Microsoft is Keeping on the Offensive with another "Laptop Hunters" Commercial



+ Add a Comment


Put simply, Macs are beautifully designed machines. They're consistently better engineered than PCs. This isn't Microsoft's fault, of course, because Microsoft only makes the operating system, not the hardware on which it runs. But Macs show an exquisite attention to detail that you don't find in most PCs.

There are quite of few excellent applications that ship with Mac OS X. It comes with a very nifty suite of iLife applications, including iPhoto, iMovie, Garage Band and iWeb, and they're much better than anything that ships for free with Windows. Time Machine is a great built-in backup program, particularly compared to the brain-dead backup program built into Windows Vista.



I own both a MAC and a PC. The really good thing about owning a MAC is it doesn't hang up, it doesn't crash, the graphics are cool and hell they run Windows faster than Windows can. The software for the most part is built into the system. You do have some trial software,but nowhere near what you get on a PC. MAC is more efficient, runs quieter, and uses less energy than a PC. It's not heavily targeted by virus writers because they are too much of a hassle, not because there a fewer people using them. You don't see Spyware and Malware on MAC's and therefore they don't slow your machine down. Unlike a PC where you constantly have to Purchase an Antivirus each year, run Spyware and Malware detection tools and have to constantly maintain updates to keep your machine functioning. PC user's realize that there are some really good free apps. out there as far as AV, but most still insist on paying for software to protect there PC's from getting attacked. The money being spent on software for maint. adds up over the course of a few years. By the time you add all the money you spent on software up to protect the PC plus the PC itself you will have spent more than it would have cost you to purchase a MAC in the first place. MAC is QUALITY. They are built to last. Spend $2000 on a MAC  and you won't have to buy another computer for 6-8 years due to failure. The things will just not quit running. If you want to blow your money get a PC. Spend $1500 on it and you will end up buying another one in 2-4 years because of major hardware failures. Sure MAC's cost more up front, but hey, you get what you pay for. Plus with the ability to run Windows on a MAC you get the best of both worlds....the dependibility of a MAC with the ease of Windows and everything can be run on it. Let's see a PC run the MAC OSx as efficiently as MAC does Windows. The only reason I even have a PC is because it's what my wife wanted. Now that she's got it, she never use's it and it's a $1800 machine. I'm lucky if I can get her off my MAC.

I was a PC up until a couple of years ago and when I had the thing in the shop for the 8th time and my friend let me use his MACBook PRO until mine was fixed. I went and bought one 3 weeks later and never looked back. I now have 2 MAC's, my laptop and a MACPro Tower. I will never switch back to  a pc. I spend all day as a Tech for the Couty fixing PC's and troubleshooting software issues on them.  I never have to do that on a MAC, or MAC networks.


Okay. So I guess I'm a MAC.



You have two completely different issues that, while Apple tries to mix together, are distinct and separate: hardware and software.

So let's begin with hardware: Caboose nailed it there - the hardware is exactly the same. Case closed.

Software: How significant is MacOS is in the world of computing? We'll test that by checking how successful MacOS is at running programs on a computer. Lets start with the Macs. I'll assume all Macs run the MacOS, so about 8% of all personal-use computers have a MacOS installed (putting aside hacks and other party tricks) according to this article:

Since I couldn't find more accurate statistics, I'll assume 8% of all software will run on the MacOS, although I suspect it's somewhat lower. That means that given any piece of software, the chance of it being compatible with any personal-use computer is 8% times 8%, which is 0.64%.

Let's do a quick check on Windows, shall we? All personal-use computers can run Windows as far as I know, and again assuming the amount of software that runs on Windows equals its market share, then 90% of software runs on Windows. 100% times 90% equals 90%.

So if you want to run a piece of software, which is what computers were designed to do, 90% of the time it will be Windows that gets the job done, while MacOS can only claim 0.64% (even worse than Linux at 0.83%). So even if MacOS was better than Windows in every possible way, it still fails at its primary function as an operating system - allowing programs to run on computers.



 You do realize, that Macs now run on almost the EXACT same hardware as a PC, and that it is simply software that is the difference. Not to mention that it's only the workstation software that is half decent. Apple server software is the worst around. When you have to rebuild an XServer every other day, and the Apple Support that your company is paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for is worse than what your google-fu can provid, then there's a big problem.

You can run MacOS on "PC Hardware" easily. Ever heard of a Hackintosh? I'm sorry if you are placing the blame of Windows issues on the PC and not the End User. I find that 90% of issues that I run in to are caused, one way or another, by the end-user. I can take a PC that is supposedly "broken" and it works just fine in my posession

I agree that Macs are becoming less of a utility/tool and more of a status symbol. Look at the iPod. There are a LOT more phones and MP3 players out there that perform much better than the iPod/iPhone, and yet if you don't have one, you're not cool. They're over-priced pieces of hardware. And when you ask someone that has one why they bought an iPod or iPhone, I bet you dollars to donuts, that they won't have a good reason as to why!


-= I don't want to be dead, I want to be alive! Or... a cowboy! =-



Okay, first of all, is there ANY Laptop that is really a "gaming" PC? I would say no. Also they said it needed to be fast because "We need to look stuff up get out the door." Internet speed DOES NOT equal computer speed, just buy better internet. Yes I do use a PC, I know the disparity, just sayin'



Considering that there are laptops with top-of-the-line graphics cards (e.g. the Asus W90 which has a dual-GPU HD 4870 X2), I'd say: yes, there are laptops that are really "gaming" PCs.



With two things

1: what taz0 said. that was the first thing that came to my mind. If you're looking for a gaming machine, all that matters is the fact that only 1 out of 1000 games on the market support Mac. Period.


2: I have to admit, the whole "hit the jump" thing lost me the first tiem I saw it. "Hit the jump? what the crap does that mean?" Must be some kind of new web generation terms? All i know is it doesn't make any real sense and this is the only place I've seen it used.

I have to say, that doesn't annoy me quite as much as when I do "hit the jump" only to read 2 or 3 more sentances... could have saved 3 seconds of load time. :P 



Is it me, or is the picture of that woman reminiscent of an axe murderer?



Stop saying "Hit the Jump".


You guys are looking more and more like tools. I understand you want to increase views to your various articles but can you do it a less obvious and blatant way? If I am interested in an article, I will click "Read More".

 But I will not click "Read More" because you guys throw in what is now becomming a particularly stupid meme known as "Hit the jump." 



Please never stop saying "hit the jump" because that's my que as to whether there is more article to be read.  If it doesn't say "hit the jump" I don't need to click on "Read More" because there is no more.  Either that, or take the "Read More" link off the articles that don't have any more stuff to read (sans the comments).  But that would probably be more difficult to do with your website template. 

Hit the Jump!



I too find the phrase (or any variation of it) not only useful, like knexkid does, but also not the least bit annoying, even fitting. 

Although to be honest, I haven't seen the phrase in ages since I've switched to reading all the articles over RSS, which not only includes the expanded article, it includes all pages of multi-page article, all on a single page, pictures and all included - sans the ads! Now that's a real treat on long articles like the recent history of CPUs article. Plus the added benefit of not needing to poll the site every so often, it just automatically appears in my RSS reader (Windows Live Mail in my case).



We're discussing ADVERTIZING, so of course the TV spots are overly dramatic. Not more so than those I'm A Mac commercials, so it's amusing to read the screams of the Apple loyalists as they furiously cling to their sleek looking trendy panda-hugging, hippy hardware. As a "PC" myself I even laughed at both ad campaigns. It's all fun in advertizing. It would seem that Apple faithfuls have much less of a sense of humor.

I am glad to see these ads aren't only for HP, which were the chosen laptops in the first few comercials. If Apple would work with game developers there would be little up for debate in this ad. The Apple fan base should be asking why the SAME hardware you can get in a M$-based laptop, now also finds itself in a MacBook, is not capible of playing all the same games. The "I'm just not cool enough to be a Mac person" comment was funny, but mislabled since it's just due to funding. If you don't have the money you're not going to get that green Mac you've always wanted to be seen with.

I think Apple should strike back with an ad about how a MacBook helped save the human race in the movie Independence Day. Too funny!



Hey that's my laptop!



I think Microsoft really missed the shot on this one. Since the mother and son were looking for a gaming computer, there really isn't any need to talk about price, screen size or hardware. All the kid needed to do when looking at the Mac is to ask the salesperson "Will this run Crysis?" (or nearly any other triple-A title). The answer would of course be a resounding NO (unless he want to buy a copy of Windows to run on the Mac, in that case I'm sure Microsoft will be fine with him buying a Mac).



" I dont want to pay for the brand, I want to pay for the computer."




I still am not impressed by these commercials. The nice thing about the Mac vs. PC commercials is that they are both entertaining (you know you enjoy them) and informative (even if they are wrong.) Microsoft had the entertaining part with the Jerry Seinfeld commercials, and the informative part with these commercials, but they have faild to put the two together in a commercial that will hook watchers of Dancing with the Stars and inform them of why Macs suck. Not impressed, Microsoft, not impressed. 


The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.



i wish i was on one of those commercials...i need a new laptop.



Microsoft once again shows their prowess as a marketing company, not a technology company.

Our country is in an economic recession, and people are focused on the cost, rather than on the capabilities, of their purchases.  Microsoft is playing on that, and they're very agressive at it. 

But they're still not going to appeal to the geeks, hipsters and power users who want a Mac for all the reasons the people in these commercials don't want Macs. Just like Microsoft can't convince these people to buy a Windows system, these people can't convince others to buy a Mac. "A person convinced against their will is of the same opinion still" - Dale Carnegie.



I disagree with most of your statement.  They will indeed appeal to geeks and power users, as those users use PCs.  The hipsters, I will give you.  But, who cares what a dippy hipster thinks anyway, right?



You beat me to it, I was going to say the same



This is perfect timing for these commercials. School is winding down and lots of high school seniors are going to be getting laptops for college. Smart of MS to get the high price tag into people's minds ahead of time, before they go shopping. 

Also, smart partering with best buy and Fry's, two of the larger remaining big-box stores around. Lets people put themselves in the commercial's situation.


It will be very interesting to see if Apple responds and how. It would be far too easy to come off as elitist or as a luxury item if they try and say that Macs are more expensive because of --inster somethiong here--. 



The problem for Mac is that there is really just looks.


Also, I like the irony that MS is fighting its PC war against Apple using a PC sold by its other enemy: Sony, 


That made me giggle.




Is it just me, i meen who wouldn't take up the offer to buy a PC with someone elses money? I pick a PC too (if your buying it of course).



All we need now is one that reads.


I'm a Penguin! 


I would support that one! :D



I second this.

I don't like Microsoft, I associate with it.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.