Apple Users for Microsoft

Just remember, guys, the cover-up is always worse than the crime:

Metadata found on Microsoft’s creative copy used in its ‘I’m a PC’ ad reveals that the graphics were actually produced using Macs running Adobe Creative Suite 3. After the details were published on the Flickr photo sharing site, Microsoft scrambled to polish off the embarrassing details last night.

The New iPods

Saw them today at the Apple Store, wasn’t impressed. I find the new Nano’s much-touted screen to be too small for video. It’s OK as a portable photo album. The new Classic doesn’t seem as solidly well-made as its predecessors. The action nowadays looks to be all on the iPhone/iPod Touch side of the operation.

But Does It Sell Software?

Back in my college days, I sat in on a presentation from a Miller Brewing marketing person who was explaining the thinking behind company’s then-popular “less filling, tastes great” ad campaign. The ads were noteworthy for their light touch (the George Steinbrenner/Billy Martin spot remains a classic) but the Miller rep’s takeaway point was that cute can never be an end in itself. The key question to use in evaluating any spot, especially the cute ones, she said, is “does it sell beer.”

Whoever’s working on the new Microsoft ad campaign featuring Jerry Seinfeld didn’t get that memo:

Weird beyond all immediate description.

Andy Hertzfeld Speaks

O’Reilly News has a nice interview with the man who wrote the original Macintosh operating system. He works for Google these days and has an interesting perspective on what makes the companies tick:

One of the ways that they’re different has to do with essentially their trust of employees. Apple is very secretive within the company; people working on Macs don’t know anything about the new iPods, etc. Google is extremely open within the company; once you’re a Google employee you have access to just about every piece of information there is. So that’s a fairly striking difference. I would say Google is a little more bottom-up oriented. Even though the leaders of Google are brilliant and fantastic, they like having a lot of impetus with the individual contributors whereas Apple is not that way. It’s more like a master plan formulated by a single individual.

Long term, Google’s is the better approach. Maybe the peaks won’t be as great, but the troughs won’t be as deep either. I’m sure Apple could have done without the Jobs-less early 1990s.


Steve Jobs concedes that Apple botched the launch of the MobileMe service. Or, should I say, re-launch. It was .Mac before that, was and remains overpriced at $99 a year, and seems snakebittenĀ and poorly conceptualized. Very, very far from being the highlight of the Apple experience.