Slashdot Mirror
Top 10 Most Memorable Tech Super Bowl Ads
theodp writes "From 1977's lovable Xeroxing Monk to 2007's smug-and-rich SalesGenie pitch man, Valleywag has rounded up videos for its Top 10 most memorable tech-oriented Super Bowl commercials. The commercials are: Apple (1984), Monster (1999), CareerBuilder (2005), GoDaddy (2005), Xerox (1977), E*Trade (1999), Pets.com (2000), Computer.com (2000), SalesGenie.com (2007) and OurBeginning (2000). This year's ads are coming soon." I've always been a fan of the Outpost.com gerbil cannon spot.
Hey, I'm a nerd AND I like football. Go figure.
But anyway, this is scaring me. Why is slashdot trying to copy and compete with the likes of Digg? I come here because this place is DIFFERENT, the discourse is often intelligent and insightful. If I wanted mindless links to ads, Ron Paul you tube videos, and funny pictures I wouldn't be on a site that purports to cover "News for Nerds".
If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
Well, using the dark "Slashdot" green background for the entire story description is a little much.
But I really like the updated layout. They're no longer wasting valuable real estate on the pointless left-hand column.
ENDUT! HOCH HECH!
It's just an idle dig at Digg...
Damn kids, get off my lawn!
/. story that has computer.com in the comments, but TFA doesn't seem to mention computer.com directly (and the linked "video dot-bombs" from TFA doesn't seem to work for me). I'm curious if anyone here knows the full story?
Jeeeeez people, calm down. As of composing this, about 75% of the comments are complaining of digg similarities, the new discussion system, blah blah. Calm down, people.. it's still slashdot. As best I can tell, they've just debuted a new section (idle.slashdot). You can still post your retarded memes (In soviet Russia our new CSS web 2.0 overlords welcome I, for one), and otherwise go about your typical slashdot business.
Back to the actual article.. I'd never heard of computer.com.. I guess it would help if I watched the superbowl.. but, yea, I don't. After viewing all the ads in TFA, some are decent (and I've seen re-run later), and some aren't terribly memorable (the salesgenie ad looks like something a 12 year old kid could storyboard in about an hour). Most of the dotcom ads are from companies I'm aware of (monster, pets.com, etc), although I never heard of computer.com or ourbeginning.com.
I tried to do some research on computer.com to see what its story was (currently a doorway page for a linkfarm).. and as best I can tell, it burned out right away (Seattle PI story from 2yrs later). (They raised $6M+ in venture funding, and blew $3M on the superbowl ads). There's even a 3yr old
I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.
I'd moderate you up, but I don't have any points at the moment.
The millionaires who demand subsidies to build stadiums or they'll move their team elsewhere insisted that their sporting events helped the local economy by bringing in tax revenues. The first baseball strike proved what a lie that was. What actually happened was people did other things in their cities. They went to dinner and a movie or the theater, etc. They spent roughly the same amount of money except they spread it across multiple businesses instead of only at the stadium. This was actually BETTER for the local economy. More businesses benefited and the tax revenues were often bigger because the professional sports team often received a tax break to stay in town.
Screw professional sports. The next time one demands the taxpayer's cough up money or they'll walk, show them the door.
-- Will program for bandwidth
The historical context for the Apple '1984' ad was that in that era, most computing was locked up in Mainframe operations. There was a crew with labcoats on who where the only people allowed to touch actual computer hardware. If you needed a printout, you filled out a form and put it in the basket next to the half-door that separated 'users' from the IT staff.
Microsoft and Apple were both 'liberating' from that computer culture, with the notion of everybody having their own computer on their desk.
The 'IBM' being decried at that time was not the 'IBM' that Apple marketed against for the decade following 1984.