Microsoft FAIL

I just saw two new Microsoft ads (ones which follow a trail of distasteful/failed ads featuring little kids taking pictures of stuff, people being fooled into thinking they were using a better OS, Jerry Seinfeld and Bill Gates acting entitled, etc.) via one of the many blogs in my RSS reader. In theory, these ads make sense: with the economy not doing so hot, you want to sell buyers the idea that cheaper is better. But that is exactly it: you're selling them a cheaper product. Of course the PCs are cheaper if the specs don't match up with the competing Macs. Sure, Lauren (who happens to be an actress...aren't these people supposed to be real folk who answered an ad?) got a cheap PC, but one that completely under-performs in all aspects compared to a comparable Mac, including half the battery life.

Also, isn't Microsoft a software company? Why do the requisites of Giampaolo's desired laptop all relate to hardware? The size of the keyboard, the amount of RAM, and battery life have nothing to do with software. Hmmmm. Also, if Giampaolo wanted something portable, wouldn't he want a 13" or smaller laptop and not a behemoth 16" one? Double hmmmm. Another also: why is HP the only PC brand mentioned and bought in these ads? Did HP subsidize these spots? TRIPLE hmmmm (but that's beside the point, so I digress).

I have trouble believing that Cripin, Porter + Bugosky are 100% behind the ads they created. I think that Microsoft's marketing team bullied them into creating ads that would push the "cheaper" messaging at the expense of any real substance. But to the agency's credit, I think these were shot at Fry's. I can spot those shrub-lined parking lots any day. I love you, Fry's Electronics.

The moral of the story? There are a few: 1) Don't trust ads with "real people" who have a long acting history, 2) You get what you pay for and 3) Shop at Fry's.


Link


Link