“As Microsoft prepares to shed 18,000 employees, you’d think the company’s marketing team would be working overtime to boost income and shore up weaker products. Instead, it doesn’t appear that any lessons have been learned from the ongoing failure of the Surface,” Gene Steinberg writes for The Tech Night Owl.
“Now in a previous round of Surface ads, Microsoft touted the ability to run Office and Skype, forgetting, or ignoring the fact that you could also do both on a Mac or an iPad,” Steinberg writes. “So where’s the advantage? Besides, the consumers that Microsoft was targeting would care about the latter more than the former. In addition to Macs and iPads, they could also run Skype on an iPhone or an Android phone, not to mention Windows Phone. So?”
“In other words, if a company is touting something as advantage, make sure it’s an advantage,” Steinberg writes. “It’s not an advantage to mention a product or service that the competition also has. It just coneys the impression that, in this case at least, Microsoft must think potential customers of the Surface 3 aren’t very smart.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: “Microsoft must think potential customers of the Surface 3 aren’t very smart.”
Hey, look, Microsoft finally got something right.
Related articles:
Microsoft no longer dissing Apple’s iPad in Surface ads, tries dissing MacBook Air instead – August 11, 2014
Surface damage mounts at beleaguered Microsoft as losses surpass $1.7 billion – August 4, 2014
Beleaguered Microsoft’s Windows 8’s uptake falls again, now slower than Vista flop – August 4, 2014
Beleaguered Microsoft employees ‘shell shocked’ at size of layoffs – July 18, 2014
Beleaguered Microsoft’s 18,000 layoffs the beginning of a painful attempt to clean up Ballmer’s mess, says Street – July 17, 2014
Surface Pro 3 shows beleaguered Microsoft is lost – May 22, 2014
Beleaguered Microsoft is a total embarrassment – May 21, 2014
Microsoft’s Surface Pro 3: The toaster-fridge makes its formal debut – May 21, 2014
Surface Pro 3: Microsoft seems more confused about the future than ever – May 21, 2014
Microsoft shows 12-inch ‘Surface Pro 3′ tablet, starts at $800 – May 20, 2014
Gene Steinberg is a useless gasbag.
MSFT is laying off 18000 workers, most from the absorption of Nokia.
MSFT has challenges. Listening to stein berg’s sage observations is not one of them
you forgot they also ‘laid off’
: Ballmer, the CEO
and Sinosfky the creator Win 8 and Surface
(and Bill Gates stepped down from being Chairman of the Board)
How do you EXPLAIN those layoffs if Msft is doing fine?
Perhaps you should reread terrym10’s post – nowhere does he say Microsoft is doing fine. His observations are accurate on all counts – Steinberg long ago stopped saying anything that is either incisive or not bleeding obvious. Microsoft’s problems go far, far deeper than advertising the availability of Office on Surface.
Maybe YOU should reread his post?
“MSFT is laying off 18000 workers, most from the absorption of Nokia.”
he was sort of blaming the layoffs on ‘the absorption of Nokia” which is true to an extant but MISLEADING in arguing to the thesis of the article which is msft is suffering.
As far as I know Ballmer, Sinosfky, gates didn’t work for Nokia…
Who said “… if Msft is doing fine?”
terrym10 said “MSFT has challenges.”
From the headline, I thought: “Is Microsoft releasing a ‘death watch’ product before Apple’s September event?”
Hey, Nutella! What a fun idea!
Wow… One of the most bigoted things I’ve seen on the web. This kind of thinking is precisely what gives apple fans of all kinds a bad name.
Do the rest of us a favor and stay under your machined-aluminum rock.
When a company dominates the professional, corporate and government world with their hardware and software, it seems stupid for MDN to use “death watch” in their description of the future of the evil empire.
Yes, Apple has the best gadgets. One day the fickle, pop culture market will grow bored with them and then there will be a different kind of death watch.
Oh wait … there’s Tim’s “great new products in the pipeline” – that’ll be Apple’s salvation. How could I have forgotten about that?
So all those iPads used in aircraft cockpits and used in hospitals around the world are just a flash in the pan, according to you?
Never mind the small disaster
Who’s the stronger, who’s the faster?
Let the pupil show the master—
Next!
=:~)
If you really knew, the smart money is buying great innovative products from like the Surface Pro. See what delta is buying, not Google garbage and not even Apple. http://news.delta.com/index.php?s=20295&item=124327
They also use Microsoft Dynamics for their business apps.
…note to self… Don’t fly Delta.
Note the small d in delta…
Love the trolling!
Delta pilots fought against the Surface, and the Surface isn’t even approved for use in the cockpit by the FAA, so it’s essentially a legal paperweight.
And since these are Surface 2s that were bought (I’m sure at a severe discount or even donated by MS), they are now outdated since the Surface 3 has been released.
Missed it-FAA did approve the S2 in February, but it wasn’t approved when Delta went with it over their pilots’ preference of the iPads they tested with.
Where in the cockpit of any modern jet aircraft are the pilot and co-pilot going to find a surface to put their handy, clickable Microsoft Surfaces on so they can use them as designed?
The day Microshaft makes something that doesn’t suck is the day they begin manufacturing vacuum cleaners.
An oldie – but a goodie.
@terrym10 and @dricht1
If the Surface is so good, and the comments in the linked article are so off-base, kindly explain why Microsoft are down the toilet to the tune of $1.7 billion vis-à-vis the Surface?
There’s dumb, and then there’s your average M$ fanboy.
=:~)
How do you spell desperation?
M I C R O S O F T
“It’s not an advantage to mention a product or service that the competition also has. It just coneys the impression that, in this case at least, Microsoft must think potential customers of the Surface 3 aren’t very smart.”
And they’d be right!
I love the acrid smell of desperation that astroturfers canvassing Apple sites a month before and after Apple’s September event give off—even more so this year.
as stated in earlier MDN piece from today…
Microsoft’s commercials seem to be geared towards:
– keeping its current user base more than growing it (it’s highly unlikely that Mac users would switch to Windows)
– those who want as little change as possible
– those who are regularly (as though intentionally) under-informed
– those who just plain hate Apple
and last, but not least:
– those who just don’t understand that things are more than just the sum of their parts…specs don’t determine equality…………………
Sad…just sad…
The Surface Pro 3 is indeed better than any thing Apple currently offers. It quite simplely makes the iPad and Macbook Air obsolete, to those who care to check it out. But be careful you would have to leave your sheltered Apple world. But don’t worry Apple will catch up, and all you mindless Apple fanboys will think Apple had it first.
Obsolete? The market leader who also happens to be the highest valued company in the world, the entire freakn world. The billion dollar losing product might be a better fit for your needs, but to say that iPad is obsolete just makes you look stupid, or ignorant, or head so far up your own ass you can no longer see anything but shit.
Don’t just declare this to be true without Devine creds. Show me places where Apple is being turned away, (and why). You have a start with Delta. Then just to be fair list companies where Apple is succeeding (and why). Show me you’re not a fanboy and give up some facts on both side I can use.
…better than iPad…. sure just like Zune was so much better than iPod. Keep the faith, brother…
Delta prototyped their electronic flight bag with the iPad. Over the objections of their pilots, Delta replaced the iPad with the Surface. Some Delta pilots guess that a considerable inducement was given to Delta to do this.
You are correct – once again Microsoft has to pay companies to use their products. I’m sure it saved Delta a lot of money but those Surfaces will kill morale at the company.. Not a smart move by Delta.
“It’s not an advantage to mention a product or service that the competition also has.”
So Crest shouldn’t advertise because Colgate also cleans your teeth?
So Pepsi shouldn’t advertise because Coca Cola also offers “refreshing” soft drinks?
I don’t know Gene, but it seems like maybe advertising and marketing 101 would be useful.
Umm… Try reading with comprehension. He didn’t say they shouldn’t advertise. Maybe you’ll understand this: Ford shouldn’t say “Buy a Ford instead of a Chevy, because we have POWER STEERING! Chevy has power steering too. It’s not an advantage.
So are you naturally hostile towards others?
A product or a service is NOT a feature. Thanks for trying to make them the same.
Next.
Didn’t mean to come across hostile. My apologies. But you twisted the point of the story. He was saying it’s not good to mention a product or service as an advantage when the competition has the same product or service. He didn’t say you shouldn’t advertise your product.
Okay, thanks — your other posts around here don’t seem hostile.
Gene said: “In other words, if a company is touting something as advantage, make sure it’s an advantage. It’s not an advantage to mention a product or service that the competition also has.”
That’s baloney. It assumes all consumers being reached by your advertising have equal knowledge of all competitive products that share that feature, and are sufficiently satisfied with their current solution to not think about switching. It also assumes your trust level for all advertisers is equal.
If you bought Crest because it was advertised as getting your teeth sparkly white, and you are happy with the job Crest is doing for you, you won’t be tempted to try Colgate. But if you’re doubting that Crest is actually living up to it’s claim, and you have little reason (beyond caveat emptor) to distrust Colgate, you might well give it a try next time.
Gene said: “It’s not an advantage to mention a product or service that the competition also has.” In an advertisement that would play out as an actor proclaiming to another person, “Yeah, and my Surface runs Office, too.” Or, “Crest is getting my teeth sparkly white.” That kind of structure doesn’t say the other guys product doesn’t, it reassures you that theirs does. And it’s absolutely valid to do that in advertising.
To me it’s more like saying, “Use Crest, because it has fluoride.” All the top toothpastes have fluoride. It doesn’t set you above the competition, it’s more akin to “Me too!”
I did seem snippy. Sorry again.
5 stars 😉
When a feature isn’t tied to a need, it’s not a benefit to a buyer. So “It runs Office” and “It has fluoride” are both features that (generally) won’t sway consumers. I wonder if this is a sign of arrogance (still) within the Microsoft advertising chain of approvals.
There ya go! I think you hit the key point.
Missed my end-quotes. D’oh!! 😖
And then you can just [Google] it.