Last night’s “Emmy awards… served as the launching pad for three new Apple ‘Get a Mac’ ads, starring hip young actor Justin Long as a Mac and stodgy-before-his-time actor John Hodgman as a PC. As is my wont, I’ll try to review them, mostly from the mundane standpoint of PC-versus-Mac accuracy,” Harry McCracken writes for PC World.
“Accident” – Apple’s Mac OS X isn’t just safer than a Windows PC, portable Macs themselves are safer, too:
McCracken writes, “Seems a little oblique, unless you’ve ever damaged a notebook or its power brick in the way referenced by the ad. But MagSafe is indeed a wonderful innovation, although as someone who uses a MagSafe-equipped Mac and a non-MagSafe-equipped PC notebook.”
MacDailyNews Take: The ad’s purpose is not really to promote MagSafe. The ad’s purpose it to imply that Apple thinks about the details with Macs, as opposed to how the details are treated by Windows PC box assemblers and their main operating system maker.
“Angel/Devil” – Windows PC fights inner demon upon being presented an iPhoto book created on a Mac:
McCracken writes, “This is one of a number of “Get a Mac” ads whose point seems to boil down to A) Macs all come with the iLife suite, while PCS have no standard creativity tools beyond Windows XP’s skimpy offerings; and/or B) the vaguer, less defensible idea that PCs are just plain terrible for doing anything that isn’t boring. For the record, iLife is a dandy product which continues to be ripped off by almost every competitor on the PC side. But Snapfish, Shutterfuly, and umpteen other free services let PCs create nice photo books. And judged in terms of sheer volume, PC users have far more fun tools to choose from than Mac users do.”
MacDailyNews Take: This ad is one of the weakest in Apple’s “Get a Mac” campaign. However, we must point out the far weaker (because it’s just plain wrong) argument offered by McCraken (and often other Windows PC advocates), “PC users have far more fun tools to choose from than Mac users do.”
First of all, the amount of tools is meaningless when Mac users have the same or better quality choices. For example, and with made-up numbers to illustrate the point: a choice of 15 photo management options vs. a choice of 3 photo management options is meaningless when the Mac has the best three from which to choose. Same goes for Word Procesors and any other category of software.
Second, in case McCracken hasn’t heard, Macs can run Windows applications, too. Windows PCs can’t run Mac apps. Therefore Apple Mac users have the ability to run largest software library on earth, not Windows PC users. Windows PC users in reality “have less tools to choose from than Mac users do” in every single software category.
Also, did McCraken miss the part where the PC’s devilish side said, “Oh, fun, we tried that once, it was nothing but pain and frustration.” The truth in that statement will resonate with Windows sufferers.
“Trust Mac” – Windows PC tries disguise in attempt to evade spyware and viruses. Mac doesn’t need to do anything:
McCracken writes, “Another riff on a major point in favor of the Mac platform–the fact that it’s nearly free of viruses and spyware… Even in a world of slightly more OS X security worries than before, that’s still a huge argument in favor of the Mac and against Windows XP. If I were marketing Macs, I’d continue to hammer away at it.”
MacDailyNews Take: Some of these Windows PC users just cling to the incorrect notion that Mac OS X has been affected by viruses and spyware. Or they can’t wrap their minds around the truth. Fact: Mac OS X is virus and spyware-free.
Full article here.
Related articles:
Apple debuts three new ‘Get a Mac’ ads – August 27, 2006
Microsoft’s Windows is inherently more vulnerable to severe malware than Apple’s Mac OS X – August 23, 2006
Symantec researcher: At this time, there are no file-infecting viruses that can infect Mac OS X – July 13, 2006
Apple: ‘Get a Mac. Say ‘Buh-Bye’ to viruses’ – June 01, 2006
My problem with these ads is that, while John Hodgman supposedly plays a PC, he actually is representing average Joe, the ads showing him as dumb, underachieving, boring, etc. That’s not a positive message to lure a potential switcher with but an insulting one, and you risk the viewer rooting for the underdog.
I agree with gheem. Show the frickin OS! Or at least do an ad with them talking about it. Before Vista gets out!
LIKE THIS:
As files and folders morph up and down on the Mac OS desktop:
PC Guy: Is that some special effect you’re working on?
Mac: Huh? Oh that’s just Mac OS ten.
PC Guy: Everything looks so nice. I didn’t know Macs were like that.
Mac: Yeah, check this out, all your windows — uh, well my windows, they’re translucent.
PC Guy: What does that mean?
Mac: You can see through them. Check it out. Check this out.
CLOSE UP: PC Guy looking at the Mac OS desktop.
PC Guy: Can I get one of those?
You see, this is my problem. When we get hit, we’re going to get hit hard and it’s going to be embarassing . People with their “call me when it happens” attitudes are a large part of the looming disaster.
A week or 2 a go the department of homeland security released a warning about Windows and everyone went off about how poor Windows secuirty is. Funny thing is, they’ve also released warnings about problems in OS X.
Instead of releasing asinine commercials Apple should be releasing best security practices videos and white papers to prevent compromises.
How many Mac users can identify the background processes running on their machines?
Few that I know of. I keep my system clean. There are about 207 processes that show up in the background. At first glance they all look standard. I had to stop and wonder what “blued” was for a moment, but nothing unusual. Then again, how hard is it to hide something? Not hard at all.
I hope that Apple looks at some of the security measures that are being included in Vista. That’s right ugly old stupid Vista.
I’d like to see them including something with functionality similar to Little Snitch, for instance.
We have an opportunity to nip this in the bud, before it becomes chronic like it is on Windows, rather than sitting around wrongly thinking we’re immune.
===
LordRobin
“hackers want to break into a Mac because it would make them famous” (they don’t want fame, they want money).
When there’s enough Macs out there to make a profitable target, we’ll see Macs attacked.
===
See, this is just bullshit.
1. Mac users SPEND more money (and “have” and “make” more money than a typical PC users) = ATTRACTIVE TARGET.
2. Mac users have LESS understanding of security and access control = ATTRACTIVE TARGET.
3. Mac users are laissez-faire about security= ATTRACTIVE TARGET.
4. Mac users have broadband more than typical PC users many of whom are on dial-up to this day = ATTRACTIVE TARGET.
If a hacker COULD get into Mac OS X easily, Macs would make a GREAT platform for illegal activity.
But the Mac is INHERENTLY secure so they CAN’T.
That’s not to say there aren’t weaknesses or exploits in theory, but all get patched up quickly thanks to parts of Mac OS X being based on open-sourced Darwin code and Apple’s need to remain secure in order to brag about it.
Oh and any “obscurity” the mac platofrom has makes it (drumroll) = ATTRACTIVE TARGET.
A hacker would LOVE to host pron sites on some Mac Pros on a T1 in some unsuspecting company…
No one is LOOKING to see if anything unusual is going on on a Mac, whereas the IT dept is scrambing to pick the nits out of every Windows OS workstation…
BUT, since the Mac is INHERENTLY secure, even this “negative” aspect of the Mac (that ti’s low market share actually is a BOON to would-be hackers) is MOOT.
Kick the FUD in the balls and tell MS I sent ya…
Everytime a customer calls with spyware and software problems I just would like to yell out loud: GET A MAC!!!
Darwin is not really so important security review-wise (it hasn’t got that big a following): Linux and the apps that run on it (some of those running on OS X, too) are more important there, I guess. Most Unix-related OS X’ apps and APIs patchs seem to come from what is being discovered there.
And the Mac isn’t inherently secure (is there such a thing at all?): it is far more secure, true, but one only has to watch the continuous stream of security patches to see there are flaws everywhere, oftentimes in the most “Mac-proper” APIs such as Quicktime. Apple is not particularly quick to patch them, anyway.
What I see as the most important factor preventing Macs becoming an interesting target is the relative unconnectedness of Mac users, more than its absolute numbers. The clumps of Mac friends are sort of like terrorist cells 😀 , small and far apart. But their information resources are mostly the same few concentrated ones, which helps preparedness a bit. That means a quite reduced warez scene and such, too. That the script-kiddies have to buy Macs to operate on them is another barrier.
Also, the fact is that some malware has been demonstrated in the past. As proof of concept, true (and it seems not specially goodly written at that, which leads one to think what if someone would care to rewite them good), but then that’s what it takes to prove OS X is vulnerable. Let’s add to that some real scares we had concerning certain OS X’ ambiguities dealing with files and such that were demonstrably terrifying (allowing things like a complete account’s files erasure).
One musn’t be so complacent as to disdain caution.
I say “inherently” because Mac OS X/NeXTSTEP/BSD have “security” (user priveleges, access controls, etc.) as an intrinsic part of what they are, from the initial design level onwards.
They were built from the ground-up as networkable, multi-user environments UNLIKE Windows which is cobbled-together and its security is a defensive afterthought, instead of a proactive design criteria.
Of COURSE there can always be openings for exploits in any OS.
We’re talking realistically. When we say security, we have to mean “steps taken during the design of the OS and features present that will most likely lead to highest possible security compared to all the other relevant OSes”.
There is no such thing as “true security” whether in meat-space or virtual.
“149 trillion years” to hack AES 128 encryption is still a non-zero chance of being opened sooner. But of course we’re talking “realistically” it is “secure”.
Pepper in some “-enough” and “more” if you like to any “secure” you see me type. Consumers ripped off by Microsoft will forgive the non-zero chance of being hacked as opposed to 144,000 active viruses and much higher likelihood.
Cute situation -> Get a Mac
Cute situation -> Get a Mac
Cute situation -> Get a Mac
…repeat, repeat, repeat
At some point, people will be frutstrated with their PC, or want to do more of the things they don’t know how to do with their PC, or whatever is represented in the cute situation, and they will make the connection to getting a Mac.
When they go see the Mac, they will get the experience (beauty, design, etc…) and hopefully make the purchase.
It’s really hard to showcase the reasons why you would want a Mac in such a short amount of time by actually demonstrating with the actual products.
As incredible as the MacBook is, it looks just like a notebook computer on tv.
These ads do a great job of putting into people’s minds, ‘You’ve got a PC problem -> get a Mac’
I’ll coin the phrase “Obscurity through security” to describe the Mac’s fate thus far.
The Mac is ostensibly punished for being as secure as it is. That is true for the IT world but not so for the home markets.
The entire “IT ecosystem” (to steal the iPod domain’s nickname for 3rd party goods and services) is based on viruses running wild, data being stolen, altered or destroyed, hardware failing via corruption, etc…
The Mac is inherently less likely to NEED any of this, well, junk (or snake oil)…so the Mac naturally maintains a smaller market share in terms of what typical (read as “stupid”) IT professionals will seek to purchase or deploy; for entirely selfish, job-preserving, relevance-preserving reasons.
The home users however, will wake up, see that they don’t have an IT guru at home like they do at work, and decide maybe, just maybe, if a Mac can do all the things their old PC does (Word, spreadsheets, Internet, AOL, chatting, email, printing, and the odd game) that it’d be worth the li’l bit extra to splurge on a new Mac and start over.
To steal Nike’s tagline… Just Do It.
Newsflash!!!
OS X is UNIX. Unix is NOT obscure. Unix is the system of choice for financial institutions and credit card companies. Unix has read, write, and execute locks on each and every individual file and directory. Want to know what processes are running? Open “terminal” and type “ps”. How difficult is that? Unix was designed to be a multi-user, networked OS that provides privacy and security to the individual user. Administration is done through superuser accounts that are logged in only for that purpose. The only major bank or credit card company to be hacked within the last 3 years was running on a WINDOWS server.
DOS was designed to be a single-user, non-networked system with NO security features. When Windows was laid on top of DOS it didn’t get much better. The Windows registry was invented to discourage software piracy. Gone were the days of simply copying an executable file. Windows was PURPOSELY designed to let outside processes and entities (Microsoft) edit the registry without user knowledge. Hackers quickly took notice and advantage of that.
Is OS X (BSD Unix) inherently secure by design? ABSOLUTELY! Is Windows a bloated, out of control, million line, security nightmare? ABSOLUTELY! Picture and elephant on stilts and you’ve got a good working model.
…When we get hit, we’re going to get hit hard and it’s going to be embarassing . People with their “call me when it happens” attitudes are a large part of the looming disaster…
Where you see ‘looming disaster’ I see …, odd, I just don’t see anything. How in the world can you interpret ‘O viruses today’ with ‘looming disaster’???
…Instead of releasing asinine commercials Apple should be…
Again, what the fsck?!? Not only are the commercials most assuredly NOT ‘asinine’, their purpose is what most commercial’s purposes are: increase knowledge of a product, hopefully to increase sales of said product, etc. Best security practices?!? Actually, just buying a Mac enhances your ‘security practices’. Same with preventing compromises.
As to all of those applications running in the background, you’ll have to become a luddite and stop using ANY computers if you fear these. I don’t know exactly WHY ‘distnoted’ is running on my Mac, but i won’t loose sleep over it nor will I worry incessantly about it.
I hope Apple does NOT try to emulate Microsoft in anything security-related. Especially concerning a program that isn’t even out yet to be tried and tested by the masses.
You were right about Little Snitch, at least. I use it and do wish something like it was included in the operating system. Of course, this would generate yet more u/i apps listed in my Activity Monitor whose exact function/purpose I may not know…
What exactly is the financial advantage in writing viruses?
None that I know of, so the idea that there is some economic advatange that exists on Windows and not on Mac because there are more Windows machines makes no sense.
Well, the nature of some of the species of malware items circulating around would show the financial advantages quite clearly: spam-emitting ones turning home PCs into “zombies” doing sort of an Akamai service for free is quite typical; keylogger ones registering and transmiting credit card keys; file encrypters that allow criminals to blackmail you into paying them for the decrypting keys. Etc.
“I say “inherently” because Mac OS X/NeXTSTEP/BSD have “security” (user priveleges, access controls, etc.) as an intrinsic part of what they are, from the initial design level onwards.”
I know what you mean by that, but most of those security mechanisms are about caging malware into the originating user account and not letting it escalate. The problem is that, although OS X is a multiuser system, most users operate in a single user account with administrator privileges: all their valuable data resides on this single account. If a piece of malware does an “erase all files in this account” operation, and such a thing was demonstrated several times in the past via some mechanisms such as Safari automatically launching downloaded files, playing around with file metadata, making an Applescript that launches Terminal, or planting a trojan Quicktime Codec or Audio Unit (modifying the User Library at those levels is not restricted)), then it doesn’t matter that the BSD underpinnings impede accessing any other accounts: the damage is done.
Also, most downloadable apps require authorization, which desensitizes users about this act’s importance. It would take just a malware app to, say, escape Versiontracker.com’s quality control filters and be posted on their pages to cause major damage to many users.
I think the Ads are spot on, and are probably the best advertising Apple has put out in years. People either love them or hate them and they sure do remember them. Thats the point of advertising.
If anything should be added, they should put a link to the get at mac section of
the apple site in the ads somewhere. Thats where the detail about OS X should be.
Showing everything that OS X can be is too much information for a 30 second spot in prime time. A single point hit home, and keeping to a human scale is a brilliant way to get the message across without seeming to “smug” or holier than thou. I think even PC users will get a smile out of these spots.
Onya Apple finally you get it right.
“My problem with these ads is that, while John Hodgman supposedly plays a PC, he actually is representing average Joe, the ads showing him as dumb, underachieving, boring, etc. That’s not a positive message to lure a potential switcher with but an insulting one, and you risk the viewer rooting for the underdog.”
It’s worked for years. Ask Fred Mertz.
Oh, oh! Lucy locked Ricky’s briefcase in the closet again!
I find the ads cute … but the Mac guy is still a little annoying. Of course … back, several years ago, so was that idiot Dell guy. At least the Mac guy is cool and annoying.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
I loved the Spywear ad. By far, thats’ be best of the 3 latest; and I’m writing this from a production standpoint. Watch Macs’ reaction to PC’s antics. VERY funny. Mac keeps laughing and trying to cover it up. I’m sure it’s because the actor kept getting tickled at the other’s performance, but beyond that there is an unplanned but true message being sent … PC’s predicament would be humorous if it were not so ludicrous.
OK……………..so you find the ads “cute”
An interesting theory, selling a product by telling your potential customers that they are idiots…………………..
hmm…………how’s that working for you?
Yes, sales are up, but because of the excellence of the product, but I think in spite of the condescending ads.
HP is doing ads which show the Windows operating system being used. Of course, the are creating an incredibly false picture of what Windows can do, but I think they are very aware of just what OSX can do and are trying a preemptive strike against what will happen should the public ever find out what OSX can really do. Who knows if that will actually happen.
And, my local Apple reseller is doing their own ads showing what you can do with OSX. But hey, what do we know, we are just small town hicks who aren’t sophistcated enough to overthink everything.
We just do ads that show what the product can do, and why we are the best value. Too simple and straighforward, I know.
===
OK……………..so you find the ads “cute”
An interesting theory, selling a product by telling your potential customers that they are idiots…………………..
hmm…………how’s that working for you?
Yes, sales are up, but because of the excellence of the product, but I think in spite of the condescending ads.
===
And I suppose the iPod silhouette ads should show the iPod MENU and show the submenus…?
BORING.
The Get a Mac ads are NOT saying the USERS are idiots, they are saying the Windows-based PC itself is idiotic.
BIG DIFFERENCE.
And every PC user I’ve talked to (I mean real ones, the ones that make up the vast majority of home users, not snide, jaded gamerz111) love the ads, they “get it” and identify with how the sillyness of PC’s character is an accurate enactment of how obtusely their actual PCs behave.
Showing a computer screen and a GUI and screens and menus and windows in 30 seconds always looks shit and rushed in a 30 second spot.
Advertisement is about idealizations and necessarily deals in highlevel abstractions to the point of stereotypes (and most stereotypes have enough truth in them to make them be offensive – if they weren’t at least partially true it’d just roll off the subject like so much nonsense.)
Personifying the Mac and the PC, using bold, if tired to some, stereotypes is actually effective with the target audience: the endless sea of unfortunate humans that bought into the aforementioned “ads that show what the product can do, and why [it is] the best value”</i> and <b>”ads which show the Windows operating system being used.” and ads that created “an incredibly false picture of what Windows can do.”
I’d rather Apple NOT be like the rest of the PC industry. I’d rather the would-be switchers think “different” when they think “Apple”.
re: “Showing a computer screen and a GUI and screens and menus and windows in 30
seconds always looks shit and rushed in a 30 second spot. “
Except when they are well done, which is the case of my local Apple reseller.
I think that the reason that Apple doesn’t show the OS on TV anymore is that the two different OS screens look almost the same now days. Have any of you seen Windows here recently. The icons look almost the same as the Mac OS X.
As for Mac security, I agree with what clyde wrote. I have security bars on my windows at home, and although I know that I’m still not 100 percent protected from burglars, I know that the vast majority of crooks aren’t going to even bother trying to break into my house but will go next door instead, where it’s a lot easier to get in.
Am I leaving myself open to viruses and spyware/mallware? No. I bought a Mac.
KenH:
Are these ads available online anywhere for viewing?
Oh – by the way, I think these ads are great. I got trashed a while back for publicly criticising the “touche” ad (which I still think is the worst one of the bunch), but I love this new set.
The only thing I would change is that I’d make the angel and devil pop onto the PC’s shoulders like ones in the old cartoons.
My favorite bits are the “pop” of the power cord, “I think that’s your screen saver…” and the whole PC spy guy thing. Hodgeman cracks me up.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
>.< mac sux…. really it does here is why:
1.Most Programs are made for Windows
2.supposely mac handles graphic programs great.. soo then why does all Computer games are for a PC…..
3.sure a pc crashes.. but at least ur done with the pc u kno u have to install it again.. but in a mac it dosent notify u it just slows down it continues to run till it just wont work att all.. even my Pentium 1 based pc can outrun a damaged mac…
4.the mac cannot be personalized.. a pc can[[replace video card etc]].
5.if a mac crashes.. u have to call support,replace a new 1.. dont forget about the $$$.
6.macs just shows u “eye candy”
7.pc shows “eye candy” and great speed and power
theres alot moore.
and about those commercials they annoy me.. [[i kno they show some truth]] but why wont they show a actual mac and pc not some dumb actors…
1 word:
stupid.