple could show in 30 seconds that would make someone think “Wow! I gotta get me one of those because my current machine a) doesn’t animate when it fast user switches, b) doesn’t have a dock (and doesn’t ripple), 3) doesn’t do that funky window-move-out-of-my-way thing.
Especially not when there are things like this available.
Exposé clones — http://www.petefreitag.com/item/124.cfm
No, it doesn’t work exactly like Exposé, but when your option is to
a) buy a whole new computer (and re-purchase apps)
or
b) buy a program that will let you pretend and keep the rest of your investment,
WHICH will most people do?
BUT you did include the
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
“Hopefully, the ad will drive people to their nearest Apple Retail Store, so that they can finally see Mac OS X, iLife ’06, etc.”
line, so you’re starting to see the light
Advertising isn’t just selling a product; it’s selling an idea.
I don’t buy an affordable product just because it is better or more useful that another, I buy an affordable product because I made a conscious and deliberate decision that a certain affordable product is better or more useful that another. Therefore, if one assumes that OS X is an affordable product, then Apple first needs to make people think about OS X as an alternative to Windows. That is, get their attention.
What about a commercial like this?
http://live.watchmactv.com/?p=146
Mac OS X ads on an iPod? That is soooo Windows Media Player.
A little bit of knowledge can be dangerous.
Commercials are not worth the cash anymore. Less people are watching TV and out of those an increasing number are automatically removing the ads before they watch the show. Tie that up with those that channel surf during the breaks and the number of potential customers watching the ad itself is tiny.
Apple are playing the long game. Slowly building up the Apple Stores and using the iPod to get people into them. There’s no better ad for OSX than watching a crowd of people using it, especially when there are plenty of staff around to answer the “Will it open my Word docs?” type questions.
Always remember – Apple’s team is smarter than you.
the ad is for developers, not for consumers. just like the think differen ads, they are for the mac base and the employees, to rally them.
when apple sees that they have enough apps on the mac(they only know how many they really want), then we will see ads for consumers.
Apple can afford to offend PC users by accusing them of working on “dull little tasks”. After all, Apple has 3% of the market nailed down. What more could they need? 4%?
It’s Apple’s unfounded arrogance that has put them in the position of being the perennial underdog, and it’s Apple’s arrogance that will keep them there forever. I own two Macs, and they’re OK computers. But neither one of them has figured out how to suck my dick yet. Until they do, in my opinion Apple is FOS.