Why Apple's new ads look like Microsoft made them.

http://seanoliver.me/post/28346128977/i-have-to-admit-that-i-agree-with-the-cacophony-of

by seanoliver • 14 years ago

337 227 14 years ago

seanoliver.me

veyron• 14 years ago

Will we ever see an ad from apple as epic as the original macintosh 1984 ad?

zheng• 14 years ago

Maybe, but probably not. 1984 Apple != 2012 Apple.

freehunter3• 14 years ago

I'm beginning to feel that Apple wasn't a company, it was a man. His employees were just extensions of his brain; they would make what he wanted, and if he didn't know what he wanted they would make every variety they could come up with until they hit it right.

Without Steve, Apple still has all the raw talent they've had for years, there's still so much creativity sitting in that office. But without a lens to distill it, without a final authoritative sign-off, they don't seem to know anymore what is good enough and what is Apple.

I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that they will find it again, but I'm not willing to bet on it. Apple is on track to become just another PC vendor, just another consumer products vendor. There's not much magic coming from Cupertino lately.

jaems33• 14 years ago

I hate to say it, but I agree.

The commercials aren't the only red flag for me.

The recent releases (MacBook Pro Retina, Mountain Lion, rumored iPhone 5, iOS6) haven't thrilled me at all and I have been looking forward to the MBPR and iPhone5 for a long time.

masklinn3• 14 years ago

That sounds like a decision looking for a justification. You weren't supposed to be thrilled by ML just as you weren't supposed to be thrilled by SL. Were you thrilled by Lion? I was not, I still consider it a huge pile of shit. Hell, I'm way more thrilled about ML because SceneKit, that may make me put my trusty SL to rest, it's got way more potential than fucking skeumorphic iCal or "linen all the things" (which I see in the line of the old stripes, that's going to age just as nicely and in 5 years everybody will agree it was a moronic idea).

MBPR, if you were looking forward to it I fail to see why you wouldn't be thrilled by it, it's the biggest (positive) change in Apple's laptops since the 2nd gen Air.

As for iOS 6, how is it any more underwhelming than iOS 5? Remember when you were thrilled about the "deep twitter integration"? Or that Apple had finally added a notification system which didn't blow goats? Yeah me neither.

As to the ads... all the Siri ads I've seen so far make me facepalm.

jonursenbach• 14 years ago

Keep in mind that the products you mentioned have been in development long before Jobs passed away, so his passing shouldn't have had any effect on them.

Wait a few years when Jobs' product roadmap runs out and we'll see what they're doing and if it's still up to snuff.

aprendo3• 14 years ago

The rMBP, widely hailed as the best Mac since forever? You seem to be the only person on the planet disappointed by it (besides people disappointed in the glued-in battery – but that’s nothing new).

Besides, there are a few years to go until we run out of Steve Jobs products.

(I think this whole discussion is utterly pointless at this point. Look at Apple’s stock in ten years and you will know the impact of Jobs. I have my doubts that it will be possible to say much meaningful now.)

pizza2• 14 years ago

The trend could just be a fluke. Only time will tell...

rimantas• 14 years ago

If I ask you what would they need to have to thrill you, would you be able to answer? Built in toaster? Cure for cancer? We don't expect luxury cars to thrill us, why do we need that from electronics? It's a sign of maturity and I will take solid no-thrills product over gimmicky one any day.

Macha• 14 years ago

The rMBP was the first Mac that I would seriously consider buying for myself. I haven't, because I can't afford to buy a new laptop just because a shiny new one came out, but if I had been looking for a laptop at that time, I would have bought it. A couple of my non-Apple using tech friends had the same opinion.

Then again, I'm not exactly Apple's core customer base, as I have no love for OS X and would probably have just installed Windows (for gaming) and Linux on it, but it's the first time in years where their computer hardware has distinguished itself, rather than selling on the basis of the OS.

grecy5• 14 years ago

> The MacBook Pro Retina haven't thrilled me at all and I have been looking forward to the MBPR for a long time.

Wow, you have some high expectations.

What exactly were you looking for?

achompas2• 14 years ago

> The recent releases (MacBook Pro Retina, Mountain Lion, rumored iPhone 5, iOS6) haven't thrilled me at all and I have been looking forward to the MBPR and iPhone5 for a long time.

All of these have been released so recently (less than a year since Jobs passed away) that it's likely he played a large part in their design. Further, you're talking about (1) a 15" laptop that beats almost everything else on the market, (2) a minor version bump of OS X, and (3 & 4) two products that haven't been released yet.

I'm as interested in Apple, post-Jobs as everyone else, but the arguments I've seen so far look too forced. The true test will occur over the next 2-3 years--not just the last 9 months.

EDIT: I like snowwrestler's point: this is all "hindsight bias."

EDIT 2: I've fallen into this trap myself at some points, especially with some of these commercials. But these are just single data points. We shouldn't fall into the trap of overemphasizing single data points.

huhtenberg2• 14 years ago

It's not even that.

Now that Jobs's gone turning iPad sideways with the taskbar open causes app icons to overlap. Sometimes, not always, but that's just the kind of "sloppy" that just didn't exist in Apple products a year ago. They are slipping. I will give them a couple of years tops before they are back at the average product polish levels.

brown9-2• 14 years ago

Seems unfair to judge Apple based on rumored specs for the "iPhone 5".

ruswick• 14 years ago

I agree that there isn't much that Apple has done lately that has been truly groundbreaking. The last time that I was really surprised by Apple was the iPhone 4. That said, it's totally unreasonable to assert that Apple is declining because Steve is gone simply because their products haven't "thrilled" you or because they ran a bad line of ads.

The Retina MBP is an excellent machine with one of the best screens to ever be put on a consumer-grade device. It might not blow everyone's mind, but it is at least as interesting of a product as the scores of laptops that were put out under Steve.

Mountain Lion isn't groundbreaking by design. It's an iteration on Lion, and so it's unreasonable to expect a massive amount of new features. The iPhone 5 and iOS6 haven't been released yet and in the case of the former the rumors are so vague and unsubstantiated that it's categorically ludicrous for you to pass judgement yet.

Lastly, I have to ask why the amount of "thrill" that a product brings matters anyway. Most consumers don't want to be thrilled. They want to buy a computer, and that's it. Apple is successful not because they thrill people, but because they make good products. The Retina MBP and Mountain Lion are still good products.

I think the biggest annoyance in the post-Jobs era is that every imperfect action that Apple does is automatically passed off as a result of Steve being gone. Steve wasn't perfect, either. We need only look to the iTunes phone, Ping or the button-less iPod Shuffle. Apple has never been perfect, and the post-Jobs era is no different.

FreshCode• 14 years ago

It feels like someone inside Cupertino has been saying, "OK, it looks good!" more than they have been saying "No."

rdl3• 14 years ago

While this may be against NDA, iOS 6 Beta is actually quite nice. If they can get real buy in from non-Apple iOS developers for iCloud, it will be a big win, but IMO it all comes down to iCloud (and probably the long term premium for the Apple ecosystem depends primarily on iCloud).

The security features in ML were critically necessary to keep OSX viable for business and professional use. 10.7 is vastly less secure than a well managed corporate Win 7 machine, and maybe even worse out of the box. (Linux probably covers the whole range of less or more secure based on exact distribution and features, but isn't terribly relevant for desktops). Which made the Google no-windows policy from a few years ago pretty funny. ML is now at parity with Win 7 out of the box, but still probably weaker in an enterprise setting due to lack of management tools.

snowwrestler6• 14 years ago

How long until we stop hearing about how Apple is going downhill without Steve Jobs? Based, most often, on totally subjective personal opinions.

I guess we've forgotten how much criticism was directed at the "switcher", "I'm a Mac", and "why I love my iPhone" ads--despite being produced under the careful eye of Steve.

freehunter3• 14 years ago

It's possible to criticize ads that make a poor point but are still genuinely "Apple-like". All those ads had that Apple quality to them. You could tell they were Apple ads. These new Genius ads feel like Best Buy advertising Geek Squad. They definitely don't feel like Apple.

robbrown4513• 14 years ago

And what is the problem with subjective personal opinions?

If you disagree with them, feel free to speak up, with your own subjective personal opinion.

Those ads done under the careful eye of Steve may have brought criticism (as Apple in general did), but they were generally very effective. And they had a feel to them that was pure Steve Jobs....like them or not.

mnicole• 14 years ago

The texture creep is what set off my alarms, which was happening while Steve was on his way out. Textures can be done right, but these weren't.. and worse, they've spurred an ongoing movement of people using distracting patterns on tiny devices.

taligent6• 14 years ago

You do realise that what some would consider texture creep has been happening since OSX 10.0 beta with the over use of "aqua and pinstripe" followed by "brushed metal".

So this ridiculous notion that it didn't happen under Steve is nothing more than a figment of your imagination.

dave_sullivan2• 14 years ago

I think it was in "Built to Last" that I read this, but it talked about different types of CEOs.

Basically, there's the visionary/cult leader type of CEO that builds an organization where he is the center and everyone else is essentially one of the tentacles. These orgs can get into trouble after the CEO leaves.

Then there's the behind-the-scenes CEOs you've probably never heard of--they tend to build organizations where they are not the focal point of every decision. These organizations have a better chance of continued success after the departure of their CEO.

Or so the story goes... it is a pop business book, so take it for what it is... and time will tell whether or not this applies to apple

SkyMarshal• 14 years ago

My very first company out of college made all new employees read Built to Last. Unfortunately, it was a case study in survivorship bias.

Any conclusion from the book is so suspect you'll probably be better informed not knowing anything at all than having read that book.

Florin_Andrei3• 14 years ago

Every time I look at the Reminders app, I'm like "Steve would have thrown a fit seeing this piece of junk". It's so... clunky and lacking any sense of... uh... flow?

pooriaazimi2• 14 years ago

I agree. It's absolutely garbage. But, still, it's better that everyone now has a simple reminder app. Those who need a "proper" to-do list, will use OmniFocus anyway.

taligent6• 14 years ago

The only thing clunky and lacking is your logic.

Steve Jobs was alive when iOS5 was previewed so he would have seen AND approved it.

rahoulb• 14 years ago

But it's such a massive improvement over trying to manage to-dos in iCal.

I suspect Steve just didn't care about to-do lists and now someone who does care has managed to get a (minor) improvement through.

andyman1080• 14 years ago

You're most likely wrong about Steve throwing a fit seeing this piece of junk.

Steve liked skeuomorphism even when it made Jony Ive 'wince' http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/05/apple-designer-jonathan...

jsz06• 14 years ago

Why do you say that? Steve was standing right there when they demoed the Reminders app at WWDC in 2011.

jalanco2• 14 years ago

Steve Jobs/Jonathan Ives ==> John Lennon/Paul McCartney. John and Paul were both geniuses, but John vetoed (or encouraged) when needed and so did Paul: hence the genius of the Beatles vs the non-genius of The Wings.

andyzweb• 14 years ago

George Martin was the genius behind the Beatles

alexshye• 14 years ago

Does anyone think it is still way too early to make a judgement on this? Steve Jobs must have been involved in iPhone 5 and it isn't out yet. There must also be other stuff in the pipeline. We aren't going to see a post-Steve Apple for a little bit, and until then everything is speculation.. and possibly negative speculation because it gets press and attention.

gnaffle4• 14 years ago

I think it's way too early to tell. In fact, I doubt we will see if they truly will succeed without Steve until a new emerging technology trend threatens to dethrone Apple from one of the categories they dominate.

If, in 5-10 years the iPhone becomes irrelevant or outdated because of a new contender and Apple has to play catch-up, then I think we can say that Apple is in trouble without Steve.

Until then, Apple just needs to keep doing what they've mostly done even when Steve was running things, which is continually improving their products to remain competitive.

jsz06• 14 years ago

Given the power structure we think exists in Apple with the CEO as the center of the universe it is natural that the company has to shift gears from pleasing Steve, who is gone, to pleasing Tim Cook who is a different person. This ad campaign is probably a good example. Tim Cook seems like a pretty wholesome guy in a lot of ways. I'm not sure snarky, somewhat mean, somewhat elitist, ads like the Mac vs. PC campaign would please him much. It may be Tim Cook wants to make Apple a little softer and a little less narcissistic? I don't think that's a bad thing. No doubt it will rattle the cage of the Cult of Steve types but for the company itself I think there are a lot of positives in having someone with Tim Cook's personality being the center of Apple's orbit. The last year or so is a good indication of that.

It will probably take a few years to fully transform the company. That may include all sorts of shocking things that people would never have believed would happen a couple years ago. There will be a knee jerk reaction to say 'this is different than before so it's bad' but I would not simply because I don't think Steve was a saint. There are probably a lot of choices he made that were bad for Apple. One example of this is the iPhone 3GS. If Apple had really knocked it out of the park in 2009 and released a new model, and broken out of AT&T exclusivity at any cost, Android may not even exist today. When we look at the iPad Apple almost seems to have realized their mistake and was way more aggressive with the 2nd/3rd generation models. So I guess my point is Tim Cook's more analytical style may make Apple a little less edgy to tech enthusiasts I think it may be a great thing for the company in the long run.

yuhong3• 14 years ago

And to be honest, promoting security by obscurity as a reason to switch to Mac was just stupid for reasons that should be obvious if you think about it.

kristopolous• 14 years ago

Is this consistent with other companies? Did Ford's heyday end after Henry died? Standard Oil after Rockefeller? Hearst after WRH?

Arguably Microsoft has faltered after Gates; what about Hughes Aircraft; well ... right. Founders cashing out after the equity event seem to be a constant death-blow to acquired properties; Snapple, CompuServe, Bebo, Mirabilis, Xoom, AOL, Excite, MySpace, GeoCities. But then again there's Paypal, reddit, and IGN.

Nintendo had Gunpei Yokoi, Atari had Nolan Bushnell, MGM had Louis B Mayer; Sony had Ibuka and Morita. Even Disney started tumbling after Walt's death.

Virgin has Richard Branson, Subway has DeLuca, Aldi has Albrecht, Koch has the brothers, Oracle has Ellison, Google has Sergey and Brin, FB has Zuck, News Corp has Murdoch, even HN has pg, Ubuntu has Shuttleworth, Wikileaks has Assange, Linux has Linus, and Wikipedia has Jimbo. Perhaps there's something to this on a more general scale.

There's other stories though; 3M, Kraft, Merck, Kroger, General Mills, Walmart, McDonalds, Procter & Gamble, Safeway, and Samsung; all continued success long after the founders demise or exodus and without quasi-government granted funding or monopolies (e.g. telecom, auto, and energy).

Although perhaps one could argue that these companies have either lost their soul or assumed a malevolent one; none of them, save Samsung and perhaps McDonalds really produce, I'd say, goods that capture people's imagination.

cookiecaper2• 14 years ago

It's hard to say definitively. I think it's mostly about installing well-groomed successors. Degrees, of course, have almost nothing to do with this; companies need a consistent philosophy to produce consistent results, and a CEO you hire off the street isn't going to do much unless your company is in full automation mode by that time. Apple definitely did the right thing to style Tim Cook as a Jobs protege. I'm not really worried that Apple is just going to lose its material edge overnight, but I think some may perceive things that way, and for Apple, it's all about perception.

Something like McDonalds, Wal-Mart et al was established as a cookie cutter, repeatable thing. People go there because they want consistency; they know what to expect. Their patrons aren't looking to have their minds blown or to become excited about their interactions; the most successful companies in the world are much maligned externally because they're seen as dry and exploitative, but most people still patronize them. It's not cool to like them, but they do very well precisely because of that predictability, that blandness.

Apple, however, lives and dies by its reputation as a visionary, an entity that is constantly breaking new ground. This is because owning a Mac is as much about the cult of Mac as it is about the actual benefits of the product. Apple isn't a cookie-cutter franchise; it needs to bring controversy and produce products that are radically different from the rest of the industry to maintain credibility. If that credibility as a visionary is lost, much of Apple's userbase comes into jeopardy, because believe it or not, it's still less effort for most people to use Windows. That will never change until OS X approaches 50% of the market.

For companies like this, the keystones of their cultural identity are the most important business assets to protect. Unfortunately, Apple chose to heavily exploit "the genius of Steve Jobs" angle while he was around (perhaps because it's much more difficult to propagate a narrative about the vision of a design committee than the vision of one amazing man), and now they're paying a price for it.

Apple may recover, and they have some usable momentum, but it's definitely going to take some oomph out of their sails because Apple's dominance is not based on the superiority of its products, but the culture and attitude around them. I think Cook is well-qualified for the CEO position, but imo the way to put this Jobs stuff to rest is to present Cook as a regularly ordained successor, tutored by Jobs, and to have him assume some very Jobsian habits that would make this externally visible (for instance, give Cook the same veneration and mystery that Jobs received while presenting at Apple conferences, make him the human focal point and the apparent origin of all innovations). To the people closest to Steve Jobs, this may seem a grotesque mockery, but if your whole company is based on the dog and pony show, you have to keep up appearances.

michaelt• 14 years ago

Well, any time you're looking at companies before vs after the death of their founder, you've got the confounding factor that the company is always younger when the founder is alive.

Google founders Brin and Page were what, 25 when they founded Google? If they've got a 75 year life expectancy, Google will be a 50 year old company when they die. I'd have thought a 50 year old Google would look more like a stable blue chip company than a fast-moving frenetic startup.

jonnathanson• 14 years ago

Some of these businesses -- particularly the latter category (Kraft, Kroger, Walmart, General Mills, P&G, etc.) -- are "systems" businesses, and not necessarily "people" businesses.

P&G runs like a machine because it is a machine. It's a relentlessly optimized, error-reduced, tolerance-tightened machine. Jobs at P&G fit into very clearly defined (almost proscribed) roles, and if you hold one of these jobs, your mission is to execute that role without deviation. The company hires very smart people -- but it's more concerned with people who can fit frictionlessly into the machine than with people who want to break the mold. Same thing with Walmart, or McDonald's, or General Mills, or Coca Cola, etc. The general philosophy is to design an internal playbook that is foolproof, then hire people who are sharp enough not to mess it up.

[At this point I will pause to note that the description "systems business" is not intended to be a pejorative. Tightly controlled systems are not necessarily correlated with failure to innovate, to design, or to grow. P&G is capable of innovation, for instance, but it has playbooks for how to innovate. It follows recipes for innovation, rather than relying on the hiring of wildly creative people who will swing for the fences and hit or miss.]

Contrast these firms with what I'd call "people" businesses -- typically, tech startups or creative fields. Many of these companies are high-variance systems. A visionary founder, or visionary product leads, can propel a "people" company forward like a bat out of hell. But a lackluster CEO, or dimwitted product leads, can dash the company's fortunes on the rocks. These businesses give their people a lot of freedom to operate, to pursue whims, and to think outside the box. I would put Google in this category, or at least the Google of recent memory. Same thing with Disney, or Warner Brothers, or Virgin. These companies are in the homerun business. They swing for the fences, and at any given at-bat, they either they smash it out of the park or strike out. More often than not, they tend to strike out -- but the grand slams often make up for the multiple strike-outs.

Apple is interesting, in that it's neither fully one, nor the other. With Steve Jobs at the helm, Apple was certainly dependent on one person -- so it had the characteristics of a "people" company. At the same time, Apple was actively engaged in systematizing its roles and procedures, especially in the latter years of Jobs's life. Jobs even made occasional reference to the P&G model. It was as if he knew that the longevity of the company depended on the ability to implement foolproof, flawless internal systems that any smart people could operate without failure. The problem is that he still left a critical hole at the top, and he never took the systematizing exercise to its natural conclusion.

rdl3• 14 years ago

If this theory is true, I particularly hope Elon Musk takes care of his health well and avoids helicopters, motorcycles, and other high risk activities.

skrebbel2• 14 years ago

This kind of comment, on a forum full of engineers, is so ridiculously insulting to all the Apple people who worked their asses off to make the products a succes.

Giving 1 person 100% credit for such a range of great inventions is just, well, off the mark.

beedogs4• 14 years ago

Why do you say that? Steve used to take all the credit for them.

kamaal• 14 years ago

No,

You don't get the point.

Apple is a company full of awesome engineers executing one awesome man's vision. Without Jobs Apple is still a awesome company, with awesome people. But they will lack that vision. That taste, they will lack the spirit that made Apple, Apple as we know it.

True test for Apple will come when their current product line will be totally exhausted and they will have to work on something new to survive. Whether the same UI innovation, hardware design will continue is a big unanswered question.

The engineers may still continue to do awesome work. But not in an awesome direction. Without Jobs they will lose the 'Think different' factor. Its like a restaurant losing its chief chef. You will still have other good chef's but the guy who had a tongue for a unique taste is gone. You might still get good food, but that 'taste' will be gone.

cageface• 14 years ago

Lots of companies have talented engineers. None of them are nearly as successful as Apple has been recently.

danmaz74• 14 years ago

What might be missing without Jobs is someone who has the power and the vision to make radical, very risky choices. Who do you think you are? Steve Jobs??

jdietrich• 14 years ago

Do Apple's engineers work orders of magnitude harder than their peers at Nokia or Asus or anywhere else? Or were they just working on more important ideas and managed by people with better taste?

The real insult is to suggest that Apple engineers are just much better than anyone else. Apple hire good people, but relatively few of them are truly exceptional. Apple has been led by once-a-generation geniuses - first Jobs and Woz, then Jobs and Ive. A man who can see the future, paired with a man who can build it.

Apple will continue to make good products, but there'll never be another iMac or iPod or iPhone or iPad. Apple will probably dominate their markets, but they're not going to invent new ones. Doing that is far beyond the scope of skilful engineering, it's the stuff of genius.

jordo37• 14 years ago

While I agree with the author's point about these ads - they don't feel like Apple to me, and they definitely are not great ads - his closing saying that this is no longer Steve Jobs's Apple is hyperbolic. On the one hand - of course it isn't. We have seen far more important changes coming out of their choices around product and dividend sharing than one marketing campaign. On the other hand, there hasn't been a large Apple marketing push for a while and this campaign has probably been in the works for most of that while. On the other other hand...

AJ007• 14 years ago

To the contrary I think those little details say a lot about what direction Apple is headed.

Something like a bad ad campaign can be shot down with a simple yes/no. A final product however takes thousands of decisions, many dependent upon each other, to product a final polished product. If the fluff around the edges starts looking weird you can bet the products that are really complicated are fucked.

On the positive side I think Steve Jobs taught the current generation of young leaders a lot. "Steve's" future work and vision will be seen in ideas outside of Apple.

iamdev• 14 years ago

I'm sure all the genius's are excited about Apple giving permission to the WORLD to make them work off-the-clock ;)

hybrid11• 14 years ago

Am I the only one that thinks that they are funny?

pizza2• 14 years ago

Sure, but advertising is made to convince, not entertain.

pavel_lishin• 14 years ago

I'd call them amusing.

cicloid• 14 years ago

Probably is has more sense if this was the only commercial running for a long time.

But they seem to be putting more "lame" commercials between product lunches and bombarding with old school feature based commercial when a new product is launched.

This commercial seems more in line with, keeping the brand alive and remembering the common guy (all those not reading HN) that a Mac is not the same as a Windows (ultra|note|net)book, which they probably own.

adamio2• 14 years ago

This ad is for Apple's support product. I think it's well made. Having worked at an Apple Store, I don't see this ad calling anyone stupid. Users finding value in Apple's genius support product (benefit) would strongly identify with these ads.

taligent6• 14 years ago

The only voice of sanity in this sea of stupidity. These ads are especially targeted at people who DO ask questions like this and often feel very stupid and patronised when they get answers from the know it all geeks. So the only point these ads needs to get across is:

"Can I go to someone at Apple if I have a dumb question about my Mac ? And will they not treat me like an idiot ? Answer: Yes."

cheald• 14 years ago

If the point is to show off the support product, wouldn't it be better to show the Apple employee being supportive, rather than condescending and smug?

I thought the ad was terrible. Apple's support is absolutely one of their best selling points, and they could definitely win some business by pushing it, but this ad does an awful job of conveying that, and instead conveys "Apple store employees are arrogant and annoying".

efsavage• 14 years ago

It makes the guy who got scammed look stupid. He's left holding a "fake" and there's nothing he can do about it.

wonderyak2• 14 years ago

Yes, this was my reaction as well. I think the author missed the point of the commercial altogether. You DO see the product, its front and center - the Genius.

I think it's a particularly poor choice for marketing computers (like Best Buy advertising Geek Squad), however thats a different topic.

MatthewPhillips• 14 years ago

> This ad is for Apple's support product.

No, it's an ad for the Mac. The last frame is the Apple Logo with the word "Mac" next to it. The fact that the focus is on support gives the impression that the Mac is difficult to use, probably not what they were going for.

adamio2• 14 years ago

OK, Apple's support product, for the Mac. The focus on support is to address buyer's apprehension that the Mac is difficult to use, support being a key benefit to many buyers. If you are saying support helps to resolve difficulty, then yes if you have difficulty with a Mac, Apple has the Genius bar. This is a different approach than setting an expectation of easy to use, because this ad is not for the computer but for the support. Reference the original iMac - "there is no step 3" ad. That ad was advertising the iMac as easy to use. Easy to use is probably an echelon below Excellent Support, on the user satisfaction scale.

saturdaysaint2• 14 years ago

I disagree. For the last few years, the only Microsoft ads worthy of note have been viral-video "zany" or vaguely cribbing Apple. Which I don't see in these at all. They're stylish, well directed and while they might be too oblique, they personify Apple's reputation for high service quality.

The "celebrity" iPhone ads deserve the real scorn. Apple should be picking aspirational creative people - leading edge musicians, hackers, writers, etc. But instead they're attaching their brand to a bunch of fading actors (and Martin Scorcese)? Apple has people that should know better. That's worrying.

MartinCron2• 14 years ago

I agree that the ads are scornworthy, but you can't call John Malkovich or Samuel L. Jackson "fading", they are both as close to timeless as you're going to get.

saturdaysaint2• 14 years ago

I like those actors too, even though neither are surefire promises that a movie is great (seen the Star Wars prequels or Red lately?). More to the point - why do I care about how they interact with Siri? I guess Apple is subtly implying that if you use Siri, you are but one degree of separation from famous/cool people. Cute, but a sad lowering of the bar for a company that once looked for customers that were trying to change the world.

RandallBrown• 14 years ago

The only thing I can think of when I see these commercials is "Dude, you're getting a Dell!"

This is the first clear sign that Apple without Steve Jobs is not the same Apple. I don't know if this is a good or bad sign. Lots of things Steve Jobs did were frustrating and there is certainly room for improvement. These ads? Not a huge fan.

pooriaazimi2• 14 years ago

> This is the first clear sign that Apple without Steve Jobs is not the same Apple.

I was mad at these ads at first. They're ridiculously stupid.

But then I thought, maybe I should be happy about it? Maybe they learn from this failure? Surely, seeing the reaction, they must've been brought back to their senses...

ericdykstra• 14 years ago

"They make the Geniuses look like unsupportive know-it-alls."

Well, that's what happens when you give the title "genius" to a teenager working in a retail store.

brudgers2• 14 years ago

The first time I saw the ad, I thought that it was mocking Apple's geniuses right up to the point where it cuts to the logo and voice over. I just kept waiting for the punch line, but the ad isn't funny, just mean.

brudgers2• 14 years ago

In my opinion, the "genius" ads continue the decline in Apple ad quality (and by recycling "I'm a Mac" indicate that the decline may be accelerating). To me, the Retina, ads were the first slide, not because of poor production values and tired concepts, but because they emphasized technical specs rather than the "magic" upon which the iPad was launched. Close looks at the numbers are not a winning strategy for Apple across the board because of the price premium many of their products enjoy.

noblethrasher3• 14 years ago

"Resolutionary" was the first alarming thing for me.

masklinn3• 14 years ago

Not sure why, it's not the first time Apple makes up a retarded word. Remember "funnest"?

noblethrasher3• 14 years ago

Yeah but "funnest" is concomitant with "think different". It intentionally conveys the idea of a company that promises to do great things without taking itself too seriously.

Maybe "resolutionary" was trying to do that too, but it just fell flat for me.

jarek• 14 years ago

I don't know. I saw ad boards boasting of iPhone 4S's "dual core" and "8 MP" camera when it came out, it was a pretty "uh oh" moment.

snowwrestler6• 14 years ago

http://mattnt.com/2012/03/08/somethings-unraveling-alright/

noblethrasher3• 14 years ago

Interestingly enough, 'thinnovation' was introduced back in 2008 with the MacBook Air.

jopt• 14 years ago

Thinnovation

sixQuarks• 14 years ago

A person like Steve Jobs comes along only once per century. He had incredible vision and knew how to execute. As for choosing his replacements, he has proven that he is not good at that. A good bet right now is to short Apple stock.

taligent6• 14 years ago

You do know that Tim Cook was basically the CEO for many years before Steve passed away. Most of the company reported to him and he is one of the major reasons Apple is alive today. Also he is the ONLY one who is respected enough and capable enough to manage the team of egos Jobs cultivated.

So go ahead short the stock. Will be hilarious to watch you lose money if the iPad Mini and AppleTV rumors are revealed to be true.

aggronn• 14 years ago

>They make the target audience feel stupid. This is Apple’s first real effort going after a less tech-savvy group of computer buyers, and this ad makes it clear that they really don’t know how to talk to them at all. The people in this segment are not idiots, in fact, a lot of them are doctors, lawyers, teachers, and otherwise very smart people.They just don’t think about the latest technology all that much, and this ad basically calls them stupid for not buying a Mac. When consumers buy PCs, they are usually doing it after lots of research — after all, it’s a big purchase for most people — and this ad is essentially telling them they made the wrong decision despite all the thought they put into making what they thought was the right one.

This is rife with things that either aren't true or are bad assumptions. Doctors don't carefully research what computer they get because they're smart. You could easily make the argument that they don't specifically because they were rich or because they value their time a lot. Additionally (and this is all out of order), this is not the first time that apple has done commercials appealing to non-tech savvy users. They have almost never tried to appeal to tech savvy users. I would argue that the only reason they're on the radar for tech savvy users is because they coincidentally are unix based.

sek• 14 years ago

I thought this was a parody, got back and the channel was really called "Apple".

I heard there was a constant fear at Apple to get called to Jobs, now everybody can add his own opinion and something like this won't happen.

astral303• 14 years ago

What's the last Microsoft ad that was worth anything? I remember those Jerry Seinfeld ads that were just incredibly poor. This does not come close in comparison.

snowwrestler6• 14 years ago

I think the IE9 ads are pretty good.

alaskamiller• 14 years ago

Feels like good ol' 90's again when idle people spend time wishing on Apple's downfall.

yuhong3• 14 years ago

Fortunately, Tim Cook was I think chosen by Steve Jobs this time.

aresant• 14 years ago

This new commercial underscores Apple's major competitive advantage in a crowded market: customer service.

Apple spent a good part of the last decade winning on design and usability, an early iPhone commercial underscores this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lZMr-ZfoE4

Crisp, product focused, and delighting in the uniqueness of the product.

But with smartphones now having ubiquitous feature sets, Android tablets fast competing on hardware, etc I think that Apple, under Steve or not, is right to be iterating their messaging.

In my own experience I've watched non-techie family members fumble with chopped-versions of Android under different carriers.

It would be a huge relief to just be able to say "Schedule an appointment @ the Apple store"

So smarmy or not, I think that Apple's new ad-strategy is on point message wise, if not perfect in execution.

pbhjpbhj• 14 years ago

>Apple's new ad-strategy is on point message wise, if not perfect in execution //

I think you've nailed it here - they did a really, really poor job of portraying customer services as a USP in that advert IMO.

Instead this advert said "we're great because we're geniuses and we think the other guy's stuff is lame".

It reminds me of politicians who stand on a platform of "the other guy is a fool/out of touch/can't cut it". Personally this always turns me off. I want to know what's good/better/best about what you have not what's bad/worse/worst about the competition.

justjimmy• 14 years ago

I didn't know of such an ad till I clicked on that link. If I didn't read the link title, there was no way I'd assume that was an ad by Apple.

The colors, contrast, quality of picture, absence of music/product, the context, the story telling and the tone of the ad were all off compared to previous Apple ads.

Is it an indication that Apple is slipping? From this ad – a resounding 'Yes'.

I can't fathom how an ad of this quality is made/approved by Apple…still have trouble believing it.

snowwrestler6• 14 years ago

The article completely misunderstands what is being advertised. The product is most definitely being shown: the Mac Genius is the product. Apple has an enormous lead over the rest of the technology industry in the quality and availability of customer support and training. This series of ads seeks to leverage and reinforce that lead.

andy_herbert• 14 years ago

I'm sure Apple, or the ad agency commissioned by them, have focus-grouped the heck out of these already. I can't think what value people commenting exclusively in the tech blogosphere, well intentioned or not, have much to add in respect to how they have been received by the general population.

nostromo• 14 years ago

Yes, this is a terrible, smug ad.

But I had the same reaction to the John Hodgman ads back in the day. I, like many (most?) people ended up actually enamored of Hodgman and annoyed at whoever the other guy was.

In the abstract, this is the same exact message of the Hodgman ads. (Apple is young, smart, and good-looking. The other guys are not.) It's tempting to chalk this up to Jobs being gone, but I'm not so sure Jobs wouldn't have approved this campaign himself.

sadga• 14 years ago

Hodgman is an pleasantly entertaining comediam. It's hard to appreciate him while loathing his character.

robbrown4513• 14 years ago

Hodgman was a great, likable character, and that was the brilliance of the ads...his likability made the commercials fun to watch and rather disarming. He was basically likably pathetic. In my opinion, the ads were passive-aggressive, but in a good way.

fus• 14 years ago

It seems that the main goal of those ads is to improve relations with geniuses, especially after articles like this: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/24/business/apple-store-worke...

jpalomaki• 14 years ago

I see here a distinction between Macs and iPhone/iPad. iOS devices are cool. Macs are friendly. I don't think this is against Jobs vision. I think this is perfectly aligned with it.

Don't really see that big difference between these and the "I'm a Mac, I'm a pc" ads which were certainly approved by Jobs.

jfoutz• 14 years ago

Yup. Apple has pretty clearly started that long slow microsoft style decline. Ipads are getting thicker and heavier. The commercials suck. Apple is spending more and more on lawyers, rather than engineers.

They're doing some things well, the MBP retina looks amazing. Not quite amazing enough for me to buy, but still, very good. I probably booted Lion a dozen times before the Mountain Lion update. IMHO, that's pretty great stability.

They just feel like they've lost their edge. Anybody think they'll be shipping beige boxes in 5 years? I can see them caving in and just licensing IOS for a bazillion dollars to Samsung.

themckman• 14 years ago

That one is a border-line condescending, however, the message is clear: Accept no substitutes. Don't be a sap and pretend you got a Mac, because you didn't. The other two (guy having a baby and guy making a movie on the plane) make the Genius' seem helpful and there to serve. Also, they all underscore the message about the Mac existing for creative activities with a focus on iMovie, GarageBand and iPhoto which has been part of the sell for Macs for a long time. Author of this piece is being a little hyper-critical.

The coming months will see quite a few doom-and-gloom articles as everyone tries to predict the fall of Apple for all the right reasons just so they can say "I told ya so."

tsahyt• 14 years ago

Beware of opinions in the following text.

For the past couple of years now I kept banging on about how Apple was basically a brilliant marketing division selling slightly polished and shiny PCs (not mentioning the brand name intentionally here) and mobile devices. I've never seen them as superior in any way, maybe because I stopped using Microsoft products a long time ago as well.

Now either their entire marketing division had a really bad time or it's actually true that Jobs was doing a lot more to the company than I ever thought. Even when putting all my objections aside this is.. well.. just an ad. It doesn't really sell. It doesn't tell you anything or give you any reason whatsoever to buy an Apple product.

And that is, I think, really bad for Apple. Right now they're still riding on their past success, but if they go on like this the downfall will come. I say this because I still believe that Apple's marketing was the main reason for them to ever become successful again after their struggle all through the 1990s. Sure, they evolved the smartphone in 2007 and did pretty much the same with the tablet, but again it wasn't brilliant innovation but rather polishing existing technology and making it attractive to an average customer through a mixture of design, simplification and.. again.. brilliant marketing.

With that gone, I really wonder about Apple's future.

zinssmeister• 14 years ago

Jony Ive should be in charge of ads.

forgottenpaswrd2• 14 years ago

I had some Apple shares. This says something to me: Sell, sell sell!

The Ads are so weird that I can not understand how it passed the company filters, and as the article says the answer probably means "leadership by committee".

Apple is starting to act like a big company with too much money in the bank, buying things like twitter, like MS with Skype.

It seems like they are also starting to loose their focus, their edge is getting rounder.

smokinjoe• 14 years ago

While Apple hasn't bought Twitter, what other acts are giving you hints that they are losing their edge?

hellosamdwyer• 14 years ago

I disagree with each and every point this blogpost makes, and I'll tell you why.

1. They don't show the product, because they're not about any one particular product. They're about how the holistic quality of the entire product and OS ecosystem extends far beyond superficial appearance. QED: If I buy a slick PC from Lenovo, Sony, etc, will it be able to edit video and music right out of the box? Lots of critics here are forgetting that Apple includes iMovie and Garageband the way Microsoft used to bundle Mindsweeper...

2. They don't explain the product, because, if you have questions, going online or into a store is a much better place to have the product explained to you, than in a 30-second ad, which is better off conveying social information (cool, not cool) and emotion.

3. "They make the target audience feel stupid." No, they make fun of people who are purchasing superficially similar goods because they believe them to be of equal quality.

4. "Genius' unsupportive etc etc." Not really. The audience knows that it's not Apple's job to support or validate a non-Apple purchase.

5. There's no clear call to action because this is a brand ad, not a product ad. The author of this article has a degree in marketing from Wharton -- presumably he knows that there are different goals that can be achieved by advertising. (For a breakdown, see this helpful link: http://smallbusiness.chron.com/goals-objectives-advertising-...)

eranation• 14 years ago

My eyes burn

spinchange• 14 years ago

I got my 60-something in-laws to get iPhones last year. They own 1 older PC and 2 PC laptops but are decidedly "non-tech." (like they don't even sync or update the phones)

My mother-in-law recently had a back-lighting issue with her display and I told her to take it to the Genius bar. They looked at me like I had three heads. They didn't buy their phones at an Apple store so they had absolutely no idea what I was talking about. I explained the whole concept of in-store service and support and that you just need to make an appointment and they were surprised.

So, I can totally see where Apple needs to make this aspect of their retail experience better known because a lot of people buy iOS devices from places other than an Apple store and have no clue about it.

Ironically, like most are responding to these ads, the most awkward part about explaining it to her was calling them geniuses. It was easier to finally say, it's like geek squad only better and cooler.

netcan• 14 years ago

I agree with the points the writer makes. I also agree that they compound to make the ad bad. But..

I don't think the "allergic reaction" is because of them though, not directly. This ad is like a mean comedian bombing on stage. The joke isn't working and it's mean. If the comedian seems nice, harmless & vulnerable you empathetically cringe, unpleasantly sharing in his embarrassment. Not fun, but bearable. You might even give him a chance to recover. If he seems like an asshole & he's making a mean joke, you react with.. almost hate. You suddenly notice all the things you hate about this asshole who isn't funny.

That's why vitriol is a bad strategy for inexperienced comedians. If you bomb, the crowd will turn on you. Hard. If mean jokes are funny, they're allowed. If they're not, the audience wants blood.

This is also true for racist jokes, misogynistic jokes, joke about child abuse. etc. If its funny, its funny. If not, he's trying to make fun of child abuse?

DannoHung• 14 years ago

I know Gruber isn't liked, but I think his analysis of these commercials is accurate: They're sending the message that a buyer can easily get assistance if they buy a Mac. Not that the Mac is better, just that you will get personal and personable care to make and do things that you always wanted to.

evertonfuller• 14 years ago

Really like the new ads. So much more mainstream and less elitist. Great job Tim.

DigitalSea• 14 years ago

What do people honestly expect? The only person keeping Apple relevant and cool was Steve Jobs. I'm a Windows user myself, but I won't argue Steve definitely changed the game, when he died Apple died as well. Steve was working on a slew of projects and ideas before he died to keep Apple progressing for a few years after his death but without his final sign off on those ideas accidents happen like this ad. What goes up must come down, I hope for their sakes they're ready to cushion the fall because advertisements like this are only early warning signs of a company that has once again lost its way.

siglesias• 14 years ago

I think there is a HUGE amount of bias going on about the quality of these ads based solely on the knowledge (actually, assumption) that Steve wasn't involved in them. It kind of reminds me of the enormous negativity surrounding the leaked iPhone 4--folks saying it was not Apple like, ugly, etc. [1]

The fact of the matter is that none of the "Apple-esque" Mac ads of the Jobs era were that effectual, and by effectual I mean resulted in moving the Mac market share significantly. I would argue that they did serve to give existing Mac users a sense of cool, and it is existing Mac users who are bellyaching about these ads the most. Hate to break it to you, but the ads aren't for us.

[1] http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=899393

vacri• 14 years ago

Apple Geniuses have poor elocution and have trouble getting their point across?

ZoFreX• 14 years ago

An ad that you run during the Olympics isn't a product ad, or a brand ad, or a perception ad. Think "Superbowl". Did the Terry Tate ads tell you anything about the product, the company, or give you any actionable take-away? Nope. Were they hilarious? Yes. This ad made me giggle, I'm sure it made lots of other people giggle too, and in context it is absolutely the right kind of advert to air.

_zeo8• 14 years ago

The question is, do they need to do these advertising campaigns? It makes sense to do advertisement if they need attention, need to work the brand or need to announce something new. It doesn't seem the case for Apple. The risk of damaging the brand is higher than the benefits at this point. Invest in ads only if you really really need to.

panicslowly• 14 years ago

"They don't show the product."

One thing to consider is why Apple made this ad in the first place.

Since these ads opened alongside the Olympics, I am guessing it has something to do with Samsung being an official partner with the Olympics, likely with exclusive rights to advertise phones, TVs, computers and whatever else they paid for.

So, in effect, Apple may have been locked out from advertising their products during the Olympics.

whunut• 14 years ago

All this talk of Apple Pre and Post Steve brings up another interesting point - how much of Steve's passing is just coincidence? As most counterpoints in this thread state, Steve did have a hand in everything Apple has released (and will release for sometime) following his death. So to flip the question around, how much of this is just bias/being more critical of Apple now that he is gone, and how much of it is just the natural progression of Apple, which would have followed the same course regardless of if Steve was still alive?

stcredzero3• 14 years ago

> They don’t show the product. This is a product ad, not a brand ad or a perception ad. And Apple has always impressed me by the way that they have (almost) always made the product the star of their product ads. Consumers need to see what’s being advertised in order to understand the messaging in a tangible way.

The author is confused about what the product is in this case. The product isn't the computer. It's the support infrastructure available to the customer in the form of the Apple retail store with its "geniuses" and the other infrastructure/ecosystem around that. The product is the end-to-end experience.

If there's any red flag, it's because the message is FUD.

dchichkov• 14 years ago

Looks like this Aug/2011 prediction is being fulfilled: http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2011/08/advertising-and-fut...

Tycho• 14 years ago

I can't believe people on hacker news are caught up in this meta-discussion of an advertising campaign. When people are writing comments in response to blogs written about blogs about advertising campaigns, it's time to stop.

codequickly• 14 years ago

I can't believe how high the expectation is for tv ads. It's just commercial, folks. Did you expect to see it starring Christian Bale and featuring mind blowing CGI and special effects?

As for the new ads, they aren't that bad. These ads aren't for us, geeks. Nope. These are for the majority of population, ie the rest of us. Apple's ad has always been about warm and fuzzy feeling of being human, not about cold and intimidating machines.

Sure, these ads are corny. It's cheesy. lame... But that's why these are so great. Someone mentioned in the comment comparing it to the lame Dell Dude. Yes, it was lame... but everyone remembered him and his line when we mention it. These ads leave permanent impressions in our mind. That's why these ad campaigns are effective. It's memorable, perhaps even embedded in our subconscious mind.

What I did get from the ads? The message is "Mac is great because it comes with support. If I need help with iMovie or Mac or anything else, I can get help from a Genius. We can ask them anything" Sure, it might be limited to talking to some snobbish teenage "Genius" at Apple store, but it's still better than trying to get tech-support on the phone with some guys in India who has no idea what the hell I'm talking about, or bugging children/relatives/cousins who happens to "know a lot about computers" during Thanksgiving/Christmas.

d5tryr• 14 years ago

> They don’t show the product. This is a product ad, not a brand ad or a perception ad. And Apple has always impressed me (blah blah blah...)

Does not bode well for the rest of these bullet points when the first one is demonstrably wrong. How the hell is apple support not a product?

Probably shouldn't have bothered reading that far through such linkbait in the first place...

gruseom• 14 years ago

Some people have commented that it's still too soon after Jobs' departure to expect signs of any decline at Apple to be externally visible. But there is a precedent, albeit in the opposite direction. Jobs retook control of Apple in July 1997 and unveiled the iMac in May 1998. That was not very long.

macco• 14 years ago

When was the last good apple commercial released anyway? Since the famous iPod commercials they were all dull and boring.

thomasfl• 14 years ago

"this is no longer Steve Jobs’ Apple, for better or for worse"

Steve Jobs did spend lot of time assuring the ads were done right.

kamjam• 14 years ago

This advert remind me of the "Like a Golf" adverts by Volkswagon...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njuGmIs_a4k

ehosca• 14 years ago

Apple ads have always emphasized "why" I should be using that product. Its not about the product itself or its specs but why I should have it. They are not straying away from that principle here so I'm not really sure where your beef is.. relevant link : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qp0HIF3SfI4

exclipy• 14 years ago

tl;dr: Apple's new ads look like Microsoft made them because Steve Jobs isn't there any more.

Why Apple's new ads look like Microsoft made them.

Related Stories