Microsoft Unleashes New "Laptop Hunters" Ad [Archive]

View Full Version : Microsoft Unleashes New "Laptop Hunters" Ad

Vincent Ferrari

04-10-2009, 05:00 PM

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.microsoft.com/windows/watchtheads/video/lisaandjackson/' target='_blank'>http://www.microsoft.com/windows/wa...lisaandjackson/</a><br /><br /></div><p>Yep, they're at it again.  Meet Lisa, a mom who thinks Apple computers are "popular at that age" (as she points to her whatever year old kid) and her son, Jackson, who wants a big hard drive, speed, and a computer that's good for gaming.  What do they look at?  Why, a Vista 64 laptop from Sony, of course!  Doesn't everyone?</p><p><object classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" width="600" height="360" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="src" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Qui43P1kztw&hl=en&fs=1" /><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="600" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Qui43P1kztw&hl=en&fs=1" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object></p><p>Unlike in the Giampaolo ad (surely you remember him? he's the "picky" and "technically savvy" guy who walked out of Fry's with an utter piece of slow heavy crap after saying he wanted speed and portability), these guys actually got a halfway decent machine.  Of course, you'll never find that machine listed on the Laptop Hunters site; they don't put the machines there anymore, so you can't make fun as easily as you used to!</p><p>Either way, it has all the features of a typical "Laptop Hunters" ad.  The stupid dig at Apple, the revelation that they need a PC, and the purchase of a PC at a big box store where your options are grossly limited to whatever they have in stock on the shelves. Should be interesting to find out, down the road, how well Jackson's gaming is going on a laptop (!?) running Windows Vista 64 (*sigh*), with a graphics chipset that's roughly 2 generations old (nice move).  But hey, they have Blu Ray!  On a 16.4" screen!  With a remote!</p><p><a href="http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921665709576" target="_blank">Here's the machine they bought.</a></p>

Jason Dunn

04-10-2009, 06:37 PM

Did I miss something and are Macs now suddenly great gaming computers? I know there are more games out now then there were two years ago, but it seems quite legitimate to go Windows if you want to play games. Sure, the ATI 3650 isn't top-end gaming graphics, but it should be decent enough for 1600 x 900 resolution. People like to play games, and for all the Mac platform is, it's not a gaming platform. I'm constantly surprised by the number of people that ask me questions about gaming on a netbook - even though it's the single worst platform for gaming put out in years, people still want to do it...and they're happy even if they're playing games at low resolutions, etc.

Oh, and by the way, which Mac laptops have Blu-ray playback again? Or a 16.4" wide screen display? I forget... :D

doogald

04-10-2009, 06:54 PM

Hmm, I guess that Microsoft needs to deduct extra charges for BluRay disks from their "Apple Tax" calculations (http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&taxonomyName=Macintoshes&articleId=9131444&taxonomyId=163&pageNumber=1). What, it's $48 a year extra for BluRay on Netflix now, right?

Windows gives you so many choices, including "pink". Thank goodness you can buy "pink".

Vincent Ferrari

04-10-2009, 07:00 PM

thatDid I miss something and are Macs now suddenly great gaming computers? I know there are more games out now then there were two years ago, but it seems quite legitimate to go Windows if you want to play games. Sure, the ATI 3650 isn't top-end gaming graphics, but it should be decent enough for 1600 x 900 resolution. People like to play games, and for all the Mac platform is, it's not a gaming platform. I'm constantly surprised by the number of people that ask me questions about gaming on a netbook - even though it's the single worst platform for gaming put out in years, people still want to do it...and they're happy even if they're playing games at low resolutions, etc.

Oh, and by the way, which Mac laptops have Blu-ray playback again? Or a 16.4" wide screen display? I forget... :D

I never once said you wouldn't go to Windows for gaming, although I'd argue that computers in general suck for gaming anyway and you should by yourself a decent computer, an XBox, a PS3, and a Wii instead.

Truth is, this is a decent machine, as I said, but hardly a gaming machine. And no, Macs aren't great for gaming, although now, I reckon the integrated Nvidia 9400 in the lowest of low-end MacBooks would smoke <link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5Cvinny%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><link rel="themeData" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5Cvinny%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_themedata.thmx"><link rel="colorSchemeMapping" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5Cvinny%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_colorschememapping.xml"><style>  </style> the ATI card in that Sony. Secondly, yes, the 1660 x 900 could be lowered to play games, but why would you do that? If that's the plan, then the "small" Macbook would look just as good.

The Mac gaming landscape is getting better, though. I see plenty of newer titles in the Apple store, so unless Apple started selling Windows software, there are games out there. Maybe not the breadth and scope of the Windows world, but not completely absent, either.

I think the most interesting part of the Laptop Hunters site is that they aren't showing the machines these people buy on the page with their video anymore. I guess they got tired of getting beat up over the specs. :D

Oh yeah; one more thing... Who in the hell needs Bluray on a 16" display?

Jason Dunn

04-10-2009, 07:07 PM

You won't find me defending this "Apple tax" push from Microsoft - there's a grain of truth to it, but they somehow inject that grain with a metric tonne of BS and made it seem like it's much bigger than it is. Yes, you pay more for the Apple ecosystem, but it's not as much of a spread as they're making it out to be.

Windows gives you so many choices, including "pink". Thank goodness you can buy "pink".

Why be derisive about colour choice? I always find it strange when people mock colour as a differentiator, as if it doesn't matter. Do you make fun of people who bought the black Macbook? Apple charged more for it, didn't they? So even the mighty Apple acknowledged that colour mattered to some people. And Apple's history with iMacs certainly showed that colour mattered. Need I even mention the iPod Nano colour range?

In the sub-$1000 price range, most computers run very similar hardware, so colour is a perfectly valid differentiator between one computer and another. A friend of mine bought a pink laptop for his wife - and the colour was the deciding factor in terms of which brand to choose. And why not? A Core 2 Duo CPU in one laptop is the same as the other. For Joe Consumer, most computer brands blur together and end up seeming pretty similar.

Jason Dunn

04-10-2009, 07:21 PM

...I'd argue that computers in general suck for gaming anyway and you should by yourself a decent computer, an XBox, a PS3, and a Wii instead.

That's a judgement call on your part. I think the 10+ million people playing MMORPGs around the world every month would disagree with you. I have an Xbox 360, and Gears of War 2 is huge fun on it - I wouldn't play that game on my PC. But I also play City of Heroes on my PC, and that game wouldn't be nearly as fun on an Xbox. Different games, different platforms. One isn't automatically better than the other - it depends on context. I personally do zero gaming on my laptops, but for some people, that's their only computer, so they'll be gaming on it...

...I reckon the integrated Nvidia 9400 in the lowest of low-end MacBooks would smoke <link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5Cvinny%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><link rel="themeData" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5Cvinny%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_themedata.thmx"><link rel="colorSchemeMapping" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5Cvinny%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_colorschememapping.xml"><style>  </style> the ATI card in that Sony.

But with what? Browser-based Flash games? There's so much less choice on the Mac for games, it hardly seems worthwhile comparing them. It's like me saying I have a V12, 1000hp engine but it takes ground-up unicorn horn to run...which means it's more or less useless. Without the games to run on it, that GPU isn't going to do anyone any good.

[I haven't done any comparisons of the top 10 selling games on Windows vs. what's available on the Mac, so I'm open to correction on this point if I'm wrong.]

Oh yeah; one more thing... Who in the hell needs Bluray on a 16" display?

Aww man, don't even go there...dismissing something out of hand as being useless just because you don't see personal value in it is ignorant - you're better than that! :) Everyone in the industry said the same thing about netbooks - look who's laughing now (that would be Asus).

I have a 17" laptop that I use to watch movies on when the wife and I go on driving-distance vacations, and it's great! I have a slowly growing collection of Blu-ray movies, so, guess what, I sure wish that laptop had a Blu-ray player in it. I tested an HP laptop last month, and it had an 18.4" screen at 1920 x 1080, and the Blu-ray movies looked GREAT on it. Anyone who says DVDs look the same as Blu-ray on a 16" or 18" screen doesn't know what they're talking about.

Just because Apple doesn't offer a techology, doesn't mean it's worthless - you know that. Apple has pioneered a lot of great technologies, but they've also missed the boat (purposefully on some, like Blu-ray) on a lot of technologies, and they deserve their lumps for that.

jdmichal

04-10-2009, 07:36 PM

Aww man, don't even go there...dismissing something out of hand as being useless just because you don't see personal value in it is ignorant - you're better than that! :) Everyone in the industry said the same thing about netbooks - look who's laughing now (that would be Asus).

No offense meant to anyone, but that's kinda what Vince does :)

As to the original question, considering that standard DVDs output at 720x576 or 720x480, Blu-Ray still makes sense. Especially since in some situations, such as airplanes or car rides, you will be pretty close to the display.

Vincent Ferrari

04-10-2009, 07:41 PM

Just because Apple doesn't offer a techology, doesn't mean it's worthless - you know that.

I do know that, which makes me wonder why in one comment section of one post, you reminded me of it twice.

As for games, I admit it isn't "as good" and even said as much, but I'd say Command and Conquer and Spore are both new enough to disspell the myth that there are no Mac games. Then again, I also don't know a lot of people who play games on computers either (and not just people who have Macs; people in general). We could argue all day about the importance of computer gaming, but I can't help but feel that it's used more as a point against Macs than a point in favor of Windows. Maybe it's just the crowd I run with.

Aww man, don't even go there...dismissing something out of hand as being useless just because you don't see personal value in it is ignorant - you're better than that! :) Everyone in the industry said the same thing about netbooks - look who's laughing now (that would be Asus).

I'm not being ignorant, and I'm not dismissing. I'm literally asking the question: who the hell needs Blu Ray on a 16" laptop? There's a reason that Blu Ray hasn't taken off, dude, and contrary to people like you and I who won't watch one single thing if it isn't in HD, most people simply can't see the difference. Someone who buys an two-generation old laptop at a big box electronics store with a low-end video card probably isn't the most in need of Blu Ray.

Again, that's an assumption, not ingorance.

Blu Ray for data storage makes sense. Blu Ray for movies on a screen size and resolution of 16 inches seems, in my ignorant and uninformed opinion, like a waste of money whether or not Apple makes equivalent hardware.

Vincent Ferrari

04-10-2009, 07:45 PM

No offense meant to anyone, but that's kinda what Vince does :)

Ummm... No offense, but it's my job. It's my job to analyze and bring things into context. Often that context includes my personal opinions, which is all anyone on here, including Jason, does. It's what makes it interesting. I could go all sterile and just report and not analyze, but I'd lose a hell of a lot of readers.

As to the original question, considering that standard DVDs output at 720x576 or 720x480, Blu-Ray still makes sense. Especially since in some situations, such as airplanes or car rides, you will be pretty close to the display.

Well then; if you're gonna be "generally" sitting that close to the screen, what do you need a remote control for?

Just sayin.

ntractv

04-10-2009, 07:46 PM

I have a 17" laptop that I use to watch movies on when the wife and I go on driving-distance vacations, and it's great! I have a slowly growing collection of Blu-ray movies, so, guess what, I sure wish that laptop had a Blu-ray player in it. I tested an HP laptop last month, and it had an 18.4" screen at 1920 x 1080, and the Blu-ray movies looked GREAT on it. Anyone who says DVDs look the same as Blu-ray on a 16" or 18" screen doesn't know what they're talking about.

Here, Here. I have a Sony Vaio with a Blu-ray player with a 18.4" screen at 1080p resolution and the picture is amazing. The same quality picture as on my larger 52" HDTV.

jdmichal

04-10-2009, 08:38 PM

Ummm... No offense, but it's my job. It's my job to analyze and bring things into context. Often that context includes my personal opinions, which is all anyone on here, including Jason, does. It's what makes it interesting. I could go all sterile and just report and not analyze, but I'd lose a hell of a lot of readers.

I think you might have assumed I was being sarcastic or something... I really meant no offense, and as a simple statement. But I guess I'm glad you agree with me at least!

Well then; if you're gonna be "generally" sitting that close to the screen, what do you need a remote control for?

Just sayin.

Because one usage scenario does not preclude other usage scenarios. Especially if you're selling to a broad audience. Sure, you might use it on the airplane 80% of the time, where you are at a distance that the video quality is visible. That doesn't mean that you're not going to spend that other 20% of your time wishing you had a remote instead of getting up all the time. And guess what; that other person over there uses it 20% and 80%, respectively. Having only Blu-Ray or only the remote would have resulted in a single sale in this situation. Having both resulted in two sales. Businesses call that winning. The more usage scenarios you support, the more people your product will be attractive to, and therefore the more likely it is to be purchased.

Vincent Ferrari

04-10-2009, 08:43 PM

I think you might have assumed I was being sarcastic or something... I really meant no offense, and as a simple statement. But I guess I'm glad you agree with me at least!

Fair enough. I guess... :D

Macguy59

04-10-2009, 10:40 PM

Anyone who says DVDs look the same as Blu-ray on a 16" or 18" screen doesn't know what they're talking about.

Just because Apple doesn't offer a techology, doesn't mean it's worthless - you know that. Apple has pioneered a lot of great technologies, but they've also missed the boat (purposefully on some, like Blu-ray) on a lot of technologies, and they deserve their lumps for that.

Depends entirely what the native res of that 16" is. Agree that Apple should be bludgeoned (repeatedly) over it's refusal to incorporate BD playback in OS X.

Darius Wey

04-11-2009, 04:54 AM

Did I miss something and are Macs now suddenly great gaming computers?

And no, Macs aren't great for gaming, although now, I reckon the integrated Nvidia 9400 in the lowest of low-end MacBooks would smoke the ATI card in that Sony.

My comment is a little out of context, since we're dealing with laptops, but there is the Mac Pro, which, depending on the configuration, can pack some high-end cards such as the GeForce 8800GT and Radeon HD 4870 - both of which are capable of running most games at 100+ FPS at standard resolutions. You can also install any other unsupported card (e.g., GeForce GTX 295) and run it exclusively in Windows (Boot Camp).

Macs aren't designated gaming computers (Apple certainly doesn't market them that way), but the point is, if you need a Mac for home or work and still love a good game, you can still get one that offers great gaming performance. If you don't need a Mac, and/or your main interest is gaming, then it's probably worth channeling those dollars toward a customized Windows box.

Sven Johannsen

04-11-2009, 08:34 PM

Just because Apple doesn't offer a techology, doesn't mean it's worthless.
Wash your mouth out Jason. Of course it does...until it gets included, then it is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and there has never been sliced bread like this before.

If we are doing ads, how about the current iPhone ads..'There's an app for that'. Wasn't that long ago you couldn't put an app on an iPhone. Still can't cut and paste, soon though, but doing it between 3rd party apps isn't a given, is it? The apps they show are neat, but I do take some exception to the tagline "Only on an iPhone." Pretty sure I've been able to get a pretty similar app to everyone for WM for some time, with the likely exception of those that need the orientation sensor. Those aren't to ubiquitous in WM hardware. Gotta admit a $300 bubble level is cool...but really.

P.S. I think the iPhone ads are very compelling. MS needs to steal some of the Apple marketing dept. ;)

Macguy59

04-11-2009, 11:11 PM

Still can't cut and paste, soon though, but doing it between 3rd party apps isn't a given, is it?

I see the beginnings of a straw man ;)

Cybrid

04-13-2009, 05:01 PM

Oh yeah; one more thing... Who in the hell needs Bluray on a 16" display?
On a machine with a remote and a HDMI out port ? Geez I dunno thats a tough one. I couldn't possibly see myself using that ever...
:D

Vincent,
In all honesty I researched apple macbooks for a co-worker and put them up against several Windows Vista machines. My co-worker wanted a light weight portable. Something she could carry to and from classes. The budget was $2000 CDN. In every instance, from the 13.3" to the 15", the macs cost more.
Admittedly it is hard to compare them unless the hardware is nearly identical but aside from the excellent video card, the 13.3 base config had 160Gb, 2Gb RAM
while I could find 320GB, 4Gb on several machines for far less. As for the processors, There may be significant difference there too but I didn't see enough of one to jump up and down for... She ended up buying the MJac 'cause it was cute. Personally I wouldn't have.

michaelalanjones

04-13-2009, 07:13 PM

I know, she is just an actress, but the maniacal shreik when she is is handed the cash, all fanned out, is creepy. It reminds me of a pr0n video; a little quid pro blow.

And she says something like: "Kids of that age are interested in Macs". Tell that to the lawyers, writers and other professional Mac users, like my wife.

Sven Johannsen

04-13-2009, 09:13 PM

Heard about this today on the radio, and thought it might be useful as ad copy.

Need to speed but radar detectors are illegal in your jusisdiction? There's an app for that ;)

http://www.trapster.com/

doogald

04-13-2009, 10:02 PM

In all honesty I researched apple macbooks for a co-worker and put them up against several Windows Vista machines. My co-worker wanted a light weight portable. Something she could carry to and from classes. ... the 13.3 base config had 160Gb, 2Gb RAM

If the reason for buying is to get a light weight portable to carry to and from class, IMHO 2 GB is definitely enough on a Leopard. My two year old MacBook has 2 GB and the only time that I notice any issue is if I am running Win7 in Parallels (XP at 512 kb RAM runs great concurrently with any other apps - I can run Mail, Firefox, iCal, Preview, Evernote, a Twitter client, and iTunes at the same time and notice no speed degradation.)

You can always upgrade later on if it turns out that more RAM is needed.

Jason Dunn

04-14-2009, 06:14 PM

I do know that, which makes me wonder why in one comment section of one post, you reminded me of it twice.

Sorry for being redundant - I just get so excited in these discussions. :)

We could argue all day about the importance of computer gaming, but I can't help but feel that it's used more as a point against Macs than a point in favor of Windows. Maybe it's just the crowd I run with.

Desktop computer gaming is a multi-billion dollar industry...one look at all the high-end video cards out there from ATI and NVIDIA tells us that. I'm not saying that you can't use a Mac for games, but if someone says they want a computer for gaming as their primary purpose, Windows is it - until the Mac reaches parity with Windows where developers release games on both platforms at or near the same time.

I'm not being ignorant, and I'm not dismissing. I'm literally asking the question: who the hell needs Blu Ray on a 16" laptop?

Again, it's about the media. Yes, Blu-ray is slow to take off - but when I see my own father getting a Blu-ray player (and he's not a techie - he just got his first HD TV this year), I know it's growing slowly but surely. So if you have a Blu-ray player in your home, and you've got a few Blu-ray discs, or you rent from Netflix or wherever, having a Blu-ray player on your laptop would probably be useful, no? I'm not saying this is the end-all, be-all awesome feature, but it's more more solution for the user.

Blu Ray for movies on a screen size and resolution of 16 inches seems, in my ignorant and uninformed opinion, like a waste of money whether or not Apple makes equivalent hardware.

Someone else mentioned the HDMI output - don't forget about that. I've gone on vacation and done HDMI output to a TV set and watched ripped movies on my laptop (and that's when you'd use a remote). It's sweet! And, honestly, find someone with a laptop with a Blu-ray player in it, and look at the same movie on DVD then on Blu-ray. You'll see a very big difference, largely because you're only a foot or two away from the screen, so the extra resolution really pops.

Spooof

04-18-2009, 12:13 AM

Sorry for lurking and then just popping into the discussion... a few comments...

I used to play FPS games on my original MBP 15inch via boot camp. At least until my keyboard would get too hot to rest my fingers on. It worked great for the most part. I have never purchased a OS-x based game... seems pointless. PC is way better for any resource intensive game.

dvd vs blueray vs crappy downloaded video. I watch a lot of movies and TV on my MBP with my wife. Seems silly considering I have a <style>  </style>ridiculously<o></o> large TV (almost as large as Jason's) but we do it anyway. I can totally notice the difference. My wife on the other hand doesn't really care. The only thing that she ever mentions / complains about is the black bars when the aspec ratio does not utilize the full screen. My point is I am not sure the average user cares... only us geeks.

Regarding hardware comparisons: there is more to it than specs. I have exposure to a lot of business quality notebooks and a few consumer notebooks. In general the fit and finish is not in the same league as apple. I am not sure how you assign a dollar value to this, but it should be factored in (my opinion).

cheers