4 ms·

This is pretty ironic considering how Mac ads far outnumber Windows ads. Maybe next time around Apple can pull a few of the spots and get Java up to date sooner

This is pretty ironic considering how Mac ads far outnumber Windows ads. Maybe next time around Apple can pull a few of the spots and get Java up to date sooner than a year after an OS release.

unalone 18y ago
But do the Apple ads cost as much as this Microsoft campaign? (Disclaimer: I don't know if they do or not. I'm curious myself about this.) Because with Microsoft the cost of the ads kept popping up, especially in regards with Seinfeld. I'm guessing their current campaign is pretty vastly expensive, and I don't know if Apple's campaign is or not.
- thomasmallen 18y ago
  It's just that, regardless of cost-effectiveness, an advertisement that criticizes another company for spending money on advertising is pretty hypocritical.
  - teej 18y ago
    To be honest, Leopard is a lot better than Vista.
    - tom_rath 18y ago
      ...and leaving Java 1.6 to sit on the shelf for a few years is far from 'bleeding edge'. Mac is very slick, but Apple isn't particularly kind to third-party developers who build software for their platform.
    - wizlb 18y ago
      To be honest...any version of Windows is better than Leopard. Especially if you value choice and flexibility.
      - unalone 18y ago
        Leopard's plenty flexible. By choice, do you mean being forced to pay extra money just to get an operating system that hasn't had features removed? Because I know Leopard only costs $80, but it's full-featured and that's what I care about. Or do you mean the choice to tinker with every little aspect of your computer? Because the system's entirely moddable. I mean, I would never voluntarily hack my computer, because I cherish it the way it is, but I remember there being a lot of buzz about the Gaia Suite, which is a complete redesign of the OS. Do you mean the lack of programs available? Because you can get MS Office if you really don't like iWork (though iWork is wonderful, in this user's opinion), and you can get replacements for every single iLife program. It's just that most people don't, because iPhoto and iTunes and Mail and GarageBand are really all excellent programs. (The one program on my entire system that I dislike is iDVD, and I feel like one bad program is a small concession to make.) If by "flexibility" you mean a non-unified system, then you might have a point, but I like knowing that the same keyboard shortcuts work for every single application I have. I like knowing the menus work the same. Hell, I like having a system-wide spellcheck. You've still got choice - I'm sure you could make a new spellchecker - but really, what's the point if it works? If you're going to diss an operating system in a community of people who really are enthusiastic about the computers that they use, at least make a good point, like the guy who mentioned Apple's Java fark-up. You can't come in blindly making insults and expect anything good to come of it. So how about you come up with some good criticisms, and in return I will try to be fairly critical of your operating system in return.
        wizlb 18y ago
        Really? Kind of like the point that I was responding to? The one that made all those good points about how great Leper'd is? Oh, but since you mentioned it...no I didn't mean any of the things you mentioned. I value the flexibility of being able to do what I want to do, the way I want to do it. For instance, Apple is always trying to lock you into: their hardware, their iTunes store, their AppStore, their ONE way of doing things (see the pattern here?) I can buy a Windows laptop that becomes a tablet. I can buy a Gyration (wii style) remote for my Media Center. I can get a CableCARD tuner. I can buy any graphics card under the Sun. Can you do that with Apple? No, instead Apple locks you into two choices: "somewhat expensive" and "really expensive". Besides hardware, I also have flexibility in how I can build programs. You got xCode and Objective-C and that's all Apple will really help you with. Sure, they let you build programs in other languages like Python but since it's not part of "the ONE true way", they won't really help you much. Microsoft OTOH supports C, C++, C#, F#, VB.Net and VB classic and they'll actually help you out with any of those (yes, even VB classic if you ask them nicely). Besides all of the officially supported languages, you still have every single language that's popular on *nix right now (Python, Perl, Ruby, etc.). Oh and the environment libraries are simply the best (.Net, WPF, DirectX, etc.) but if they aren't good enough for you there's a billion dollar market for third-party components that you can use. On the Mac? Not so much. Then we come to user experience. I'm a power user and I could go on for days about how bad I think the Mac user interface is. I simply don't want to get into that with you, it's a very, very long discussion. Suffice it to say that Apple is very opinionated about the way they think YOU should work and if you can't see that, you're blind. I'll take Windows over OSuX any day thx.
  - deleted 18y ago
    [deleted]
- yef 18y ago
  While 3 years old, this article says Apple spend $287 million in advertising in 2005, and that was part of an upward trend. http://news.cnet.com/iPod-ads-cost-Apple-a-bundle/2100-1047_3-5978598.html http://news.cnet.com/iPod-ads-cost-Apple-a-bundle/2100-1047_... In comparison, the Vista campaign is reported at $300 million today. I think we can say that Apple spends comparable money on advertising as Microsoft. I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing, but it does make this particular commercial annoying and misleading; a big disappointment from the clever ones that began this ad campaign.

This is pretty ironic considering how Mac ads far outnumber Windows ads. Maybe next time around Apple can pull a few of the spots and get Java up to date sooner than a year after an OS release.

unalone 18y ago

But do the Apple ads cost as much as this Microsoft campaign? (Disclaimer: I don't know if they do or not. I'm curious myself about this.) Because with Microsoft the cost of the ads kept popping up, especially in regards with Seinfeld. I'm guessing their current campaign is pretty vastly expensive, and I don't know if Apple's campaign is or not.

thomasmallen 18y ago
It's just that, regardless of cost-effectiveness, an advertisement that criticizes another company for spending money on advertising is pretty hypocritical.
- teej 18y ago
  To be honest, Leopard is a lot better than Vista.
  - tom_rath 18y ago
    ...and leaving Java 1.6 to sit on the shelf for a few years is far from 'bleeding edge'. Mac is very slick, but Apple isn't particularly kind to third-party developers who build software for their platform.
  - wizlb 18y ago
    To be honest...any version of Windows is better than Leopard. Especially if you value choice and flexibility.
    - unalone 18y ago
      Leopard's plenty flexible. By choice, do you mean being forced to pay extra money just to get an operating system that hasn't had features removed? Because I know Leopard only costs $80, but it's full-featured and that's what I care about. Or do you mean the choice to tinker with every little aspect of your computer? Because the system's entirely moddable. I mean, I would never voluntarily hack my computer, because I cherish it the way it is, but I remember there being a lot of buzz about the Gaia Suite, which is a complete redesign of the OS. Do you mean the lack of programs available? Because you can get MS Office if you really don't like iWork (though iWork is wonderful, in this user's opinion), and you can get replacements for every single iLife program. It's just that most people don't, because iPhoto and iTunes and Mail and GarageBand are really all excellent programs. (The one program on my entire system that I dislike is iDVD, and I feel like one bad program is a small concession to make.) If by "flexibility" you mean a non-unified system, then you might have a point, but I like knowing that the same keyboard shortcuts work for every single application I have. I like knowing the menus work the same. Hell, I like having a system-wide spellcheck. You've still got choice - I'm sure you could make a new spellchecker - but really, what's the point if it works? If you're going to diss an operating system in a community of people who really are enthusiastic about the computers that they use, at least make a good point, like the guy who mentioned Apple's Java fark-up. You can't come in blindly making insults and expect anything good to come of it. So how about you come up with some good criticisms, and in return I will try to be fairly critical of your operating system in return.
      - wizlb 18y ago
        Really? Kind of like the point that I was responding to? The one that made all those good points about how great Leper'd is? Oh, but since you mentioned it...no I didn't mean any of the things you mentioned. I value the flexibility of being able to do what I want to do, the way I want to do it. For instance, Apple is always trying to lock you into: their hardware, their iTunes store, their AppStore, their ONE way of doing things (see the pattern here?) I can buy a Windows laptop that becomes a tablet. I can buy a Gyration (wii style) remote for my Media Center. I can get a CableCARD tuner. I can buy any graphics card under the Sun. Can you do that with Apple? No, instead Apple locks you into two choices: "somewhat expensive" and "really expensive". Besides hardware, I also have flexibility in how I can build programs. You got xCode and Objective-C and that's all Apple will really help you with. Sure, they let you build programs in other languages like Python but since it's not part of "the ONE true way", they won't really help you much. Microsoft OTOH supports C, C++, C#, F#, VB.Net and VB classic and they'll actually help you out with any of those (yes, even VB classic if you ask them nicely). Besides all of the officially supported languages, you still have every single language that's popular on *nix right now (Python, Perl, Ruby, etc.). Oh and the environment libraries are simply the best (.Net, WPF, DirectX, etc.) but if they aren't good enough for you there's a billion dollar market for third-party components that you can use. On the Mac? Not so much. Then we come to user experience. I'm a power user and I could go on for days about how bad I think the Mac user interface is. I simply don't want to get into that with you, it's a very, very long discussion. Suffice it to say that Apple is very opinionated about the way they think YOU should work and if you can't see that, you're blind. I'll take Windows over OSuX any day thx.
- deleted 18y ago
  [deleted]
yef 18y ago
While 3 years old, this article says Apple spend $287 million in advertising in 2005, and that was part of an upward trend. http://news.cnet.com/iPod-ads-cost-Apple-a-bundle/2100-1047_3-5978598.html http://news.cnet.com/iPod-ads-cost-Apple-a-bundle/2100-1047_... In comparison, the Vista campaign is reported at $300 million today. I think we can say that Apple spends comparable money on advertising as Microsoft. I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing, but it does make this particular commercial annoying and misleading; a big disappointment from the clever ones that began this ad campaign.