Apple retaliates with four new 'Get a Mac' advertisements

If you follow Neowin then you've been following all the recent advertisement shenanigans lately, and as you may see, said shenanigans have no end in sight. Apple has gone and released four new 'Get a Mac' ads, combating Microsoft's recent 'Laptop Hunter' series.

The four ads, titled 'Biohazard Suit', 'Legal Copy', 'Stacks' and 'Time Traveler' and aim at things like having to use virus protection (Biohazard Suit) and crashing (Time Traveler). These will no doubt spark a bonfire of typical controversy, especially the 'Time Traveler' video.

Biohazard Suit features the typical PC and Mac characters, in which PC has to wear a biohazard suit to avoid viruses out and about. Legal Copy is about PC being superior to Mac, and everything he says that is a benefit causes a legal disclaimer to grow. Stacks features PC searching through thousands of photos, and Mac informs him about iPhoto's facial recognition feature. Time Traveler shows PC traveling to the future to see if future PC has had his crashing issues fixing, and upon being asked, future PC freezes up.

The ads are shown below. Please, post your thoughts in the comments below, loyal Neowinians.

Biohazard Suit:

Legal Copy:

Stacks:

Time Traveler:

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Apple readying AV cables for an upcoming HD iPhone

Next Story

Microsoft charges less than $15 for each XP netbook

249 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

SONY Picture Motion Browser does face recognition. It's not perfect, but no face recognition suite is.
Does anyone know how to get it to sort photos to a by date taken directory structure like canon zoom browser can?

Yeah, but snarky and arrogant is the cornerstone of all that is Mac. Look at their founder! Time machine! Ha, that's a laugh! in 2150, Macs won't exist.

Wow, is that the best they can come up with? Apple's marketing machine must be out of ideas. I guess people who buy Macs really are gullible, ignorant about PCs, and insecure about their self image. Or at least Apple thinks they are.

Does anyone else notice how for 99% of the Apple ads, you could just swap who's the Mac and the PC in the script. Have the Mac guy be the PC, and the PC guy be the Mac. Change a few words here and there, and they would become snarky arrogant and misleadin pro-PC ads instead of snarky arrogant and misleading pro-Mac ads.

Might be a fun project to upload to Youtube. Hmm........

mad_spooky said,
I'm a PC and I run Linux? Am I still a PC? :)

Yes and the Linux guys don't complain as much as the other OS's do which is calming to my ears.

Im sorry but when was the last time that my computer achually crashed due to the OS (its crappy software that crashes mine :P)

Regarding the viruses hopefully any idiot would know because Windows is so popular, more then Mac people target it because it holds the most benefit. I can't wait for the day that Mac viruses emerge xD

Yeah youre waiting for osx virus for almost 10 years now, dont you ever give up?

An antivirus is a biohazard suit... almost every windows install must have it

Oh man, I'm so glad I saw these. I would have had no idea what computer I should buy.

But, really. Is there really any more than 5 people out there who use these for more than flame material? (I'm not pointing fingers or Apple or Microsoft, I'm just commenting this because it happens to be the article on the front page at the moment. They're both equally guilty.)

I'm sure this comment will be ignored or lost in the shuffle here, but it needs to be said. Many people here are confusing Windows Live Photo Gallery's facial detection with iPhoto's facial recognition. In WLPG, you must manually tag each face in each photo. It automatically finds the faces, but does not know the difference between one face and another (you and your grandmother both look the same to WLPG). In contrast, once you tag a face once in iPhoto, it searches all of your other photos and finds the same face and automatically tags them for you (it knows the difference between you and your grandmother). That was the entire point of the "Stacks" ad, but since many people here have only ever used the facial detection feature of WLPG and not the facial recognition feature in iPhoto, those people did not know that the feature is NOT the same thing.

roadwarrior said,
I'm sure this comment will be ignored or lost in the shuffle here, but it needs to be said. Many people here are confusing Windows Live Photo Gallery's facial detection with iPhoto's facial recognition. In WLPG, you must manually tag each face in each photo. It automatically finds the faces, but does not know the difference between one face and another (you and your grandmother both look the same to WLPG). In contrast, once you tag a face once in iPhoto, it searches all of your other photos and finds the same face and automatically tags them for you (it knows the difference between you and your grandmother). That was the entire point of the "Stacks" ad, but since many people here have only ever used the facial detection feature of WLPG and not the facial recognition feature in iPhoto, those people did not know that the feature is NOT the same thing.

Adding a comment just so it's better seen :)
(Added note to my above comment about this too)

What i find ridiculous, is how many nerves these ads hit. Microsoft throughout the years has done some pretty ugly things to get where they are, and apple is probably no better. I don't think apple really expects to hit the mainstream the way they would like... Agood product speaks for itself, (3/4 or more of the US population probably owns an ipod and the iphone is not so far behind, these are more iconic andstatus symbols), if apple was really thinking forward what they would do now is promote the fact that the hardware can now run bot apple and wintel systems natively. This way no matter what mac you purchase, you are getting the ability to run both systems, (and this includes vista ultimate, and win7, which i am running on a mac flawlessly), all in one machine.
Hardcore, real hardcore gamers, might want to invest in some PC systems that cater to that kind of use, but most of the masses will be more than satisfied with what a mac can do with both systems, and with 90% of apps out there. On the same note, i am still a bit leery about apple on an enterprise level.

rayven said,
if apple was really thinking forward what they would do now is promote the fact that the hardware can now run bot apple and wintel systems natively. This way no matter what mac you purchase, you are getting the ability to run both systems, (and this includes vista ultimate, and win7, which i am running on a mac flawlessly), all in one machine.

This would be great to see, though I think the issue for Apple is the extra support and commitment it may require. That is, Bootcamp will need to work flawlessly, and they may have to deal with any issues arising from Windows usage.

(That's not a dig at Apple, but an economic and feasibility issue)

I don't believe Apple would be too interested in advertising the ability to run Windows on their machines. That would probably imply that OS X can't do everything, and that's not something Apple is willing to mention, considering how strong they make their ads against Windows.

video 1: ah typical apple stereotypes
video 2: riiigghhtt...
video 3: live photo gallery has face recognition
video 4: more stereotypes

*yawn*

Long and Hodgman will never be able to get another job now. :(
They've got the "made for TV" stigma all over them now.

GreyWolfSC said,
Long and Hodgman will never be able to get another job now. :(
They've got the "made for TV" stigma all over them now.

Hodgman does do bits on The Daily Show, but what I've seen of him so far he's been a bit underwhelming.

I think Long was great in Dodgeball, though

Justin did "Live Free or Die Hard" after he's been doing Apple's advertising. He was the weakest link in that film... as well as "Waiting", which he also did after the Apple ads, IIRC.

RAID 0 said,
Justin did "Live Free or Die Hard" after he's been doing Apple's advertising. He was the weakest link in that film... as well as "Waiting", which he also did after the Apple ads, IIRC.

I was so hoping for Long's character to "not make it" in the Die Hard movie.

i think most of you are one sided

ms message "we are cheaper" is also "they are expansive"

both companies throw dirt at each other except mac are doing it funny too
good for them

PROGAME said,
i think most of you are one sided

ms message "we are cheaper" is also "they are expansive"

both companies throw dirt at each other except mac are doing it funny too
good for them


Admittedly there is an element of that, but the overriding message is "PCs are cheap and do what you want." Not "Apples are expensive and won't do what you want, but hey, here's an alternative".

You realize the Microsoft ads don't even advertise the Microsoft OS, right? You could get linux on any of those computers and never touch Vista/XP.

Fan of both OSx and Windows, Really wish Apple would grow up to be honest. These adverts really can't be doing much for Apple. I always thought they were cleverer than this.

Funny how they don't have "legal copy" on all their ads consdiering the lies they spew out in every ad.

The only true message that is effectively conveyed in these ads is that Apple is reaching new lows of desperation.

eh, They are just commercials. Apple is the underdog and Microsoft is the big giant. Let the little dog bark.
Mac OS X is great!
I love the Apple ads. I do not know why everyone has their panties so tight. Its commercials.

The arrogance of Apple. There WILL be a time when they WILL get nailed with viruses and malware. Them gloating left and right about OSX not getting infected is like taunting the hackers out there. Plus, there ads are the same damn thing they and others have been saying all along.

Poor Apple, first they try to bad mouth MS' new ads...now they create new ads with the same damn annoying people in them...haha...FAIL

There WILL be a time when they WILL get nailed with viruses and malware.

We hear this for almost 10 years now... but still nothing...

the same people getting irate over these ads are the same ones who mocked apple fans who did the same thing over the new MS ads. Go figure

Byron_Hinson said,
the same people getting irate over these ads are the same ones who mocked apple fans who did the same thing over the new MS ads. Go figure

Because these are disputable ads. How are Windows/Linux laptops being cheaper than Apple laptops disputable?

Ah yes - forgot how realistic and genuine the last one was where the boy bought a gaming machine - you know, the gaming machine with an on-board graphics card that won't play any of the latest or 80% of games!

Byron_Hinson said,
Ah yes - forgot how realistic and genuine the last one was where the boy bought a gaming machine - you know, the gaming machine with an on-board graphics card that won't play any of the latest or 80% of games!

I play WoW with my on board graphic chip. Besides, er ... what makes you say it has on-board graphics?

It would appear that they bought a Sony VAIO VGN-FW290, which comes with a ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3650 with 512MB vRAM. My source is http://technologyexpert.blogspot.com/2009/...nd-jackson.html

Where did you get your information, eh?

Apple.
Instant Computer. Instant bull****.
Microsoft stepped on Apple's tail with their ads, and now Apple yaps back like a mad little (snipped).

These commercials are crap except for the iPhoto one. Microsoft has them beat on there ads. Microsoft is actually telling a true point when it comes to price. Apple is just posting ads that don't give the other information that voids there point. Pcs are attacked becuase most of the world uses them, apples don't have any protection, and could very well be in a worse off or equal to postion. The future ad is just stupid. The iPhoto ad is the only valid point becuase that is indeed a good feature. And the legal point is with left out details. Apple has there iLife suit becuase they don't get sued by greedy companies when Microsoft incorperates there own software inside the OS.

Macs are for cool people. Ill take my low down virus infected custom pc any day.

Mac is basically sayin on the first ad, lets not wear a seat belt becuase I never get in a car crash!

Kirkburn said,
Note, Windows Live Photo Gallery, which is free, apparently has the iPhoto feature mentioned.

So that one's useless too.


I dont think Photo Galery has that feature. You have to tag people in each photo WLPG but in iPhoto you tag a photo and it finds that person in other photos for you.

I happened to catch two of these new ads last night... They were just dumb. I think this campaign died in the operating room and they are trying hard to bring it back to life but it's not working.

Their Mac's beachballed on them when they were exporting the commercial in Final Cut. They had to re-work the entire video and failed the second time around. At least that's what I'm going to tell myself. Lol.

The biggest difference between this latest brawl of advertisements is the fact that Microsoft didn't put down Apple but promoted their product and the PC image. Then you, of course, get Apple fighting back with the same arguement they used 10 years ago. "VIRUS VIRUS VIRUS = = = PC PC PC".

Sean Bradford said,
The biggest difference between this latest brawl of advertisements is the fact that Microsoft didn't put down Apple but promoted their product and the PC image. Then you, of course, get Apple fighting back with the same arguement they used 10 years ago. "VIRUS VIRUS VIRUS = = = PC PC PC".

How is screaming virus virus virus any different to the only argument Microsoft has is "we're cheaper".

Reminds me of the supermarkets who realised that as peoples incomes increased they found if they didn't cater for their needs they would leave. Well all Microsoft is now doing is pricing themselves as the cheap ones - when the economy picks up and people have extra dollars in their pockets - do you think they're going to keep with the cheap brand? you think that the family who has extra money is going to keep purchasing the cheap toilet paper and the no-brand biscuits?

You cannot see the difference as Apple crying virus virus virus is playing up the negativity of their competition while MS claiming they are cheaper is playing up the positivity of their product? One is putting down others while the other is playing up their strength. While the result is the same (putting yourself on top of your competition), the means one go about doing that leaves a bad taste in most sane people.

Macalicious said,
How is screaming virus virus virus any different to the only argument Microsoft has is "we're cheaper".

Funny. I thought Microsoft's real argument was "we have more choices." Which is extremely important when shopping for a laptop.

Macalicious said,
Reminds me of the supermarkets who realised that as peoples incomes increased they found if they didn't cater for their needs they would leave. Well all Microsoft is now doing is pricing themselves as the cheap ones - when the economy picks up and people have extra dollars in their pockets - do you think they're going to keep with the cheap brand? you think that the family who has extra money is going to keep purchasing the cheap toilet paper and the no-brand biscuits?

You know you can also buy more expensive, high end PC's as well right? If your budget goes up and you want to buy something more flashy, you don't have to switch to apple.

Macalicious said,
Reminds me of the supermarkets who realised that as peoples incomes increased they found if they didn't cater for their needs they would leave. Well all Microsoft is now doing is pricing themselves as the cheap ones - when the economy picks up and people have extra dollars in their pockets - do you think they're going to keep with the cheap brand? you think that the family who has extra money is going to keep purchasing the cheap toilet paper and the no-brand biscuits?

You make it sounds like cheap supermarkets like Walmart and Asda would go out of business if people had more money.

I'm pretty sure, regardless of how much money you have, you generally look at "cheap" and work your way up from there. Not expensive, and work your way down.

Well said, Kirkburn.

As the economy picks up, people who still like to do even the simplest of things such as play games would be required to run Windows anyway simply to do just that! I mean, people sit around here boasting facial recognition software as if that's the decider. Let's totally overlook the fact that the gaming component itself it sorely lacking for OS X. I mean, as big as the gaming industry is, it's obvious that you can't simply brush it aside...

Macalicious said,
Well all Microsoft is now doing is pricing themselves as the cheap ones

Affordable. Not cheap. Not the same thing. PC isn't cheap, it's just Apple that is overpriced.

when the economy picks up and people have extra dollars in their pockets - do you think they're going to keep with the cheap brand? you think that the family who has extra money is going to keep purchasing the cheap toilet paper and the no-brand biscuits?

Price is not the only factor in the decision making.
Look at it this way. Instead of going for the Vaio PC, people will maybe choose a regular HP or Dell. They won't go Apple _just because_ they can afford it.
And comparing buying a computer to buying toilet paper is just silly.


Kirkburn said,
You make it sounds like cheap supermarkets like Walmart and Asda would go out of business if people had more money.

I'm pretty sure, regardless of how much money you have, you generally look at "cheap" and work your way up from there. Not expensive, and work your way down.

And again you ignore what I post - why aren't I surprised.

Both Walmart and Asad have diversified; The Warehouse (the Walmart of NZ) used to sell cheap crap but they have upgraded and now selling big name brands at prices that are within the reach of the average person. It is about making sure you're not reliant on one strategy .

Oh and and where did I state anything about Apple? Both ads have been solely about price - when are we going to see a person who is willing to throw down several thousand and put a high end Sony against a high end Mac - to show that PC's with Windows are not only available at a low cost but in a wide variety of designs.

Oh k7of9, and PC's aren't expensive; I remember when computers were NZ$2,000 for a low end model, laptops were NZ$3,000 were the lowest end model. Don't give me this crap that Apple is expensive - Apple's not expensive by any stretch of the imagination nor are PC's. Both of them are pretty damn cheap compared to the crap that a large number of people waste their money on - like the number of Americans who go out and purchase SUV's without the slightest concern for the on going costs but apparently faint at the sight at the price of a Mac. Kinda like Lauren who apparently can't afford a Mac but quite happy to purchase a NZ$50,000 VW Beetle.

Macalicious said,
And again you ignore what I post - why aren't I surprised.

I assure you I did read it.

Macalicious said,
Both Walmart and Asad have diversified; The Warehouse (the Walmart of NZ) used to sell cheap crap but they have upgraded and now selling big name brands at prices that are within the reach of the average person. It is about making sure you're not reliant on one strategy .

Who cares? We are not talking about actual supermarket economics here, we're talking about PCs. However...

Macalicious said,
Oh and and where did I state anything about Apple? Both ads have been solely about price - when are we going to see a person who is willing to throw down several thousand and put a high end Sony against a high end Mac - to show that PC's with Windows are not only available at a low cost but in a wide variety of designs.

Lol, are you serious? Do I need to remind you of what you said? ...

"Reminds me of the supermarkets who realised that as peoples incomes increased they found if they didn't cater for their needs they would leave. Well all Microsoft is now doing is pricing themselves as the cheap ones - when the economy picks up and people have extra dollars in their pockets - do you think they're going to keep with the cheap brand? you think that the family who has extra money is going to keep purchasing the cheap toilet paper and the no-brand biscuits?"

Is anybody in the entire world not going to think you're talking about Apple here? For chrissakes, your name is Macalicious. You're talking about the more expensive brand than Microsoft. There is none except for Apple.

The sheer brazen absurdity of the idea you're not implying Apple in this. Ahahahaha!

And finally:

Macalicious said,
Oh k7of9, and PC's aren't expensive; I remember when computers were NZ$2,000 for a low end model, laptops were NZ$3,000 were the lowest end model. Don't give me this crap that Apple is expensive - Apple's not expensive by any stretch of the imagination nor are PC's. Both of them are pretty damn cheap compared to the crap that a large number of people waste their money on - like the number of Americans who go out and purchase SUV's without the slightest concern for the on going costs but apparently faint at the sight at the price of a Mac. Kinda like Lauren who apparently can't afford a Mac but quite happy to purchase a NZ$50,000 VW Beetle.

Of course they aren't expensive, when you compare them to something more freaking expensive. What on earth are you trying to prove here? The sole point is that Apple PCs are generally more expensive than non-Apple PCs. Simple. Fact.

i am starting to think i am the only one who REALLY likes all of the mac ads
way better than the windows ones
(and i never even seen a mac, they are rare here)

The legal copy one was retarded, considering iphone adverts were banned over here (UK) Until apple dumped legal copy at the bottom of the screen.
All of these adverts are just stupid in general. Apple adverts work best when they are pointing out the features of a product without dissing another companies products. The iphone "app" adverts are perfect.

Hardly. Mac sales have slowed down, perhaps due the economy, the Microsoft ads, and so forth. These new ads are really bad, and this is overlooking the bad claims they make specifically. They offer no real "Wow!" and just spit on Microsoft some more. There's nothing new from them in general.

Meanwhile, Microsoft's ads are showing off how easy it is to use their software, as well as how cheap you could get off with a decent laptop. Consumers are seeing people like themselves shopping for a computer, that are also perhaps on a budget. This has great appeal to the public, especially these days when prices are definitely a concern.

Meanwhile though, as I sit discussing new PC solutions to people who just can't let go of their 5+ year old hardware, none of them seem to have even heard of OS X, much less that there's a real difference between OS X and Windows. For them, all they see is hardware that's just too expensive for them.

All in all, Apple I feel needs a new angle with their advertisements, especially if you want to have "great competition" between the two. As I've stated numerous times, I don't understand how they can do SO WELL with the iPods / iPhones, yet so incredibly bad with OS X itself. It's as if they're not even trying...

This is just sad, people fighting over OS's and calling themselves PC's or Mac's.

Its a computer with an OS they all pretty much do the same thing!

Although the adverts can be amusing this is exactly the reason windows users hate Apple, because generally these adverts are just full of crap.

1: Yawn havent they done this advert before - and major new virus - errr where???? Apple do not even understand what a Virus actually is.

2: They have pointing out Microsoft's disclaimers? - they should take a look at their iPhone adverts including the ones that were banned in the UK.

3. Errr you can also use face recognition on a pc - it probably just doesn't come pre installed for fear of Apple claiming it to be anti competitive.

4. Pc can go to the future? That clearly is an epic win though.

Glendi said,
Why do they bash windows? I thought they were bashing PCs. Do they have a counterargument against Linux?

M$ is the only one making adverts calling themselves "I'm a PC". Not to mention everyone knows viruses / BSOD / restrictive licensing / OS [that comes with no software] is refering to windoze. I don't think anyone with half a brain could misinterpret that

Apple invented the "I'm a PC" term with their ads. At the beginning of each ad it says "Hi, I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC" and their referring to Windows.

Microsoft didn't call themselves a PC, Apple did, and Microsoft rolled with it and took advantage of it, empowering PC users all around the world.

I know a kid, who boughgt a mac book pro to try and look better than other people. what a loser, i just laugh at her.

I also have a macbook, and she has a macbook pro, and she likes to think her mac is so much better than the normal macbook when mine easily runs all the applications hers does, (final cut pro ect)

I Also have a pc and i love it.

I laughed knowing that they didn't have enough screen space to fit all the legal copies for Apple, since all the Mac was saying was lies. I'm sick of Apple lying all the time. Honestly, why would people care about Steve Jobs if he still endorses these types of ads? (he was the head of the company when the ads started).

I love my iMac, I love my iPhone, and I like Apple as a company. But the person responsible for these adverts needs sacking.

How many times do I need to say it? Sell your product on what makes it good - don't sell it on what makes other peoples products bad. As others have said, the Windows 'crashing' thing is a complete joke.. Windows is reliable now and that joke doesn't hold water now. As for anti-virus, I've run my XP installation at home without antivirus now for years. I watch which sites I go to, I don't use IE, and I don't download anything which looks even remotely suspicious. It's worked so far.

I hate these adverts with a passion. Come on Apple.. you're so much better than this.

The same goes for me, LOVE my MBP, LOVE my iMac and my iPhone but these ads friggin' suck. What's the use of bitching another company's products instead of promoting your own :S This is really not cool.

Chicane-UK said,
I love my iMac, I love my iPhone, and I like Apple as a company. But the person responsible for these adverts needs sacking.

How many times do I need to say it? Sell your product on what makes it good - don't sell it on what makes other peoples products bad. As others have said, the Windows 'crashing' thing is a complete joke.. Windows is reliable now and that joke doesn't hold water now. As for anti-virus, I've run my XP installation at home without antivirus now for years. I watch which sites I go to, I don't use IE, and I don't download anything which looks even remotely suspicious. It's worked so far.

I hate these adverts with a passion. Come on Apple.. you're so much better than this.

That may be the case, but it's clearly working. Otherwise why would M$ be counter-attacking? You could argue that these adverts are extoling the benefits of a mac, for example, viruses are extremely rare. In doing so they simultaneously demonstrate the weaknesses of the competition and the virtues of themselves.

liberatus_sum said,
That may be the case, but it's clearly working. Otherwise why would M$ be counter-attacking? You could argue that these adverts are extoling the benefits of a mac, for example, viruses are extremely rare. In doing so they simultaneously demonstrate the weaknesses of the competition and the virtues of themselves.

1). Stop using M$, it's sad.

2). Wrong way around. They attack Windows in order to show how OS X is good. Why do they need the attack part in order to show how OS X is good?

Such comments from Apple users are enlightening. I have no comments about Apple products as I don't use them, but I do find these advertisements childish and some even contain blatant lies (as the Windows freezing advertisement is). The advertisement team for Macs is immature and filled with liars, but I do find the advertising team responsible for the iPods to do a decent job which has enticed me before. Those dark shadow-figures dancing are eye-catching and attention-grabbing!

Chicane-UK said,
I love my iMac, I love my iPhone, and I like Apple as a company. But the person responsible for these adverts needs sacking.

How many times do I need to say it? Sell your product on what makes it good - don't sell it on what makes other peoples products bad. As others have said, the Windows 'crashing' thing is a complete joke.. Windows is reliable now and that joke doesn't hold water now. As for anti-virus, I've run my XP installation at home without antivirus now for years. I watch which sites I go to, I don't use IE, and I don't download anything which looks even remotely suspicious. It's worked so far.

I hate these adverts with a passion. Come on Apple.. you're so much better than this.


Your comments always impress me, Chicane.

You know, I don't actually care if they are flat out lies even. The ads are just so much more entertaining than those sickly-sweet 'look at the lovely little child making a gallery' ads. The MS ads do absolutely nothing for me. These make me laugh, rightly or wrongly.

SniperX said,
You know, I don't actually care if they are flat out lies even. The ads are just so much more entertaining than those sickly-sweet 'look at the lovely little child making a gallery' ads. The MS ads do absolutely nothing for me. These make me laugh, rightly or wrongly.


Then why do you view ads? Just buy anything who's cover just is funny.

SniperX said,
You know, I don't actually care if they are flat out lies even. The ads are just so much more entertaining than those sickly-sweet 'look at the lovely little child making a gallery' ads. The MS ads do absolutely nothing for me. These make me laugh, rightly or wrongly.

Flat out lies? Lets see shall we:

(1) Viruses are endemic in windoze check.
(2) Very restrictive licensing and huge EULA check.
(3) Pre-installed mac software is superior check.
(4) Likely hood of future versions of windoze crashing / BSODing / being generally unstable check [look at vista].

liberatus_sum said,
Flat out lies? Lets see shall we:

(1) Viruses are endemic in windoze check.
(2) Very restrictive licensing and huge EULA check.
(3) Pre-installed mac software is superior check.
(4) Likely hood of future versions of windoze crashing / BSODing / being generally unstable check [look at vista].


(1) Yes there are alot of viruses for Windows, but it is a more targetted system, and there are viruses for Mac OS X http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=3157

(2) the licensing isnt that restrictive, and it wouldnt stop you doing anything apple stops you from doing, like installing on non oem equipment

(3)Windows Live Photo Gallery does the photo face tagging stuff, but not that i have used it, but iMovie is ment to be good. but this software isnt actually free, because they sell it. and microsoft are moving away from preinstalling their other free software due to anti-trust cases, but still windows live essentials is a free download, and takes minutes to install

(4) can we please stop thinking about classic windows. Windows Vista and 7(less so on XP) are very reliable and stable, i havnt seen a BSOD that wasn't due to a broken graphics card since XP. Yes im sure that there is a percentage of people which get BSOD and have major problems, but im sure that it is driver or hardware issues (in my experience most likly hardware)

Lloyd Sparkes said,
(4) can we please stop thinking about classic windows. Windows Vista and 7(less so on XP) are very reliable and stable, i havnt seen a BSOD that wasn't due to a broken graphics card since XP. Yes im sure that there is a percentage of people which get BSOD and have major problems, but im sure that it is driver or hardware issues (in my experience most likly hardware)

Amen. I've been a proud user of Vista Ultimate 64 bit for a year now. Not one BSoD after I replaced that bad stick of memory.

And liberatus_sum, gtfo until you get your facts right. OS X's EULA is more restrictive than Win"doze"'s. Not letting you run their OS on any machine but thier own is one example.

Lloyd Sparkes said,
(1) Yes there are alot of viruses for Windows, but it is a more targetted system, and there are viruses for Mac OS X http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=3157

That's a malicious program inside a pirated program, and is unable to propagate itself which means it isn't a virus by any definition. The user has to explicitly download it and give it permission to execute. This is a completely different case.

In windoze, one merely needs to use the default browser after installation to get infected by some drive by malware which is capable of propagating itself over the network. This is quite apart from the incident you linked to.

Lloyd Sparkes said,
(2) the licensing isnt that restrictive, and it wouldnt stop you doing anything apple stops you from doing, like installing on non oem equipment

Lets see. The original vista license allowed the end user to reassign the software to another device once. Does that sound fair and unrestrictive to you?

Lloyd Sparkes said,
(3)Windows Live Photo Gallery does the photo face tagging stuff, but not that i have used it, but iMovie is ment to be good. but this software isnt actually free, because they sell it. and microsoft are moving away from preinstalling their other free software due to anti-trust cases, but still windows live essentials is a free download, and takes minutes to install

They only have anti-trust issues because they use their position to eliminate competition. They could bundle other FOSS software with the system if they wished and this wouldn't present a problem.

Lloyd Sparkes said,
(4) can we please stop thinking about classic windows. Windows Vista and 7(less so on XP) are very reliable and stable, i havnt seen a BSOD that wasn't due to a broken graphics card since XP. Yes im sure that there is a percentage of people which get BSOD and have major problems, but im sure that it is driver or hardware issues (in my experience most likly hardware)

Tell that to those people who experienced constant BSODs, incompatible hardware, and horrible performance [simple file copies / archive extractions]. I'm pretty sure they would disagree with you. And I'm talking about vista, not XP.

Broken graphics card? You mean the new driver model deployed in vista? It seems likely that played a major role in the debacle. It's easy to blame the hardware vendors (though no one seems to do that in linux. It's always linux's fault that hardware doesn't work, go figure).

The fact is, when vista shipped it had more holes than a bullet riddled gangster. Nothing you say can excuse that epic failure.

liberatus_sum said,
They only have anti-trust issues because they use their position to eliminate competition. They could bundle other FOSS software with the system if they wished and this wouldn't present a problem.

Do you really believe this? You're suggesting MS bundle other people's software with their OS, and this would be "okay"?

I rather doubt it.

liberatus_sum said,
Tell that to those people who experienced constant BSODs, incompatible hardware, and horrible performance [simple file copies / archive extractions]. I'm pretty sure they would disagree with you. And I'm talking about vista, not XP.

Broken graphics card? You mean the new driver model deployed in vista? It seems likely that played a major role in the debacle. It's easy to blame the hardware vendors (though no one seems to do that in linux. It's always linux's fault that hardware doesn't work, go figure).


Yes, a fair few driver manufacturer's weren't up to date upon release of Vista. MS only slightly shares the blame for making the changes - but it's not their fault if the manufacturer's didn't bother to update the drivers properly.

And no, I'm pretty sure people blame nVidia and ATI for Linux graphical issues.

You appear to suggest Microsoft shouldn't change anything when it updates an OS, lest it introduce any incompatibilities. Which is, frankly, ridiculous.

liberatus_sum said,
The fact is, when vista shipped it had more holes than a bullet riddled gangster. Nothing you say can excuse that epic failure.

"Holes"? What "holes"?

liberatus_sum said,
That's a malicious program inside a pirated program, and is unable to propagate itself which means it isn't a virus by any definition. The user has to explicitly download it and give it permission to execute. This is a completely different case.

Yup, just like 99.9% of Windows malware.

In windoze, one merely needs to use the default browser after installation to get infected by some drive by malware which is capable of propagating itself over the network. This is quite apart from the incident you linked to.

Really? Even with UAC, Protected Mode, Defender, and an Antivirus? I'd like to see that. We've already seen how quick OSX got hit through it's default browser.

Lets see. The original vista license allowed the end user to reassign the software to another device once. Does that sound fair and unrestrictive to you?

Apple's EULA: Subject to the restrictions set forth below, you may, however, make a one-time
permanent transfer of all of your license rights to the Apple Software (in its original form as provided by Apple) to another party, provided that: (a) the transfer must
include all of the Apple Software, including all its component parts (excluding Apple Boot ROM code and firmware), original media, printed materials and this License.

One. One. Sound familiar?

They only have anti-trust issues because they use their position to eliminate competition. They could bundle other FOSS software with the system if they wished and this wouldn't present a problem.
Source? Used, and once. Once.
Tell that to those people who experienced constant BSODs, incompatible hardware, and horrible performance [simple file copies / archive extractions]. I'm pretty sure they would disagree with you. And I'm talking about vista, not XP.

Again, source? Since Windows is it Microsoft's job to force hardware manufacturers to write compatible drivers? It works the same way as Apple. If you want your hardware to work with their OS, you make sure the drivers work on it.

Broken graphics card? You mean the new driver model deployed in vista? It seems likely that played a major role in the debacle. It's easy to blame the hardware vendors (though no one seems to do that in linux. It's always linux's fault that hardware doesn't work, go figure).

Linux drivers are generally written by the linux community, not by the hardware manufacturers. It's totally nVidia's fault their Vista drivers were flaky two years ago. They had two years before that to work on them.

The fact is, when vista shipped it had more holes than a bullet riddled gangster. Nothing you say can excuse that epic failure.

Third time, source? It's been pretty bullet-proof since it came out.

liberatus_sum said,
That's a malicious program inside a pirated program, and is unable to propagate itself which means it isn't a virus by any definition. The user has to explicitly download it and give it permission to execute. This is a completely different case.

In windoze, one merely needs to use the default browser after installation to get infected by some drive by malware which is capable of propagating itself over the network. This is quite apart from the incident you linked to.


Ok yes i can see your point there, but there have been viruses for mac, iirc there was one that propagted through iChat. and when Apple say viruses they mean, viruses, trojans, malware, spyware ..... need i go on

liberatus_sum said,
Lets see. The original vista license allowed the end user to reassign the software to another device once. Does that sound fair and unrestrictive to you?


The excat license details depend on OEM vs Retail, OEM can not be installed on a different machine than from the one with was sold with, but i believe retail did, even if it was only once. But to be perfectly honset, how many people really were affected by this?, the majority of Windows copies sold is OEM. And the retail is so over priced you'd be a fool to buy it.

But i dont think that is a restrictive as say placing a limit on what OEM the software can be installed on

liberatus_sum said,
They only have anti-trust issues because they use their position to eliminate competition. They could bundle other FOSS software with the system if they wished and this wouldn't present a problem.


Oh yes please bundle 32 different browsers, photo gallery applications, media players, and email clients. Im sure you mac fan boi's would have a field day moaning about bloat then.

But the functionality is there, as a free download. So those who want it can get it.

liberatus_sum said,
Tell that to those people who experienced constant BSODs, incompatible hardware, and horrible performance [simple file copies / archive extractions]. I'm pretty sure they would disagree with you. And I'm talking about vista, not XP.

Broken graphics card? You mean the new driver model deployed in vista? It seems likely that played a major role in the debacle. It's easy to blame the hardware vendors (though no one seems to do that in linux. It's always linux's fault that hardware doesn't work, go figure).

The fact is, when vista shipped it had more holes than a bullet riddled gangster. Nothing you say can excuse that epic failure.


By broken graphics card i ment, i had gotten one from Ati (last september 2008) and there was a flaw in that card, that caused it to be unreliable, and Vista did a good job of warning me, and trying to correct the problem before the situation lead to a BSOD

When vista shipped yes it had a few problems, but i didnt get any BSOD (appart from the ones i got with the gfx over a year after release).

There was a file copying bug, where the file copying dialog would hang(once it had actually finished), but it was more of a annoyance than anything else. Hardware problems were due to the driver structure to be more secure, and reliable, and to a usermode driver model (in part), this is one thing that isnt totally MS's fault.

But Vista was bloody secure, yes since ites release there have been a few holes found, but nothing like XP had, and Vista set the basis for making Windows inherently more secure, it changed alot, it broke alot, all in the name of security.

And the major hole that was found, was patched before it was even exploited. Which if everyone kept upto date on their Updates, Conflicker wouldnt be a problem.

liberatus_sum said,
(4) Likely hood of future versions of windoze crashing / BSODing / being generally unstable check [look at vista].

Really, just what exactly are you basing that on besides your preconception of PC's?
Look, I'm no fan of Vista but that has nothing to do with stability at all. Because Vista IS stable.

The last time I had a BSOD was about two years ago when a memory module went bad, so that has nothing to do with Windows.
The last one before that (and I AM telling the truth) was with Windows XP pre-SP1, there were problems with nVidia drivers causing BSOD's.

So you can pull out all the cliche's you can think of but BSOD's on modern day Windows is a rare thing. Not any less rare than kernel panic's.

//edit: omg, just read your other statements. It's clear you are as ignorant as they come and unable to look past your fanboy mindset.

This was my favourite:

In windoze, one merely needs to use the default browser after installation to get infected by some drive by malware which is capable of propagating itself over the network. This is quite apart from the incident you linked to.

This is such complete and utter bull. Or I must be eexxxttrrreeeemmmeelllyyyy luck for not experiencing that.
If it was 2001 and I was using XP pre-SP1 then yes it would have been likely to happen. So again, the only thing you are capable of is spreading around heresay and FUD.

Vista is amazingly secure and stable. It has only 5% of all operating system vulnrubilities while Leopard has 15%. Yea, Vista's 3x more secure than Mac! Wow!

I haven't had a virus on all three of my computers for three years, and their all running Vista.

If you run your automatic updates, then Coniflicker wouldn't be a problem.

All these adverts do is lie,

The problem is the uneducated masses believe it.

That's okay. The popularity of these ads will be their undoing. If they actually succeed at gaining a larger market share then inevitably the malware writers will begin to target them. Then we'll see how funny things are. You'll have millions of users with Mac's that don't believe they need virus protection or updates and won't have a clue how to begin either task.

Good luck on getting Apple's help on that. Let's not forget that they never admit fault. It's never something they did wrong. Nope. Never.


+1

If it's in e.g. the graphics or design business (in which Macs are common and geared for), then no, I wouldn't blindly go by the clothes. :-p

Actually, in my cases, I'd be more intrigued by a more down to earth guy, but maybe that's just me.

liberatus_sum said,

Where are the lies? Are you saying viruses aren't pervasive in windoze? Can you say that with a straight face :)

Many (snipped) use that same argument, but viruses just don't propagate on macs or any variant of *nix. They are just better designed and innately secure. Virus writers have tried attacking *nix and failed epically every time. I don't see that changing in the future.


Im not an expert, but i believe that you are very wrong in your last statement.
PS that picture says it all, nice find

liberatus_sum said,
Where are the lies? Are you saying viruses aren't pervasive in windoze? Can you say that with a straight face :)

Many (snipped) use that same argument, but viruses just don't propagate on macs or any variant of *nix. They are just better designed and innately secure. Virus writers have tried attacking *nix and failed epically every time. I don't see that changing in the future.

Windoze? seriously, how old are you because 12 year olds say things like that.

And if Viruses don't propagate on Macs, tell me how do you think that mac botnet got out there? OK it may have been delivered by pirated software, but how did it spread and work if you can't write virii for macs?

We should not feed trolls.

I personally think the MS ads were a lot more mature than these Apple ads which feed off ignorance. Sane users and mature Mac users all use their computers according their requirements and do not use such advertisements to influence their computer decisions.

Windows freezing? Outright, blatant lie from Apple which I believe should be sued for defamation. Windows has not had significant freezing problems since 2000/XP (NT line), and certainly a lot less in Vista and beyond. Disgusting, disgusting company that can put out such filth and lies. The rest of the advertisements at least do not contain such blatant falsehood.

I would hire the mac boy. We are doing games at my job and he fits a lot more the style of the staff. We do games for Windows, Mac and iPhones BTW. And every OS (Mac OS X or Windows) has their flaws and their strength. I love the '*nix' command line in Mac OS X, and, since we don't develop for Linux (not enough potential clients), it is good to have "tcsh, bash, sed, cut, grep, gcc, vim, ..." to automate a lot of the tasks. Also, iPhoto comes handy very often.

We could do all these things under windows with third party free apps, but we wouldn't have customer support. Customer support (it is absolutely useless most of the times) removes the responsability of having a stable system from the hands of the developper (who have better things to do) and pushes it back to a company (Apple or Microsoft) who will take care of any problem themselves (Apple or Microsoft will pay to fix it, not our company).

Also, Visual Studio is sooo much better than XCode.

Solid Knight said,
One commercial actually had something legitimate to say; the iPhoto one. The rest are basically FUD.

Yeah they were - they are playing on misconception in the same way Microsoft did with the Apple tax thing. It's all very childish from both sides but thats normal.

Solid Knight said,
One commercial actually had something legitimate to say; the iPhoto one. The rest are basically FUD.

The iPhoto one was FUD as well... Windows Live Photo Gallery supports face recognition & tagging and has done for many months now.

They're *all* FUD...

Byron_Hinson said,
Yeah they were - they are playing on misconception in the same way Microsoft did with the Apple tax thing. It's all very childish from both sides but thats normal.

Uh, how is the "Apple Tax" a misconception?

Solid Knight said,
One commercial actually had something legitimate to say; the iPhoto one. The rest are basically FUD.

Ahem, viruses are FUD? Considering almost every other copy of windoze has one, I see this as factual.

liberatus_sum said,
Ahem, viruses are FUD? Considering almost every other copy of windoze has one, I see this as factual.

Just say Conficker :P

iamwhoiam said,
Uh, how is the "Apple Tax" a misconception?

To tax (from the latin taxare: to estimate, which in turn is from tangere: to touch) is to impose a financial charge or other levy upon a taxpayer (an individual or legal entity) by a state or the functional equivalent of a state.

So it's not technically a "tax," merely a markupâ€Â¦ But Apple spends millions on r&d, product design, etc. and people don't see that when they buy a computer...

d4v1d05 said,
So it's not technically a "tax," merely a markupâ€Â¦ But Apple spends millions on r&d, product design, etc. and people don't see that when they buy a computer...

Just so you know, Microsoft spend far far more on R&D than Apple.

It's about $8 billion compared with Apple's $800 million or so.

liberatus_sum said,
Ahem, viruses are FUD? Considering almost every other copy of windoze has one, I see this as factual.

Considering you use the term "Windoze", I think we can discount your comment as being a huge exaggeration.

liberatus_sum said,
Ahem, viruses are FUD? Considering almost every other copy of windoze has one, I see this as factual.

Does it? I can see 5 Windows PCs from my desk, (at home, mind you,) and none of them have malware on them. Neither do my parents' PCs or my siblings. I've not see a Conficker infection period.

liberatus_sum said,
Ahem, viruses are FUD? Considering almost every other copy of windoze has one, I see this as factual.

I think you've done just about everything you can to discredit yourself. Every other PC having a virus is FUD.

Viruses are becoming unheard of now with Windows Vista and up-to-date virus protection software. I haven't had a virus in about three years now, on all three of our vista computers. Now XP, that's another story.

By the way, how is Apple retaliating? They simply released 4 new ads. The new Apple ads don't refer to the laptop hunters ads at all, or anything in them.

Agreed, how is this retaliating? It looks to me the ads have two different objectives: MS wants people to consider the specs when buying a PC along with the attractive prices (laptop hunters) and Mac wants people to focus on the negatives of the competition and spin off public perception. MS wins based on rationale points and Mac wins on swaying perception.

roadwarrior said,
By the way, how is Apple retaliating? They simply released 4 new ads. The new Apple ads don't refer to the laptop hunters ads at all, or anything in them.

Agree there - the only one that seemed even related was the iPhoto one and in my view they should have gone into more detail of why iPhoto is better, as it certainly is!

Maybe they didn't retaliate with THESE ads, but a Apple head did throw a hissy fit over MS's Laptop Hunters ads. (reference the thread in Apple General Discussion)

hm... the laptop hunters seem to be a pretty good example...

oh and the Seinfeld ones... but they were full of ...literally nothing... so I guess they don't count :-P

Rolith said,
oh and the Seinfeld ones... but they were full of ...literally nothing... so I guess they don't count :-P

Well they were funny to say the least..

Why do Mac ads always how good they and how bad PC's are ? THe Mac's of today are gettin more and MORE like a pc !!
So really there is not that much difference between the two these days ..... first intel chips now graphic cards.
Some of the features Mac's have were incorporated after PC's had them ie the Mac version of "System Resstore" for example.

False advertising is the reason why products r sold. Apple claimed & filled the mind of users that iPods are first of there kind & easy to use, while Microsoft didn't. Look what happened & whose making money

Uh, Apple had iPods out before Microsoft had anything of the equivalent at the time I believe. If you're going to bash Apple, do it right. :P

gxsaurav said,
False advertising is the reason why products r sold. Apple claimed & filled the mind of users that iPods are first of there kind & easy to use, while Microsoft didn't. Look what happened & whose making money


Please show me where Apple claimed that the iPod was the first of its kind.

roadwarrior said,
Please show me where Apple claimed that the iPod was the first of its kind.


I'm sure they said that somewhere it's all in the words. saying "first of its kind" isn't the same as saying "the first" I could seriously see Jobs saying that in the past.

dead.cell said,
Uh, Apple had iPods out before Microsoft had anything of the equivalent at the time I believe. If you're going to bash Apple, do it right. :P

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Creative had an iPod like mp3 player out long before Apple deided to get into the game with the iPod.

This is just like the old days when Apple got all hot and bothered over Windows back in to v1.0-v3.1 era because it "copied" the Mac's GUI design. Of course, they conveniently forgot that both they and Microsoft ripped the idea off Xerox who had it first. Apple just tried to CLAIM it was first.

krasch said,
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Creative had an iPod like mp3 player out long before Apple deided to get into the game with the iPod.

This is just like the old days when Apple got all hot and bothered over Windows back in to v1.0-v3.1 era because it "copied" the Mac's GUI design. Of course, they conveniently forgot that both they and Microsoft ripped the idea off Xerox who had it first. Apple just tried to CLAIM it was first.


The first MP3 player I remember was the Diamond Rio. Talk about YEARS ago.

gxsaurav said,
False advertising is the reason why products r sold. Apple claimed & filled the mind of users that iPods are first of there kind & easy to use, while Microsoft didn't. Look what happened & whose making money

They make good products in general, that's probably why people like them. M$ just copies / imitates and tries to bully its way into a market (often by abusing its monopolistic position).

liberatus_sum said,
They make good products in general, that's probably why people like them. M$ just copies / imitates and tries to bully its way into a market (often by abusing its monopolistic position).


This is the first i've heard that Microsoft has a monopoly in the MP3 player market!!!!!!!

krasch said,
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Creative had an iPod like mp3 player out long before Apple deided to get into the game with the iPod.

This is just like the old days when Apple got all hot and bothered over Windows back in to v1.0-v3.1 era because it "copied" the Mac's GUI design. Of course, they conveniently forgot that both they and Microsoft ripped the idea off Xerox who had it first. Apple just tried to CLAIM it was first.

I said before Microsoft. Creative is not Microsoft.

liberatus_sum said,
They make good products in general, that's probably why people like them. M$ just copies / imitates and tries to bully its way into a market (often by abusing its monopolistic position).

I loled. Now is a good time to start educating yourself in this area.

dead.cell said,

I said before Microsoft. Creative is not Microsoft.

And you also implied that Apple was some kind of pioneer in the field, which they are patently not. Which was MY point.

Apple makes a habit of trying to get people to believe they're pioneers and visionaries. And the Apple Store late-to-the-party tech-wannabe lemmings drink that propaganda kool=aid in barrels. The reality is neither they nor Microsoft for the most part are anything of the sort.

The closest was Woz coming up with the Apple II, but that train sailed years ago.

Both are good companies with good product, but Apple is a lot more arrogant and wrongfully self=aggrandizing.

kalam_ said,
I really don't understand how they can legally get away with these ads. Slander and outright lies...

1. Biohazard - The sheer number of viruses for PC is the claim vs. the number for Mac... This is fact, so it's not a lie and by definition isn't slander.
2. Legal Copy - There's always some fine print on PC features, I think that is what the ad is playing at.
3. Stacks - No such feature exists on the PC. Maybe there is a 3rd party solution, but I don't think so.
4. Time Machine - OK... this one I can kinda see...

1. Biohazard - True PCs get viruses.
2. Legal Copy - I find this one odd because the latest iPhone have just as much legal copy. Normally them cutting out steps to make things seem faster then they are.
3. Stacks - Windows Live Photo Gallery
4. Time Machine - I don't even get this one...

CarlJ said,
1. Biohazard - True PCs get viruses.

So do Macs, just because people and Apple tries to ignore the fact, doesn't mean it's not a reality.

In 2007, Mac/OSX had the most security holes, I also saw in 2008 again, which some have never been patched.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=758

Plus the newest Trojan on OSX makes Macs zombies, just like they do on Windows, no difference.


owensd said,
1. Biohazard - The sheer number of viruses for PC is the claim vs. the number for Mac... This is fact, so it's not a lie and by definition isn't slander.
2. Legal Copy - There's always some fine print on PC features, I think that is what the ad is playing at.
3. Stacks - No such feature exists on the PC. Maybe there is a 3rd party solution, but I don't think so.
4. Time Machine - OK... this one I can kinda see... ;)


For 3, pinning a folder to the taskbar as a Quick Launch toolbar does the same thing as Stacks.

GreyWolfSC said,
For 3, pinning a folder to the taskbar as a Quick Launch toolbar does the same thing as Stacks. :)


The ad called "Stacks" is talking about the facial recognition in iPhoto (PC was looking through large stacks of photos). It has nothing at all to do with the Stacks feature of the Dock.

@Express: As has been stated repeatedly here, Live Photo Gallery does NOT do facial recognition, it only does face detection. They are NOT the same thing.

roadwarrior said,
The ad called "Stacks" is talking about the facial recognition in iPhoto (PC was looking through large stacks of photos). It has nothing at all to do with the Stacks feature of the Dock.

@Express: As has been stated repeatedly here, Live Photo Gallery does NOT do facial recognition, it only does face detection. They are NOT the same thing.


WLPG worked for me. After I identified my sister in my photo folder it tagged the rest of her pictures accurately.

GreyWolfSC said,
WLPG worked for me. After I identified my sister in my photo folder it tagged the rest of her pictures accurately.


I'm not sure how you got it to do that when it is already documented (and I just tried it myself to make sure) that it does NOT automatically recognize and tag faces.

I ain't even gonna bother looking at those ads. It just disgust me that a corporation such as Apple can proudly false advertise and be successful in making people believe this BS. Their marketing team hit the jackpot. Why advertise to people who use computers when you can make twice as much money on people who are computer illiterate!


That's their methodology! They realized long ago they couldn't break into the hardcore PC user / gamer / enthusiast market. So they tried with schools. Depending on your age you might remember that practically every school at one point or another had a fleet of Mac's. Apple gave them away. That didn't work either (most schools are now PC based). Apple still has their core graphics / music users but that's such a small percentage of the overall market.

So now they cater to the ignorant. I really feel sorry for people that buy a Mac just from these commercials.

More fail ads from Apple.

Funny how they can do so good with the iPod / iPhone ads, but fail so hard with their computers. Even the Macbook ads were better, despite pretty much doing nothing more than rotating a shiny object. At least you got to SEE the object...

I'll quote this comment in reply to yours...

dead.cell said,
Because the girl buying a laptop could've totally bought a Mac for under $1,000. Let's disregard the fact that the only laptop available that's anywhere close is realistically over her budget. Anyone with a budget generally tries not to hit the maximum, and even so, with tax, it's already more than just a few bucks overboard. Not to mention small and not to her own likings.

The Guardian said,
They probably never will, because thats just how they operate...Their policy is, " Our way, or the highway".


Totally agree! Don't forget, "We're apple. We never do anything wrong."

andrewbares said,
I hate quicktime too. They should use Flash or Silverlight. Way better technology.


Flash and Silverlight are not the same type of media as Quicktime. Quicktime is more akin to WMV than either of those.

I just played crysis on my vista 64 ultimate rig about an hour ago,
now i'm designing on the same 64 bit rig with photoshop cs4 64bit.

I'm 64 bit PC!!!

wetworker said,
I just played crysis on my vista 64 ultimate rig about an hour ago,
now i'm designing on the same 64 bit rig with photoshop cs4 64bit.

I'm 64 bit PC!!!

I think the legal Ad should come in about now for the CS4 statement (just guessing).

offroadaaron said,
I think the legal Ad should come in about now for the CS4 statement (just guessing).

You do realize that people actually buy the expensive software, right? Just because it costs what it does, doesn't mean people that use it pirated it.

More than likely it's the people who don't know how to use it that pirate it, because they don't understand why it's worth the money

If apple is so truthful and doesn't need all the legal text then they should say how they use all kinds of things from bsd and unix in general in their system. Not to say windows doesn't use bits from other things too but there are whole components of os x that are just modified versions of bsd and unix components.

And how they lied about the Conifliker virus. If you just have your computer set up to run automatic updates then you don't have to worry. Oh yea, Apple, I said "automatic updates"! Yes, Windows does have that! No worries, just let it automatically update!

The Time Travel one was funny, but the rest were kind of lame. They've sort of lost their edge. It's the same old joke told 20 different ways.

"PC's have viruses and Mac's don't" *lie*
"PC's freeze and Mac's don't" *lie*
"PC's are for losers and Mac's are for cool people" *debatable*
"PC's lack features Mac's have already" *lie*

Debatable really?

Why would a computer determine your social status? Oh probably because PCs are a tool while Macs are a lifestyle. lol

Mav Phoenix said,
Debatable really?

Why would a computer determine your social status? Oh probably because PCs are a tool while Macs are a lifestyle. lol

Oh since Macs generally cost hundreds (sometimes thousands) more than a PC, it is often looked upon as a luxury item, and of course, the cool kids are the ones with alot of money...


It's not debatable. If you have a Mac for no other reason other than "it's cool" then you might as well have a sticker across your forehead that reads "sucker here, sell me a bridge".

Second, if you determine your social status or "coolness" by your Mac, then there's something really wrong. Get help.

Tim Dawg said,
It's not debatable. If you have a Mac for no other reason other than "it's cool" then you might as well have a sticker across your forehead that reads "sucker here, sell me a bridge".

Who said that may be the ONLY reason someone get a Mac?

You guys have it backwards. Buying a mac does not make you cool. I think Marshalus meant that people who already fall in to the "cool" category (or think they do anyways), buy macs. And this does seem to be the truth.

Of course that doesn't mean other people don't buy macs for other reasons besides the cool factor.

I'm a PC by the way

Marshalus said,
...
"PC's have viruses and Mac's don't" *lie*

How is that a "Lie"?

The commercial says there are a number viruses or new viruses for PCs, with more coming every day.

And that these viruses don't affect OSX.

And they don't.

There have been lab-created demos of potential viruses, but I don't think that you can declare a statement that there are hundreds of thousands of PC (Windows) viruses as a lie. And you also can't say that it is a lie that these viruses don't affect a Mac.

Mac's have viruses. Leopard makes up 15% of all operating system vulnrabilities while Vista only makes up 5%. Vista is 3x more secure. Mac's don't have many users so no one cares to write viruses for Leopard. The least secure OS is the Mac.

andrewbares said,
Mac's have viruses. Leopard makes up 15% of all operating system vulnrabilities while Vista only makes up 5%. Vista is 3x more secure. Mac's don't have many users so no one cares to write viruses for Leopard. The least secure OS is the Mac.

Oh, good god!

You are parroting the Microsoft report based purely on the number of patches and completely disregarding the severity, and the days of exposure. Plus, that number didn't count the flaws still open.

If you believe what you have repeated (as it is apparent you didn't develop that weak argument yourself), then you have been drinking the Kool-aid, too. (a different flavor than the Apple Kool-aid, but Kool-aid, none-the-less)

markjensen said,
If you believe what you have repeated (as it is apparent you didn't develop that weak argument yourself), then you have been drinking the Kool-aid, too. (a different flavor than the Apple Kool-aid, but Kool-aid, none-the-less)

Any meaning in any of the numbers is arbitrary anyway because most Windows users won't come in contact with the vulnerabilities and most Mac users won't come in contact with the vulnerabilities. The reason Microsoft doesn't always rush to patch flaws is because they know this.

Now that browsers have procedures to guard the user against malware and people use firewalls and UAC, there's very little reason for an average user to be concerned with an anti-virus program at all. If you run a server obviously you'll want to take more precautions.

The reason I hate Apple for pushing points like this goes beyond that its anti-Windows, I hate whenever people try to scare average people about computer viruses and push them to buy anti-virus software which does nothing for them; it just slows down their computer and intimidates them about using computers in general.

All but the 'biohazard' ad were amusing, and 'time travel' was hilarious. However, they are pretty much complete lies.

Then again, the 'laptop hunters' series isn't completely truthful either. Both companies need to start showing the product instead of blasting each other. The Laptop Hunters ads give me no reason to use Vista, and the Mac vs. PC ads usually use outright lies to promote OS X over Windows.

Both are stupid campaigns.

But that's not the message of the laptop hunters ad... the message is that "you should buy a PC because it's less expensive and does what you want," there is no mention of Windows at all.

Yea the Microsoft ads are 100% true. They don't even mention Windows in the ad, and that's the point. Microsoft is trying to prove that they are a good company and don't care only about money, so they go and promote companies products like HP and Sony. It puts a good PR face on them.

dhan said,
Ok, I don't get the "Legal Copy" ad...can someone explain it to me?
Others? Umm Apple, you can do better.

Fail.

roadwarrior said,
Actually, large portions of it are.

Since it's based on Unix. Of course.

But OS X is alot more legally restricted in terms of what you do with it than Windows.

^ How very true! Apple has a knack about controlling EVERY aspect of their products. Nothing happens in the Mac / iPod / iPhone world without them personally signing off on it.

Admodieus said,
Yeah, the Legal Copy one was pretty lame. It's not like OS X is open source.

WTF???

It has nothing to do with "Open Source" at all.

Legal Copy is the small print disclaimers. Much like at the end of the "Free Credit Report dot Com" commercials, where the voiceover says "offer applies with enrollment in Triple Advantage", or the small text and voiceovers in most car commercials.

It means that PC's aren't worry free and that everything the PC claims in the commercial isn't true.

I think we need a legal disclaimer for the Mac ads, they're so untrue. Every time I use a mac it freezes and beachballs, why's that Apple? Huh?

Cool, Windows 7's WMP 12 built in [.mov] codec really works! I don't need to install Apple's Quicktime /w Apple's bloatware software updater to play these!

I'm proud to be a PC!

s3n4te said,
Cool, Windows 7's WMP 12 built in [.mov] codec really works! I don't need to install Apple's Quicktime /w Apple's bloatware software updater to play these!

I'm proud to be a PC!


Not to be picky, but the .mov extension is not a "codec" it is a "container".

Also it's just the ones encoded in H.264 that do play in WMP12. Older MOV files using whatever codec they used to have will require Quicktime or equivalent (ffdshow, Haali Media Splitter, etc.)

I'm not positive on this, but wasn't iPhoto the last photo suite to get face tagging? Picasa and Windows Live Photo Gallery had it first, I believe.

Admodieus said,
I'm not positive on this, but wasn't iPhoto the last photo suite to get face tagging? Picasa and Windows Live Photo Gallery had it first, I believe.

Picasa's Web Gallery brought it out first in Sept. 08, but it only stays online and doesn't sync to your local library.

WLPG was released Jan. 7, 09, but it only does face detection, not recognition. Even then, it only detects faces in an open photo and doesn't do a scan through your library.

iPhoto 09' was released Jan. 6, 09.

Wow come on they continue with the lying.

Vista ,xp, and windows 7 have a very very very good built in search. I have used it mutliple times. Also on a domain there is even a free server for domain wide searching.

Atleast the microsoft commercials arent complete lies.

majortom1981 said,
Wow come on they continue with the lying.

Atleast the microsoft commercials arent complete lies.

True dat. Is this Apple's grand retaliate plan? More PC vs. Mac false advertising? Sigh... Will they never learn?

C'mon, guys. They're just advertisements. Even if the generalizations they make about Windows aren't true anymore and they're exaggerating them, those commercials are pretty well done. They're short and some of them are pretty comical.

Why do people always fall back on 'oh they're just ads'? Ads shift perspective, false advertising shouldn't be allowed or excused.

If this can be classified as 'false advertising', so can basically every ad on television right now. Microsoft ads included.

Because the girl buying a laptop could've totally bought a Mac for under $1,000. Let's disregard the fact that the only laptop available that's anywhere close is realistically over her budget. Anyone with a budget generally tries not to hit the maximum, and even so, with tax, it's already more than just a few bucks overboard. Not to mention small and not to her own likings.

Not sure how personal preference can be false advertising anyway though.

I don't plan on sitting here to go into detail with every ad though, but if you can find me the television ad where Microsoft overstepped, I'll be gladly to look at it. (I'm tired as I write this too, so forgive me if I sound a bit stuck up at the moment)

majortom1981 said,
Wow come on they continue with the lying.

Vista ,xp, and windows 7 have a very very very good built in search. I have used it mutliple times. Also on a domain there is even a free server for domain wide searching.

Atleast the microsoft commercials arent complete lies.


What ad are you referring to? The one where PC is searching through the pictures? If so, please show me how to search for faces in pictures on Windows, I'd love to see how that works.

Just saw all four Mac commercials and I am disgusted by it, not only are they wrong in the assumption that Windows are virus laden but they continue to whine and repeatedly say the same things over and over again. Apple is like a broken record. I am noway a Windows fanboy; I own both a Windows 3-way SLI gaming PC and a Macbook Pro unibody but I have respect for every single person and constantly being negative is just wrong!

haefft said,
Just saw all four Mac commercials and I am disgusted by it, not only are they wrong in the assumption that Windows are virus laden but they continue to whine and repeatedly say the same things over and over again. Apple is like a broken record. I am noway a Windows fanboy; I own both a Windows 3-way SLI gaming PC and a Macbook Pro unibody but I have respect for every single person and constantly being negative is just wrong!

Exactly.
I deal with multi and cross-platform problems on a daily basis, as someone who routinely uses windows, mac and linux. All faces have their blemishes, and all have their strong features.

majortom1981 said,
Wow come on they continue with the lying.

Vista ,xp, and windows 7 have a very very very good built in search. I have used it mutliple times. Also on a domain there is even a free server for domain wide searching.

Atleast the microsoft commercials arent complete lies.


Ads always does not (have to) say the truth...

roadwarrior said,
What ad are you referring to? The one where PC is searching through the pictures? If so, please show me how to search for faces in pictures on Windows, I'd love to see how that works.


http://download.live.com/photogallery
left tab called "people tracking"

picasa has also had this feature for a while now.

roadwarrior said,

What ad are you referring to? The one where PC is searching through the pictures? If so, please show me how to search for faces in pictures on Windows, I'd love to see how that works.

Apple copied the technology from Microsoft. Microsoft Photosynth is light years ahead of Apple's BS and it's free and not only does it find and compare your photos but can ping the web and completely create an interactive environment for all bunch of other photos from Flickr or similar.

Microsoft commercials didn't lie about anything. They just point obvious information and never dig Apple directly, which is a sign of maturity, something that Apple can't seem to be.

Berserk87 said,
http://download.live.com/photogallery
left tab called "people tracking"

picasa has also had this feature for a while now.


Not the same. http://www.windowslivetaskforce.com/view/31

Picasa's Web Gallery is like Faces though.

Apple copied the technology from Microsoft. Microsoft Photosynth is light years ahead of Apple's BS and it's free and not only does it find and compare your photos but can ping the web and completely create an interactive environment for all bunch of other photos from Flickr or similar.

Photosynth? What does this have to do with iPhoto/WLPG/Picasa, which are more practical in attuned to identifying people?

majortom1981 said,
Wow come on they continue with the lying.

Vista ,xp, and windows 7 have a very very very good built in search. I have used it mutliple times. Also on a domain there is even a free server for domain wide searching.

Atleast the microsoft commercials arent complete lies.


yes, because Micro$oft has never been guilty of FUD, no, never... :rolls eyes:

Chris-Gonzales said,
Windows live photo Gallery


WLPG does not do facial recognition like iPhoto, it only does facial detection. There is a HUGE difference.

majortom1981 said,
What ad are you referring to? The one where PC is searching through the pictures? If so, please show me how to search for faces in pictures on Windows, I'd love to see how that works.

Have you tried Windows Live Photo Gallery? You can tag peoples faces, which the program automatically recognize, or you can draw a rectangle if the software doesn't recognize someone.

The tags for people are shown in the left side of the program for quick access to the pictures they are in.

ajua said,
Have you tried Windows Live Photo Gallery? You can tag peoples faces, which the program automatically recognize, or you can draw a rectangle if the software doesn't recognize someone.

The tags for people are shown in the left side of the program for quick access to the pictures they are in.


Please read above.