Whoever thought of this campaign for Microsoft should be fired. I'm no marketing whiz, but it seems to me that having your protagonist go to the "Mac Store" first only serves to emphasize that that is where people go to look for a computer first now, not the right message. Wouldn't the better commercial be her walking into the Best Buy and looking at all the variety and choices she has among the manufacturers? Then using the "savings" at being so far under $1000 to pick up a new Zune or a copy of Office or a game or something?

All they did was take a swipe at a company they don't even have to acknowledge, and a company that has no problem in releasing a new (much better) ad throwing it all in their face in a month.

So why shouldn't Microsoft take a nip out of Apple's style with this ad? Are they to just sit there while Apple spits out negative ad after negative ad?

Let the truth be known, you can get a killer dual core PC for $599 which is cheaper than Lauren's! And that is with great specs.

Sorry if it hurts Apple, but your hardware *is* way overpriced. Considering you are on standard x86 hardware now, the truth is coming out on just how big that "Apple Tax" is. Don't try to "disect" it, there is nothing to disect. It's black and white.

Campbell's soup used to run an ad campaign with the slogan, "Soup is good food." They could use a slogan that didn't mention the company by name because they owned 90% (or more) of the shelf space at your local grocer. So if you were buying soup, you were most likely buying theirs.

Now Campbell's, feeling pressure from Progresso Soup, runs ads claiming that they have more soups without MSG than the "other guys have soups."

MS literally owns 90% of the PC market (probably more if you're not just counting new computer sales in this downward economy). Why should they care if 3% - 5% of people are buying Macs instead of Windows boxes? MS could easily run an ad campaign to encourage users to upgrade and not even mention Windows and they'd still come out ahead. Way ahead.

Instead, they run ads that have been ripped apart by anyone with an average IQ. Remember the multi-million-dollar Jerry Sienfeld meets Bill Gates ads? No? Neither do I. But I heard they ran once on TV. Then there was the "I'm a PC" ads. I saw a great take on that on YouTube (you should search for it, too), where PC says "I'm a PC" and Mac replies, "I'm a PC, too" (because, you know, Mac can run Windows, too).

Personally, I think it's funny that the 500-pound MS gorilla is feeling threatened by the annoying mouse in the corner. If nothing else, at least it's entertaining to see MS squirm like this.

I just wanted to note that the supposed decrease in Apple's market share is artificial because sales data for last quarter is being compared against the quarter from when the MacBook air was released. Sales of the MacBook air were artificially high because it was a brand new product. Without this spike from last year, I don't think that sales figures would show Apple losing share.

-Thanks.

When the economy recovers, people will remember Microsoft as a company that sells cheap products. If I want to spend millions on an ad I would include as much factors to buy my product as i could (value, reliability, price). But Microsoft geniuses concentrate only in the price!

Actually, I think it's a good ad and shows an advantage of the PC universe over Apple.

Take the example in the ad: I want a big-screen notebook to use as a desktop replacement. Something I can carry around but doesn't have to be super-portable. It should be fast, obviously, but it doesn't need to be amazingly so.

The MacBook's screen is too small--both in size and resolution, but the speed is about right. The MacBook Pro screen is good and the speed is probably more than I need. You start to see the issue? There's no big-screen laptop in Apple's line in the $1000-$2000 range.

Now I'm not busting on Apple's laptops. Comparing the 17" HP Laptop with the 17" MacBook Pro is like comparing a Ford Escort with a BMW 300-series in terms of reliability, speed, and style. The 17" MacBook Pro is designed to be a portable production studio--not something you'd use to sit in the coffee shop and surf the web.

The advantage of the PC world though, whether Mac people like to admit it or not, is that--hardware-wise--you can probably find whatever you want at whatever price-point you desire. Want a Core 2 Duo (or Quad?) PC with 2 AGP slots so you can keep it up to date with the hottest graphics cards? You'll find it. Want a $400 computer? You'll find it. Want a super-fast multi-core CPU and 10 PCIe slots? You'll find it. Want a laptop with a big screen for under $1000? You'll find it. Whatever combination of requirements you have (price, speed, expansion, display, etc.), you'll find a PC that fits.

Apple does not try to be all things to all people. Their product matrix is designed to appeal to the most people. But if you end up somewhere in between--you want a consumer laptop with a big screen--you're better off looking elsewhere.

I think a more telling statistic might be to look at adoption rates among college students. The survey of UVa students which prompted UVa to announce the closure of community computer labs (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/03/whats-the-point-of-running.ars) showed that Mac ownership accounted for 26%. That is more than double than in the general population.

Why is this significant?

These kids go on to make decisions in business (including purchasing) and with their own families - which includes what computers to buy. If Apple starts seeing enterprise desktop adoption - Microsoft will have to do what it hasn't been forced to do for a long time - fight for market share. Believe it or not - the home market is nothing compared to enterprise licensing as a cash stream.

I would suggest that you get out your Apple only cage and see the whole world.

Microsoft changed its attitude about its competitors. In the past they never gave names of anyone. Not only Apple but also others such as Google.

They are becoming more open about it now, and when they talk about a competitor they give its name too.

And about being scared of competitors. That's just good. It will keep the company awake.

Two things:

1) MS doesn't actually have 90% of the PC market, as is my understanding. The "90%" number comes from EVERYTHING Windows is on - including ATMS, cash registers, local government computers, EVERYTHING. The PC market is a lot, A LOT closer, and that is the pinch MS is feeling. They aren't JUST stupid, they really are seeing some scary numbers. It's the first rule in advertising, if you are #1, not to mention #2 - and they are well aware of this rule. They are breaking it, I don't say Apple is #1 - but they are breaking it because the trend is looking scary.

2) This commercial has been debunked on its own merits already. It has been pointed out that when the SAG affiliated actress 'Lauren' walks into the 'Mac Store', at about :12, or :13, there is a man in a striped shirt walking past. Two seconds later, when she is exiting, he is in the middle of this same stroll.

I want to add that: Microsoft's stock is in a freefall, and that Microsoft almost doesn't pay their employees, they allow shareholders to do it through the stock option system. They used to fudge the numbers by buying back a lot of the stock the employees had to dump on the market, but the stock is sold, now, at a rate faster than Microsoft can buy. This company is in the death throes.

@Shawn

Thank you for bringing up the "Apple Tax", a non-existent piece of marketing fluff from Microsoft. You bought it hook line and sinker and by mentioning it you prove that you are a brain dead lemming. Whether you choose a Mac or PC is not the concern. What is the concern with the ad is that Lauren didn't do any quality research on her product and simply bought the cheapest on the shelf with a 17 inch screen.

Never once did she address "why" she needed the computer and "what " she was going to be using it for... those should have been the first questions addressed. Then you look at the best computer that meets your budget.

What the ad really said was, "If I could live with a 13inch screen I would buy that one, becasue Macs are cool and I really want one." Had she done some real research she could have gone to the Apple Store online and realized she could have bought a refurbished 20inch screen iMac for $849 because let's face it, the $699 17 inch screen portable PC she bought weighs about 8 pounds and I don't see her carrying that thing around too much.

Love the Lauren follow-up even better
http://www.macmod.com/other/1951-microsoft-lauren-sues-microsoft-a-best-buy

@Atrius

Your understanding of the PC market isn't entirely incorrect. But whether the computer is used in the govt, business or home, they all need to pay for a license. Apple products in most cases *are* too expensive for the biz/gov markets. While some other posters were right to point out that MS should be worried that Apple is making significant gains in the younger market, the cold hard fact remains that MS has a very clear and undeniable market share advantage.

As far as your claims that the stock is "in freefall" and that they don't pay their employees... Geez help yourself to a frickin Google search.

MSFT stock gives a 13 cent dividend four times a year. The yield alone on that is quite large. When you have 90% market share you can't be a "growth stock" anymore. I'd point you to a wikipedia page describing this phenomenon, but I imagine you're one of the inarticulate idiots who edits the finance pages.

They also pay their employees more than Apple (stock and benefits aside). Check out glassdoor.com

Thank you for your well researched opinion. I'll be sure to skip over any comments that carry your name in the future.

MS may own 90% of the PC market, as Herbert Woodrose points out, if you count the cash registers, EVERYTHING it's installed on. This figure is very misleading.

I'd be willing to bet good money that a large percent of people in offices, on reception desks in hotels and doctors offices haven't a CLUE what OS is on the computer that came with the job. Asked, they would probably say, "Intel" or "Explorer." What the market share figures don't show is is the market share for those who actually choose the computer they want to use. You get some idea of this in the figures for web use. These show Safari gaining nicely. That, coupled with the Zune, XBox, Tablet PC failures is what has MS worried.

But this whole thing came from the Ballmer statement about paying 500 dollars for a logo. Hey! The CEO of MS had an IDEA! Wow!

It's one thing for someone (Ballmer), who is notoriously "creative" with figures to make a crass statement that'll be forgotten in a couple of days and quite another to use it as an advertising campaign.

Hey, guys! Buy Microsoft! It's cheap!

Start down that road and someone is soon going to point out that Linux does everything that Windows does with GREATER SECURITY and SPEED ................ FOR FREE.

And you don't get much cheaper than that.

RIP Microsoft.

We hardly knew you.

@Atrius:
Microsoft has as much to fear from Google as Apple, if not more. Google's Android is even more of a threat than the iPhone; it's a free alternative to WinMobile. Google Apps represent a future of cloud-based computing that could undermine Office. And Microsoft can't make a dent in search against Google, which led to its futile attempt to buy Yahoo!
Between Apple and Google, Ballmer has plenty to keep him awake at night.

Microsoft makes and sells the Windows OS and Microsoft Office Suite — for both PC and Mac. They probably charge the PC Computer manufacturers the same price whether they install it on a Netbook or on an Adamo. So when they disparage a the buyer who can afford the logo, they disparage the person who can afford to also buy and install both Windows and the Office Suite. Technically, Microsoft wins even without running any commercials, but they choose to bite their nose to spite their face.

The way Apple and Mac fans has come out and defended themselves I think they are the scared one.

If taking dig at some company makes you scared then Apple is scared of Microsoft for years.

I think you are Apple fan that's exactly your post suggest to me.

@bmovie

An Apple fan defending Apple products, I hope you didn't spend too much time trying to figure that one out.

Apple products are better than Microsoft products, it's almost a given these days, but whether you choose Mac or PC do your homework first. Microsoft has never been shy about saying their OS is "good enough" and Apple has always strived to makes sure their OS is "great." That is the difference in philosophy and that is what this ad is all about. If you want a computer that is not great, but costs less, get a PC. If you are willing to spend a little extra "up front", but save in the long run and get a great computer that some would perceive to be cool, get a Mac.

I feel bad for HP in all this. Not only is this ad saying PC's are cheap, it's saying HP computers are cheap.

Market share: it isn't just Windows running on cash registers. If you segment the market intelligently (separate large organizations from consumers buying their own machines), Apple's share in the American consumer market is high enough to get MS' attention.

But yes, while perhaps tactically effective in the current economy, this MS ad cements the brand positioning: Apple is the one you really want, MS is what you settle for.

I'm a mac user and lover and they're definitely not perfect. But it ain't a label Mr. Balmer. The 800 lb gorilla is... Malware. MS sells a product that requires another product to keep it running smoothly. Mac users really do run without any sort of malware protection (despite what the so-called security researchers say is theoretically possible).

Obviously theres OSX (which most perfer), iLife, etc.... a lot more than "a label". But nothing shows how ill suited Windows is for people who don't have an IT department to support them than the whole malware thing.

If Apple screws up, there's not much buffer between them and bankruptcy.

@Johnnny

I guess you don't consider 30 Billion in cash and no debt that much of a buffer.

my life as a home pc owner/user up until 3 years ago:

* crashes, blue screens of death, annual costs for virus protection, lots of extra $$ to buy half-decent software, sloooooow boot-up times, poor integration between software and hardare that distracted from the user experience. lots of time spent fixing and retooling, rather than actually getting work done.

my life as an iMac owner now:

* none of the above.

one thing i like about Macs is the relative seamlessness of integration between software and hardware, when compared against most PC products. This isn't necessarily a knock against Microsoft, but rather, a knock against the way the PC biz is set up, with MS designing software on one side, and a wide range of hardware makers building machines on the other.

Recently, i used a $3,000 Lenovo laptop -- brand new. To take a picture with the built-in laptop camera, it took me about 20 minutes to find the program -- embedded within one application folder after another -- and about several steps just to take the photo. On most Macs, you can figure it out and get the job done in seconds.

If there's an "Apple tax" that people are willing to pay, it is indeed for a far easier user experience.

Same goes with networking. My old set up involved a Linksys router that inexplicably crapped out whenever it felt like. I spent probably dozens of hours troubleshooting and on the phone with tech support.

I ditched it when I bought the iMac and bought Airport Express for $99. In about five clicks, my home network was set up and hasn't crapped out since. For that ease of use, after spending hours and hours troubleshooting, you know what? I would pay even more for that $99 Airport Express. Time is money.