Slashdot Mirror
Interview With "Switcher Girl" Ellen Feiss
Ed over in Accounting writes in with a Macinstein interview with Ellen Feiss, an Internet cult figure of a bygone era. Back in 2002, in the heyday of Apple's "Switcher" ads, the 14-year-old Feiss garnered a bit more than 15 minutes of fame. Her Switcher ad became an instant classic — partly because of the widespread belief that she was stoned while filming it, which she says was not the case. In the interview Feiss, who is now a college student with one movie behind her, talks about pseudo Internet fame, drugs, and acting. She says she's still using the same G4 she had when the ad ran. Nostalgia bonus: the ad is embedded at the end of the interview.
She actually says "Psych!", as if she is still 14. She may have well as ended a hilariously fallacious statement with "...NOT!".
I wasn't stoned when I saw the ad either!
It's not like the kids these days will believe the conditions we lived under back then anyway (both ways), or our strange social customs, or that we really risked prosecution to download that shitty, old fashioned music.
And Jesus we dressed funny. No, that half decade is an era best left bygone alrighty.
KFG
Interesting to hear she's still using the same G4. I'm using the same PowerBook G4 I bought in 2003, because it still is a surprisingly competent notebook after 3.5 years, even for my daily graphics work. I hear all these Windows people complaining about how a PC only lasts a couple of years before you have to buy a new one; I hear that and think, well, that just about negates the "PCs are cheaper" argument...
...What do you think it was about your ads that made you a stand out?
Ellen: I don't know? Because people thought I was stoned, because there aren't that many young girls in computer commercials.
Ellen seems to have figured out where fanboys come from.
- - - -
You can't be ahead of the curve if you're stuck in a loop.
You can't be ahead of the curve, if you're stuck in a loop.
I saw her Switch ad when it came out. I didn't get the cult fascination then, and I don't get it now either. So fine, whatever. Fast forward 5 years later and I'm wondering what the hell any of us are doing reading an interview with her.
I read part of the interview and have concluded that it's just as interesting as most blogs by strangers I'll never meet. Funny thing is, most people are immediately appreciative of how much most blogs suck, yet an interview with Ellen Feiss is somehow above that.
Please, someone tell me, what the hell am I missing here? Really. I don't get it.
2002 is not a bygone era damn it. We haven't even decided what to call this decade yet.
as quoted by a MacFan magazine...
Macenstein: What do you think of the newly announced Apple iPhone?
Ellen: Sounds expensive.
Macenstein: Ok, we've taken up far too much of your time already.
- - - -
You can't be ahead of the curve if you're stuck in a loop.
You can't be ahead of the curve, if you're stuck in a loop.
I was reading the story, and thought I was going to see something interesting, and it was like "beep beep beep". It's kinda... a bummer.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
The internet highlights a rather interesting aspect of human nature - the need to idolise other people.
The rise to fame of actors and actresses is a bit more straightforward, since their performances are laid bare for all to rewind and review. We needed to see something about a person before we decided that they were worth the worship.
Now, as we move forward, it seems the time and effort required for someone to bask in the aura of fame is drastically reducing. What we find more often in public forums are people, represented by no more than the text of their name or a default avatar, enjoying heroic receptions.
I guess anonymity of others allows us to identify one or two things we like, and then our imagination fills in the rest.
I think this will negatively effect self esteem in the long run.
It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
I worry about this too.
I'll be suprised if the new UK ads make an impact. We don't react very well to negative advertising over here and we tend to be more diserning consumers. Most people who are using Windows are using XP. XP, for all of its faults is stable, verstaile and familiar; on modern hardware with oodles of ram its fast and it does work with all of those odd USB gadgets that people buy (my missle launcher doesn't work under OS X).
Its also cheap. You can buy a decent computer from Dell with LCD monitor etc. for under £300.
I'm a devout Mac user and even I don't relate to adverts. Yes, I have made photo albums, they did look fantastic and I could do it with the software that was provided with the machine but it also cost me £30. Yes, I can watch DVDs out of the box, but if I want to watch anything in fullscreen in Quicktime I need to buy a £20 pro update, or import them into iTunes (not iMovie) and watch them in front row.
As for the 'no drivers' being a good thing, I'm not sure what they are smoking. There are laser printers that require you to compile open source drivers to get to work, mobile phones that refuse to connect via bluetooth and perhaps my biggest irritation is cameras whose RAW file format isn't supported. Now these arn't necessarily Apples problem: Fujitsu encrypt their RAW, Minolta only support Macs on their more expensive printers and Motorola are the worst phone manufacturer, but they ALL work on Windows with the drivers in the box.
Telling Brits that they are stupid for buying a PC isn't going to work. Buying a PC is a choice. There is more software (including viruses), they are cheaper and they are as stable. The reason I bought a Mac? UNIX under the hood, a great interface (apart from finder), great hardware and in my experience less goes wrong.
Scared of flying, pointy things snce 1979!
You touched upon an important point there too, Joe Public usually doesnt think in terms of Windows vs OSX vs GNU/Linux vs AmigaOS4 ... They buy a "computer". That computer will most likely come in the form of a Dell a HP or a Mac and may well be from PC World with a free digital camera, oh and have Intel Inside too, because that's what the TV adverts tell them is good.
While us geeks are sitting around slashdot arguing about Vista's lateness, OSX's niceness and Linux's empire toppling innocence PC World, HP, Dell and Apple are raking in the big bucks and conditioning the public's opinions on what constitutes the latest greatest in computing via advertising.
The simple fact is that until PC World adertises their latest Red Hat or Suse bundle during the Superbowl GNU/Linux will not be joe-public's-desktop-ready no matter what we collectively shout about it here.
Obviously, i sincerely hope to be eventually proven wrong, but i suspect my karma's about to plummet rollercoaster style, in which case: Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
If you don't risk failure you don't risk success.
People are aware that computers are these cool, amazing machines. As is written in the Book of Jobs: "bicycles for the mind The problem is that (Windows) PCs do suck. It's like having to work with a manic depressive coworker who drains your energy by making you deal with his weird issues all the time.
You can't sell a computer that you want people to love without reminding them that (Windows) PCs suck, because over time people begin to accept that suckiness is the way computers are supposed to be. You can't change the world without first upsetting the unconscious accomodations people have made to the status quo. The world if full of unreasonable things people get accustomed to; it's only when they are reminded they have a choice that they remember how ridiculous things are.
The reason people "don't buy" Macs is the same reason people "don't buy" BMW cars. There are cheaper alternatives that fill their needs. Yes, the Mac Mini is pretty cheap, but beige boxes are even cheaper. If they could buy the mini at $299, more people would buy them. But cheapness is a game Apple can't win at, and doesn't want to play. BMW could sell more cars if it had an offering to set against the Ford Focus, but that would turn them from BMW into a smaller, less competitive Ford. BMW sells luxury cars, Apple sells luxury computers. And Apple has the luxury of not needing to advertise much if at all to its existing customers; most of them are not going to switch to a PC unless they are forced to be circumstances that no advertising could alter. What Apple needs is to find the people who are disatisfied with their old PC jaloppy and can be interested in trading up.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I'm -really- tired of people saying how well OpenOffice works when it doesn't. Just because it -is- an alternative doesn't mean it's superior, or even on an even footing with its competition.
or maybe she was frightened by rogue clowns from outer space who just flew into the room wearing nothing but loincloths and Cyndi Lauper concert T-shirts. That's a perfectly reasonable explanation too.
That said, the chemical influence causing it isn't necessarily a hallucinogen (or a stimulant), it could be the same stuff the optometrist uses, to simulate the effect of drugs.
Atropine is available in eye-drops, it blocks muscarinic receptors and causes pupillary dilation. It has been used for hundreds of years by women because they thought dilated pupils make them look "sexy". In fact atropine is derived from the "belladonna" plant, bella donna meaning "beautiful woman" in latin.
There are other antimuscarinincs that can be used by hollywood to acheive this effect, since atropine can dilate pupils for weeks at a time which is not a good thing if you plan to be outside once in a while...
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
The reason people "don't buy" Macs is the same reason people "don't buy" BMW cars.
They don't want others to presume they're obnoxious twats who derive self-esteem from a brand identity?
Wow am I square. It took me until this post (I haven't RTFA yet) to realize that the summary wasn't referring to a Biblical stoning. Yikes.
"Clear eyes? How would that protect this poor girl from a thrown... ooooh!"
...following the principles of Heisenburger's Uncertain Cat...