True. Giving the ad agency the benefit of the doubt, they likely had to spend some time introducing the genre of ad and the premise they wanted to use for the series.
Indeed. Smart people don't judge the success or failure of an ad campaign based on the first ad - you look back at the start to finish campaign and judge it as a whole. But doing that doesn't make good headlines for today, so most bloggers are out there trashing it. Sometimes I hate the Internet - the immediacy of the medium is matched by the immediacy a rush to judgement and a lack of anything approaching thoughtful analysis.
I've seen what this ad company has done with other products and brands - I won't underestimate them and will be watching this ad series keenly (though I'll probably never see it on TV, which is a huge mistake in my mind).
__________________ Want to contact me personally? Use this. Want to read my personal blog? Check it out. Want to follow me on Twitter? Here you go.
Indeed. Smart people don't judge the success or failure of an ad campaign based on the first ad - you look back at the start to finish campaign and judge it as a whole. But doing that doesn't make good headlines for today, so most bloggers are out there trashing it. Sometimes I hate the Internet - the immediacy of the medium is matched by the immediacy a rush to judgement and a lack of anything approaching thoughtful analysis.
I've seen what this ad company has done with other products and brands - I won't underestimate them and will be watching this ad series keenly (though I'll probably never see it on TV, which is a huge mistake in my mind).
I've seen what this ad company has done with other products and brands - I won't underestimate them and will be watching this ad series keenly (though I'll probably never see it on TV, which is a huge mistake in my mind).
Actually, I/ve seen it 3 or 4 times on TV already, while flipping the channels
__________________
You create your opportunities by asking for them
Well, in fairness to the critics, we only have the one ad to discuss right now so I'm not sure what you guys would have them base their opinions on other than that one ad. Are they supposed to just imagine how clever this may all turn out to be and comment about that?
I mean, this one ad is pretty meaningless. Now if it turns out that this is just an introduction to a series that really sells MS well, then we can talk about that as it happens. But in the meantime, I'm not sure what else anyone is supposed to say except that I wish I could get paid as much as they did for writing a commercial like that. After all, it really is an ad about nothing. (Well, okay... it does hint at the possibility of edible computers in the future, but that's not really a feature I'm looking for.)
(Too bad MS didn't simply air parts of the infamous Bill Gates Last Day at Work movie, which really was funny in many ways.
Hopefully they will. What made that video work was the slew of different stars, like Bono and Jay Z. If anything I would be happy if they had other celebrities in the commercial besides Jerry.
Indeed. Smart people don't judge the success or failure of an ad campaign based on the first ad - you look back at the start to finish campaign and judge it as a whole.
Are people really judging the whole campaign, or just this ad in particular? On the latter note, like a lot of other people, I don't quite get it. It's a mildly funny commercial, but it doesn't do what a good commercial should -- sell a product or a brand. There's no Vista references whatsoever (wasn't that the point?) and the Microsoft references are muted at best. I only recognized the campaign because of the headlines that I've seen before.
Comparing this to Apple's Get A Mac campaign isn't really possible, because they're in completely different genres.
The one word that best sums up my reaction to this ad is "pointless." I can't imagine what in the world it was intended to accomplish. As I recall, Seinfeld's show was supposed to be "about nothing," and I guess that pretty well sums up this ad, too. If anything, it made me less eager to buy something from Microsoft, because they wasted two minutes of my time with this drivel. I guess I'm not in their target audience, either...
When I saw this ad for the first time, I thought to myself- "WTF"??? The only reference to Windows at all was the logo at the end. Nothing about this ad was funny. The ad was about "nothing". This approach didn't give me the warm fuzzies about Windows and I don't see how this ad could inspire anyone to want to wrestle with Vista. Here's a novel Idea- Adds that show what Windows Vista CAN do well that Mac doesn't:
How bout starting the ad off with Seinfeld walking in on Bill G playing a game (Crysis, Company of Heroes, COD4, take your pick...) on a Gaming PC (Alienware) hooked up to FOUR flat panel monitors. Jerry gasps (WOW) , says "That is incredible. How'd you get four monitors hooked up to your computer like that"? Bill replies- "I'm running two ATI 4870 video cards in Crossfire mode. Each card has two monitor inputs, so I hooked up four monitors". Jerry replies- "Hey, l can't run that video card on my Mac, or that game, can I". "No you can't Jerry. This card and this game only run on Windows PC's." End of story. Show us something Windows CAN DO that the Mac Can't do or doesn't do as well or as fast. THAT will spark interest in Windows, not a series of commercials about some nonsensical nothingness with a tiny Windows logo at the end. That commercial was a joke that wasn't funny.
As the poster above said, good advertising makes you want to go out and buy the product, not leave you with more questions than answers, scratching your head wondering "what were they thinking"? As an example, Audi's latest TV ad campaign is very well done and leads you to their website where you can look at more ads that all together make you want to go out and buy an Audi. Included in the online ads are information about the product that answers your questions and tells you why you want to buy an Audi. That approach works. The first ad in this Sienfeld/Microsoft comedy show, does not.
__________________
"...And miles to go before I sleep.."
Palm Pre Plus running Web OS 1.4.5 on the network with less bars in more places- AT&T
As the poster above said, good advertising makes you want to go out and buy the product, not leave you with more questions than answers, scratching your head wondering "what were they thinking"?
I really think that they made a point to not mention any Microsoft product because the ad was meant to sell the company and not a product. No one is going to care that Windows can do something that the Mac can't if they hate the company. That is just what I picked up for it.
Now on the other hand, after working for a marketing agency for a bit, I learned that even advertisements that were completely random and abstract still told some kind of story that only the lunatics in the meeting room that worked on the ad know.
For instance if this was the old agency I worked for, the shoe store would have been like the experience of shopping for a PC - quality products at discount prices, why pay more. Tons of manufactures make Windows PC, you can find one that has the hardware you want at a fraction of what it takes to purchase a Mac... or in this case a designer shoe.
The shoe being a little tight and the salesman telling him they would stretch would have been like buying a Mac and the whole "Apple knows whats best for you" mentality. Instead of you getting something that fits exactly what you need, you have to adapt to something new and hope it blends with your life, or stretches to be more comfortable.
The Conquistador running tight references would have been related to how customizable a PC is. You can get one that completely fits your need, or in this case, one that runs tight and fits perfectly.
Showering with your clothes on and making a point to show the shoe is just to random and weird to not have some marketing bologna behind it. Probably a shot at Mac for being so sparkling clean. then again, that could have just been pure Seinfeld.
Jerry announcing Bill is a ten, more than once, gets it stuck in peoples head that Bill is a ten and usually when we say something is a ten its like giving it two thumbs up or five stars. That is just too blatant to not be some marketing mojo.
I think the Big Top points were just amusing and had no doublespeak behind them. On the other hand I definitely think the whole 'delicious' ending is going to be a convergence of Microsoft products, something we have all been begging for for years. Reason being is that convergence is the only thing I can think of that Microsoft can do that would be delicious - or at least mouth watering. To think for once, all of those programs communicating and talking at once? If this is true, the hub of the experience could be centered around the Zune or Windows Mobile platform seeing as how those are the two devices people usually carry with them everywhere.
Then again I am probably completely wrong with my predictions above but working for an ad agency that worked for Microsoft and Intel and constantly being in meetings with them working on projects, this is exactly the type of stuff that would fly around the room.
Now on the other hand, after working for a marketing agency for a bit, I learned that even advertisements that were completely random and abstract still told some kind of story that only the lunatics in the meeting room that worked on the ad know.
Isn't this comment back up exactly our point? We need the majority of people to get it, not the advertising lunatics.
I am up on many Apple-Microsoft metaphors, and it was totally not obvious to me that the shoes were a metaphor for that distinction. One could make the opposite argument, in fact, that one needs to work at ("stretch") Windows to get it to be comfortable.
Linear Mode
