Microsoft Causes Internal Family Strife

techmuse writes "Fresh from its ad featuring Bill Gates and Jerry Seinfeld eating churros and discussing shoes, Microsoft has introduced a new advertisement in which the aging former CEO and comedian take up residence with a family, causing infighting and malicious plots by the family members. Although the ad does not mention Microsoft's operating system directly, it does mirror the real world experience of the company's products — appearing where not wanted, hard to remove, causing administration headaches, and finally being forced out in hopes of getting one's living space back."

Comments

i'm no MS fan, but...

[gadabyte]

holy flamebait summary, batman!

Re:i'm no MS fan, but...

[$RANDOMLUSER]

Wait until you actually watch the video - stupid, unfunny, lame, pointless.

Re:i'm no MS fan, but...

[asg1]

I disagree... I thought this one was good for a few laughs. Yes it is a commercial but how many commercials do you actually laugh at? Again, like the first ad, Microsoft just got many to watch it and talk about it; thus it was successful. Besides, do you really think they are trying to reach out to the average slashdotter? Remember that these ads aren't targeted at us.

Re:i'm no MS fan, but...

[MMC Monster]

Actually, I found parts of it pretty funny.

It does accentuate how out of touch both Seinfeld and Gates are (and even mentions that fact).

You would have no idea that it's a commercial about an OS.

In fact, you can run the same commercial and put a picture of Tux at the end, with the slogan "Keep uninvited pests away" (or something like that; I'm not a marketing guy) and be quite effective.

Re:i'm no MS fan, but...

[SanityInAnarchy]

Yes it is a commercial but how many commercials do you actually laugh at?

The Mac/PC ones, I actually laughed at -- and it also contained some reference to the actual product being pitched!

Re:i'm no MS fan, but...

[moderatorrater]

It is flamebait if the accuracy is entirely of your own opinion and debatable, thus "bait"ing those of an opposite opinion to "flame" you with their own.

Re:i'm no MS fan, but...

[JWSmythe]

    No, no. There's an underdog spin on it.

    They are staying with a family. The family obviously boards other people. The grandmother has been living there for 12 years. Maybe this is a reference to Windows 95 being ancient, but still kicking around the house.

    While they are there, the little girl gets upset that she lost her room. Here they are calling non-Microsoft OS's bratty little girls.

    The little girl gets her revenge by planting the stolen item in Gates' pack. This is either saying that other OS's use deception to get what they want. Gates, being the better man just leaves to let the bratty girl have her way, because there are bigger things to come.

    I like understanding subtle undertones to what appears to be obvious. I also like listening to the words of "Hotel California". :)

Re:i'm no MS fan, but...

[e2d2]

Why not just come with facts then and leave the flaming statements behind? It's hard to have any useful dialog when you start the conversation with YOU SUCK. I can criticize MS all day long using facts, but it gets me no where to come right out of the pocket with a very biased statement. Why would anyone even follow up if it seems that I cannot be swayed and have taken up a religious-like stance?

Some people need to get that chip off of their shoulder and grow up. They aren't doing anyone in the Open Source community a favor by coming off like a pretentious ass that can't be reasoned with.

You want me to criticize windows? I can write a laundry list using facts. You want me to criticize Linux? I can write a laundry list of facts. Facts speak volumes. Everything else is a waste of time and gets the us nowhere.

Re:i'm no MS fan, but...

[jellomizer]

Nah, like me, we just got older. When were were young Microsoft was pure evil, Linux was the savior. All the MS did was wrong and all that Linux did was good. Then we entered the real world. Finding the Microsoft actually makes rather competitive products. And Linux has consistently dropped the ball in some areas. Over the years when challenges of life take effect GNU and Software freedom means less then it did before. It is about getting the Job done, and you find that software freedom has less to do with free speech then you did when your young. Some say we have sold out. I think of it as having a greater perspective. I am a Linux developer and I still use it daily. I have been using the latest versions. However I am finding that Software freedom comes at a cost of other freedoms. And those guys who choose windows over Linux aren't as stupid as I once believed, and actually had informed reasons to do so.

Re:i'm no MS fan, but...

[aftk2]

Umm, Gates is the product being pitched.

Re:i'm no MS fan, but...

[IGnatius T Foobar]

Then we entered the real world. Finding the Microsoft actually makes rather competitive products.

And if that were the whole story, few geeks would have a problem with them. Really, who doesn't want to use the right tool for the job? But that isn't the entire picture. Microsoft may have a few competitive products, but if you want to go anywhere near them, you're forced to take half a dozen other half-baked products that they forced down your throat. Then in order to interoperate properly you have to outfit your entire network with Microsoft technologies that you didn't want. And let's not forget the way they use their big money and market position to force preloads, manipulate international standards bodies such as ISO, and a million other reasons why Microsoft will build a better product only as a last resort.

No, it's not just about the product. If they succeeded on merit alone they would deserve to win. But that's not the Microsoft we know.

Re:i'm no MS fan, but...

[nabsltd]

I have to agree. I laugh at the Mac/PC ads, mostly because they are so over the top.

Macs aren't that wonderful and PCs don't suck as much as the ads would want you to believe, but that don't change the fact that the ads are well done, and even non-techies find them worth watching.

Re:i'm no MS fan, but...

[Massacrifice]

You have to clarify an ad when you get upset by it and don't know why. Most of the time, this is because you're not part of the target demographic. This is the case here, with a general-public/family oriented/techno-unsavvy ad vs. Slashdot readerbase. I think GP's ad deconstruction is quite acccurate in this regard, and helps explain where MS might be going next.

Advertising

[jmpeax]

Microsoft's operating system - appearing where not wanted, hard to remove, causing administration headaches, and finally being forced out in hopes of getting one's living space back.

Well you know you could just avoid giving Microsoft all this publicity if you feel so strongly about the quality of their products.

As for the advert, I thought it was quite funny. It didn't mention any specific products, but that's not really the point: the very personification of Microsoft (good ol' Bill) is given a soft, friendly image that will inevitably reflect onto the company and its products. It's got a kind of quirkiness that works really well - this will no doubt help improve sales of more personal product line (such as the Zune) that aren't really compatible with the hygienic, corporate image of Windows and Office.

Re:Advertising

[grasshoppa]

You wrote this advertising scheme, didn't you?

An ad which doesn't mention a product is hardly an ad, wouldn't you say? It is extremely hard to write a 30 second spot which not only pulls in your audience, but captivates them enough to work out subtle meanings. Hell, most 2 hour movies can't do this.

I'm not quite sure what MS is after with these spots, but I truly hope it's not what you claim; that would indicate a level of incompetence which even I wouldn't expect out of MS.

Re:Advertising

[Lord_Frederick]

If the ad itself is being talked about, then it has been successful on some level.

Re:Advertising

[jmpeax]

that would indicate a level of incompetence which even I wouldn't expect out of MS

You vastly underestimate the power of advertising. Consider that most people who see these ads aren't anti-Microsoft Slashdotters, but people who have other interests and for whom Microsoft products are just part of the scenery along with different cars, cereals and soft drinks.

These adverts are designed to make Microsoft stand out on the skyline by associating with it a more comfortable, personal feeling.

Re:Advertising

[Coryoth]

If the ad itself is being talked about, then it has been successful on some level.

While there is some truth to that, I'm not sure exactly how successful you can judge an ad to be simply because it gets talked about. I mean an ad that consisted of a long, detailed and graphic discussion between Gates and Ballmer as to their preferred methods for torturing and maiming kittens would probably get talked about; I'm not sure such an ad could be considered as positive for Microsoft. An series of ads that has Bill Gates working his way through the Microsoft product line, explaining how bad each product is, highlighting several flaws, and then laughing over how the public has been so easily duped into buying it ... that would probably get plenty of people talking about it; again, I'm not sure that's likely to be judged a successful campaign. There's more to advertising and marketing than getting talked about -- the context and nature of the discussion does matter. If people are talking about these ads with regard to how out of touch they demonstrate Microsoft to be (as has been the case in a lot of conversation I've read and heard), I am not sure that actually count as a net positive for Microsoft.

Re:Advertising

[PJ1216]

You're making an incorrect generalization about ads.

Ads don't have to sell a product. But they do have to sell something. Brand is a perfectly reasonable thing to sell.

In these ads, they are selling their brand. look at the icon next to the summary here. Bill Gates as a borg. This is *not* the image MS wants to be associated with. So they're just making silly commercials. There are THOUSANDS of commercials that do just this and are successful. Remember Quiznos first commercials, "We're like the guy who invented pants."

People attacking these ads are mainly attacking these ads because they attack ANYTHING microsoft does. The ads are completely fine. Their products are fine. You don't like them, thats ok. There are millions of products that don't appeal to everyone. That does *not* mean they're bad. It just means they don't appeal to you, but if a product is as successful as MS's products, they obviously appeal to someone. Some people ACTUALLY like them and weren't somehow roped in by monopolistic practices or something which I'm sure someone will throw out there to explain the only reason Microsoft is 'successful.'

Re:Advertising

[Yvanhoe]

That's a common mistake geeks make : ads (along with most political speeches) are not made for people who actually parse sentences. They are for people who just listen to them and let their "gut feelings" influence their actions. The goal is to make an instinctive neural pathway for ideas : Microsoft BillGates FriendlyGuy makes people feel more comfortable about Microsoft and directly confront the image that we convey here that Microsoft MonopolisticMonster. We are less efficient because we base our arguments on facts, not formulas.

Basics of marketing : if the product name and the quality you want to associate it with are more than 3 words away, your sentence fails, whatever its point is. Why do you think that you here so much the "McSame" and "Obama Ben Laden" neologism ? They are far more efficient at negative image association than any well weighted argument.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely hate it when I am confronted to this kind of argument. But I have to admit that as much as I would like Microsoft to listen to geeks when it comes to fact, geeks should take a lesson from Microsoft when it comes to marketing.

Great summary :-)

[Peter Simpson]

I'd like to see them visit a family with a nerdy kid who uses a MythTV box.

"Yeah, I used to use Windows, but it wouldn't record all the shows I told it to -- something about a "broadcast flag content protection error". Ever since I replaced it with Myth, I've had no more problems.".

!!?? Where do you live ??!!??

[hummassa]

Facts speak volumes.

As you seem to live in another planet, and one where facts do speak volumes nonetheless, I friendly request that you take me to your leader -- after asserting that your homeworld environment is livable for my pitiful lifeform.

Because, in this planet:

• spin speaks volumes
• hype speaks volumes
• noise speaks volumes
• a beautiful face or a nice body speaks volumes
• knowing how to throw or kick a ball speaks volumes
• engineered lying speaks volumes
• brute force speaks volumes
• money speaks volumes

But facts were never and will never be on the list. Not even close.

Re:I want to see one

[gabec]

holy flamebait summary, batman!

Seriously... Slashdot never has made claims at being unbiased, and I have no excess fondness for MS products (I'm currently writing this from my ubuntu desktop) but still... Frontpaging needlessly harsh opinions best left to tongue-in-cheek office humor don't serve the slashdot community.

If I want vitriolic bias, I'll head to Fox News.

What "other freedoms" ?

[mpapet]

However I am finding that Software freedom comes at a cost of other freedoms.

What exactly is harmed by having more transparency and lower communication costs resulting in more efficient infrastructure?

And those guys who choose windows over Linux aren't as stupid as I once believed, and actually had informed reasons to do so

In every case I've seen it, it's because the C-level people find the name Microsoft socially acceptable explanation for everything technological. Sprinkle ANY useless explanation with Microsoftisms like "microsoft's documentation", "active directory", ".Net", "Exchange server" and they just accept the answer as is. Obligatory star wars reference, "These are not the droids you are looking for." Try it sometime!