Seen the latest commercial from Microsoft? The spot claims to have found an “artist” who wants to find the right computer for video editing. I don’t wanna spoil the ending for you, but she chooses a PC over a Mac. Microsoft wants us to all believe that, in the words of Irving Berlin, “Anything you (Mac) can do, I (Windows) can do better.” Only one teensy, tiny little problem. It’s all a lie.

In 1987, I was hired by Micrografx to become a part of the sales and marketing team. My first day at work was, coincidentally, the first day of COMDEX, where we showing off the soon-to-be-released Micrografx Designer 1.0. Quickly moving from Sales to Marketing, I assumed the reins of the Creative Services Group, the in-house ad agency for the company. My first task was to fix display ads that only a propellerhead could love, and brand the company and the Designer product. Our big competition at the time was Illustrator, for it (as well as Aldus FreeHand) were the big dogs of vector design. The conventional wisdom in the design world was, if you were gonna do any serious design work on a computer, you needed to buy a Mac – PCs need not apply. At the time, that was somewhere between a lie and and a gross exaggeration. In 1987, feature for feature, Designer on the PC was a better, more full-featured product than Illustrator on the PC. This was because Illustrator for the PC in it’s first release cost more than the Mac version and had fewer features (it could print in color, but it couldn’t display in color). I realized that, for vector design at least, you didn’t need to buy a Mac to get work done. I created a campaign that coined a word – MacEnvy. My campaign pointed out the superior features of Designer and positioned it as “the cure for MacEnvy.” The campaign was a huge success – in the late 80′s Micrografx blew Illustrator out of the water, with over 80% market share. Fast forward to 2009…

Micrografx is history – purchased by Corel. FreeHand was orphaned with Macromedia was acquired by Adobe. I’m not even sure that they make Designer any more. Illustrator on the PC is now every bit the application it is on the Mac. Most publishers write their apps for both Mac and PC, and keep feature set parity a priority. So which platform is better?

If you’re looking for “cheap” or “disposable” computers, the PC is the smart buy. But if you want to get a computer that is capable of, say, encoding video, editing video, or anything else that requires power, speed, and ease-of-use, you’d be an idiot to buy anything but a Mac. I say this with a good deal of authority, because I’m still stuck using a PC.

At one time, I had both a Mac (Quadra 950) and a PC on my desk. Every time a app update came out, I had to buy two upgrades – one for the Mac, one for the PC. My wife convinced me to choose one platform or the other, and ditch the loser. I chose PC, because the hardware was cheaper, and most of my clients ran PCs. Today, a high-end Mac costs about the same as a high-end PC, and my clients couldn’t care less what I use. What I care about, however, is being able to get work done. XP is clunky. Vista is a steaming pile of dung. Windows 7? Don’t get me started. Mac’s OS is easy to use, reliable, and doesn’t get in your way. Here’s a comparison: It’s a good day when I don’t have to reboot my PC more than once or twice. I’ve a video editor friend here in town. He has to reboot…um…well “seldom” would be accurate – say, once a month, on the average. It takes either my desktop or laptop PCs about 5 to 7 minutes to reboot from a system reset button. There are days that I have to reboot a dozen times – usually when I’m working on large files (i.e.: video clips). That’s not just inconvenient. That’s wrong.

So the bottom line is, even if a Mac was more expensive by a grand, you’d still be better off with it over a PC that will cost you time, money, and visits to your doctor to prescribe BP meds for hypertension. Microsoft may want to claim that they are the better choice, but unless you’re a Hermann Goebbels fan, let Microsoft peddle th Big Lie to someone that confuses “marketing” with “reality.”

Under New Management.

I was at my local FastSigns this afternoon, and I saw some of their recent work on cars. I’m sure you’ve seen cars that are wrapped from stem to stern with graphics, turning them into one big ad. Interesting idea, but I’m not sure that I would want my corporate identity in the hands of somebody who cuts off potential customers in traffic. Nevertheless, it made me think about naming rights.

Naming rights are nothing new, at least in Theory. Way back in the days of the Crystal Palace and the D’Oyly Carte Opera Company, Messrs. Gilbert and Sullivan created an Operetta, The Gondoliers, in which the Duke of Plaza Toro decided to “go public,” selling shares in his Dukedom, for those members of the Great Unwashed, allowing them to bask in the glow of his royal blood. The only thing the duke did NOT sell was naming rights on his cloak. (I’m sure if there’d been such a thing back then, G&S would have satirized it.) Corporate HQs have always been named after their lead tenant, but many of these buildings have leased space out to other tenants, thus allowing the tenants to glom off some of the lead company’s fame. From there it was only a hop, skip and a jump to places like sports stadiums to sell their very names to the highest bidder. (Ever wonder why USC doesn’t sell naming rights to it’s home field? I’m sure a certain maker of condoms would like the answer to that one.)

While I hate the idea of some company buying up naming rights, doing something inappropriate, and having the the sports field suffer guilt by association (Enron Field, Invesco Field, Citi Field, et cetera), the idea makes economic sense. Which leads me to ask…

…why are we constantly naming taxpayer-funded buildings after recently deceased politicians? Understand, I’m all for naming things after Ronald Reagan (one of my heroes), but the idea of naming a building after some mook who’s biggest achievement was to get reelected fourteen times is not my idea of a worthwhile idea. Better to come up with creative ways to offset budget deficits by selling the rights to buildings to the highest bidder.

Here are some ideas to get things started:

Of course, for those that want a shorter-term endorsement contract, there’s always the sides of NASA rockets. Think of what this could do for Enzyte. Might even put a smile back on Smilin’ Bob’s face after that nasty business with the states’ Attorneys General.

Should we sell our naming rights to our cherished national sites? Ordinarily, I’d say ‘no,’ but if it would keep us from begging China to buy our dollars, I think I could stand the embarassment of an Extenz Washington Monument.

Evidently, Microsoft got the message that the Jerry Seinfeld ads weren’t working. (Hard to tell if you’ve arrived if you have no idea where you’re going.) That’s the good news.

The bad news is that Mickeysoft has decided that a one-to-one face-off with Apple would be a good idea.

Sweet Mother of Perpetual Illogical, who in the HELL thought THIS was a good idea?

The Apple ads are clever, funny, and reinforce a core truth – Macs are easy, PCs are hard. They humanized what are basically machines, and gave them personalities. Sadly for Microsoft, the PC’s personality is is officious, petty, and annoying. Much like my PC, which is why those spots work. They resonate. Think about telling a joke – any joke can be funny, but to really reach an audience, the joke and the audience have to connect on some level – and it’s usually that the joke triggers something familiar…an experience, a memory, a feeling. The Apple ads do all that and do it well. There’s an inner truth to what Apple is saying. No matter if you’re an Apple user, a PC user, or you use both, you can relate to what they’re saying.

Now let’s look at the NEW ad from the Boys of Redmond.

“I’m a PC,” states some hapless Microsoft minion, who happens to bear a striking resemblance to John Hodgman (the guy who plays “PC” in the Mac spots). This is followed by dozens of other people proclaiming they they to are “PC.” The cumulative effect is “We are the Borg. Resistance is futile. Join the collective.” There’s nothing fun about this spot. Nothing inspired. Nothing that would make me want to buy a PC, nor convince me to switch platforms. These people look either like uniformed, clueless lemmings, or Stepford Users, willing to do their master’s bidding. (Except for the bit with Tony Parker and Eva Longoria. She looks hot. Clueless…but hot.)

The ad tries to get us excited about being part of the collective. Evidently, they’re going to be pushing “connectivity.” As a victim of the Microsoft Mobile user experience (ActiveSync is truly a one-word double contradiction in terms – it’s neither ‘active’ nor does it ‘sync’), I can’t believe these clowns are trying to convince anyone that they should be trusted to bring connectivity to the masses.

With apologies to the ASPCA for beating this dead horse just one more time, here’s what the ad SHOULD say:

Hi. I’m Steve Balmer, CEO of Microsoft.

And I’m Bill Gates, CEO-emeritus of Microsoft.

We’d like to apologize for the problems many of you are having with Vista. Operating systems are complex things, and we realize now that we let that one out of the lab too soon.

We’ve committed every resource within Microsoft to fixing what’s wrong with Vista, and we’re releasing updates just as quickly as is prudent, in order to fix those problems. In the meantime, we’re not asking you to believe us, or trust us. We know we’ve broken that unspoken bond of trust with you, our customers. All we ask for is the opportunity to make things right.

In the coming weeks, we welcome your comments, and we promise we’re listening. We’ve set up a special address, in order to receive those comments, suggestions, and complains. We’re committed to resolving them, and rebuilding your trust in us.

And we pledge that all our other new projects and applications will not be released until we fix what’s wrong with Vista, and earn back your trust.

Thanks for listening.

Run that ad, and I’ll sit up and take notice. Run more crap like the ad above, and I’ll sit on my hands and watch as Apple goes from niche player to take away your market share, user by user.

The latest spot from Microsoft has been unleashed on an unsuspecting populace. The good news: it’s (a bit) funnier than the last spot. The bad news: it’s still brain-dead stupid. According to a Microsoft spokespersyn, there’s to be a whole series of these spots (Oh, the Humanity! The Horror!) and we’ll just have to wait for them to do the ‘reveal’ as to what in the HELL they’re on about.

Color me underwhelmed.

At this point, Microsoft, I don’t care if your next product is an all-singing, all-dancing, walks-on-water, savior of the universe. You’ve broken a sacred trust with me (that would be “Vista,” and until you own up to that colossal mistake, I’m not gonna trust you with my money. Period.

It would be a better use of Microsoft’s marketing dollars if they simply came out with a mea culpa about Vista, and promised to fix things. Trying to divert attention from the train wreck that is Vista is not just ineffective – it’s stupid.

Apparently, Microsoft wants to re-brand “PC” to mean “Perpetually Connected.” Um…right. Here’s the deal, Bill – I can’t keep my friggin’ Windows Mobile Phone to sync with my Windows XP or Vista computers. How much credibility do you think you’ll have trying to convince me that you guys are suddenly gonna know how to keep things “perpetually connected”? That, of course, belies the REAL point, that Microsoft products are difficult to use, buggy as Hell, and make it much harder to be productive than the other guy’s stuff (that would be Apple).

I don’t see any good coming out of this. Microsoft is every bit as out of touch with their users as Washington D.C. is with taxpayers. Perhaps we should all send T-Shirts to CEO Steve Balmer, emblazoned with with message, “Stop! I am their leader! Which way did they go?”

Sad. Very sad.

Did you ever wonder why Microsoft and marketing both start with “m” but just don’t go together? I’m just not quite certain if Microsoft has an aversion to marketing in the same way that, oh, say, Oprah has to Governor Palin. But if this latest excursion into television advertising is any indication, I’d say that “Microsoft” goes together with “marketing” like “Congress” goes with “bi-partisan cooperation.”

Let’s recap: On the one hand, you have Microsoft, probably The Most Successful Computer Company Ever.™ On the other hand, you have Apple, the Little Company That Could.

Microsoft is the Übergorilla in the room – the company that practically owns every facet of your computer. Think about it. Microsoft Windows. Microsoft Mouse. Microsoft Keyboard. Microsoft Office. You name it, and the Boys of Redmond are doing their level best to corner the market in any given segment. Their sheer size and market penetration of so many mission-critical markets make them the big dog on the block.

Apple is the smaller, smarter, more agile competitor. Their products work better. They are easier to use. They are more fun. And they offer a legitimate alternative to Microsoft in every market in which Microsoft plays.

You’d think with all that money (I’m surprised they haven’t cut a deal with Uncle Sam to co-own a Treasury Printing Office…think of the time we’d save on shipping if we could get Microsoft to print the money, instead of printing it elsewhere and shipping it all to Redmond), Microsoft could afford to hire some people that actually understand marketing. In fairness to Microsoft’s marketers, they probably have – but the Microsoft culture refuses to listen.

Apple is different. (No, duh.) They seem to approach everything from a marketing point of view, i.e., “here’s a problem…how can we solve it to make people happy?” Then they think, “how can we make our solution the best possible of all solutions, making it useful, friendly, easy-to-use, and…well…fun.” Microsoft approaches things from a view of “here’s a market that’s making money. Let’s dominate it. Doesn’t much matter if we do it better – we just want the money.”

So every so often, Microsoft inflicts television spots on us. Some of them have been memorable – usually for all the wrong reasons. When they announced Windows 98, they used the Rolling Stones “Start Me Up.” Evidently, nobody thought to listen to the lyric just after the snippet they used – the somewhat prescient, “You make a grown man cry.” Another Microsoft spot famously used Mozart’s Requiem to pitch their products. The Dies Irae section’s lyrics go a little something like this:

Day of wrath, day of anger
will dissolve the world in ashes,
as foretold by David and the Sibyl.
Great trembling there will be
when the Judge descends from heaven
to examine all things closely.

If only. So Microsoft has a well-documented history of shooting itself in the foot with their marketing. (Of course, you can argue that they do the same thing with their products, and you wouldn’t be far off the mark.)

Vista is an unmitigated disaster, an operating system that only a sadomasochist could love. We have it on two of the computers at my house and it is universally reviled with the same enthusiasm one has for excrement found adhering to the bottom of one’s shoe. To make matters worse, Apple’s agency devised a brilliant, long-running series of ads that poke fun at Microsoft in general, and Vista in particular. “I’m a Mac.” “And I’m a PC.” is nothing short of genius. In every ad, the theme is hammered home that Macs are easy to use, fun, and help you get work done. PCs are dull, boring, difficult to use, and are best relegated to folks like “Mordac, Preventer of Information Services.”

As if to rub it in, Apple made one brilliant move after another. iPod. iTunes. iPhone. “iSurrender” would have been a legit strategy for the Redmond crew, but nooooooooo – they decided to fight back the best way they know how. With a new ad. Starring Bill “Mr. Personality” Gates and Jerry “I’m bored and the money’s good” Seinfeld.

In Damage Control 101we learn that the best way to deal with a collosal P.R. problem is to face it head on. Vista’s problems are no big secret. In fact, everybody but Microsoft seems to know about it. A spot where the recently retired Gates says something like, “Hey everybody…Bill Gates here. Sorry about that Vista thing. We’ve heard you. We realize our new O/S is a big steaming pile, and we’re gonna do something about it. Please be patient, and we’ll fix it. And we’ll never violate your trust in us again.” Now THAT’S a spot I’d like to see. Believable? Maybe…maybe not. But it would stand a much better chance of resonating with the public than the piece of ego-driven dreck they’re airing now.

No mention of the Vista Problem. No admission of culpability or guilt. All they do is to talk about the future. (Just between you and me, I could care less about a computer that offers chewey, yummy goodness. I’d be satisfied if the damn thing worked once in a while.) No, they do a riff on Bill G.’s status as the World’s Richest Nerd, allow Jerry to do his schtick about how he can’t wait for the NEXT Microsoft innovation, and then…nothing. No payoff. No big announcement. No “sorry about that Vista crap – but now for something really worth waiting for!”

Microsoft seems to have forgotten that, in order to make the FUD factor (Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt) work, you must first promise something more or less specific coming Really Soon Now. You can be vague about the details, but it helps to have something specific in your promise – especially if you’re trying to counter-sell against your competition. If they claimed, “Hey…forget about that OS/X stuff…we’ve got something that’s gonna blow it – and Vista – away!” You might not believe it, but (if you hadn’t heard it a thousand times before) you might at least let them sew the seeds of doubt in your mind. As it is, the spot is just…pointless. So what if they’re gonna do something cool in the future? We need solutions NOW. There’s nothing in that spot that convinces me to buy a Windows box – or to change my decision to buy Macs from now on. (Remember, until just recently, I’ve been a Window guy.)

Is there hope for Microsoft? I kind of doubt it. You see, inertia is the only thing they have in their favor. Bigger companies than Microsoft have imploded, flamed out or simply rotted from within before. Won’t be the first time. Google (a.k.a.: “The NEW Microsoft”) is busy pulling the rug out from under Microsoft’s kingdom. Google is doing a fine job of disintermediating Microsoft to the point where they’ll simply be irrelevant. Can marketing help Microsoft avoid that fate? In the short term, maybe. In the long term, not unless they actually deliver on the yummy goodness stuff, and stop shoveling things like Vista on to our plates and telling us it’s great.