I can see some dude in mid-nowhere seeing the commercial and saying, "Ah, yes, that tall dude with the waggling rear end, who is not identified in the ad, can nonetheless be recognized by everyone in America as Mr. Bill Gates, one of the founders and recently retired CEO of Microsoft, that hitherto evil, inhuman, and monopolistic gobbler-up of good ideas which, I now see, has been miscast in that role because, after all, someone with such a waggly rear end couldn't possibly be so Machiavellian and evil, and so the company itself couldn't be so bad, so that its products must be good. So I think I'll go off and buy Vista."<br><br>Riiiight!<br><br>[color:red]</font color=red> [color:orange]</font color=orange> [color:yellow]</font color=yellow> [color:green]</font color=green> [color:blue]</font color=blue> [color:purple]</font color=purple>
_________________________ MACTECHubi dolor ibi digitus
Best comment and really sums it up: " . . . the ad simply mirrors and perpetuates the multiple and manifest problems with Vista: it doesn't work."<br><br>Bull's eye.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br>[color:white]xx</font color=white>[color:blue]I always deserve it. Really.</font color=blue><br><br>
_________________________ I always deserve it. Really.
Well Don is a hardcore PC weenie , he will never get it .<br><br>[color:blue]it took the focus off Gates' money, Vista's problems, and Microsoft's poor public image, and started erecting a more positive image of the company</font color=blue><br><br>Now Bill retired and left MS to Monkey boy -> now to bring Bill back shaking his arse is positive ?? Sure people see Bill = MS but thats not their new image without Bill what they did was bring back the old one<br><br>IMO<br>MS should focus on their new image and not try to humanize Bill he is gone already<br><br>
Loc: Sunnyvale, CA mostly
That guy's too funny. What a pontifical moron, publicly confirming his idiocy to the world - Ahhh, I just love the internet at times - It's like The Gong Show. This isn't about Vista at all, but a far greater and more important picture.<br><br>I have it from an informed source that the campaign objective is to promote Microsoft's continuing platform relevance in an information processing environment profoundly different from that of ten years ago.<br><br>OK, now, my translation of this MicroSpeak is that this is a platform on a fast train to irrelevance. The desktop is over with (for everyone, of course). The enterprise is vulnerable. They've failed at search advertising. They will fail with their cloud platform. Silverlight is already being dumped. XAML will die. Most devices are failures. WinMob's future is uncertain.The only bright spot is Mail and Exchange, and (whoopdifrickindoo) MySpace, the only social networking platform built on IIS-ASP, the red-headed stepchild bastard orphan of the internet (whoopdifrickindoo), oh, and a few brilliant open source things such as XBMC (Windows only worth is as a device driver for a cross-platform software ).<br><br>Of course, like a majestic mightly tree, long dead before the evidence of it shows up at its grow points, Microsoft could topple over at some point unless it is able to successfully prosecute corrective measures. They will never beat Google in a court of law, for they themselves set the precedent for predatory auspice of the 800 Pound Gorilla - Google is the new lover on honeymoon from sanction. They have no recourse but to battle this straight up, head to head, mano y mano, winning the hearts and minds of the market.<br><br>They don't look to be off to a good start . I hope they can pull it off - It's dumb to trust Google . They make a lot of stuff I like, but they're disposable - They're just a frickin commodity afterall. They're just an interchangeable part in digital machinery, swappable with an abundance of stuff. It was inevitable, the normal trajectory. They should be able to hack it. If they can't, they'll die. That's just the arc of a diver.<br><br>If they were a Japanese company, they could win this. The ultimate cost-effective way to do business is with quality. The ultimate price point is free. They could focus on core life support platforms, make them bulletproof perfection (yeah, a daunting task for them, I know ), and give them away to establish ubiquity to eventually capture the advertising revenue nut, and perhaps stuff like vast peripheral end-to-end compliments such as hosting (everybody will eventually be hosted - hey, someone would actually be using Microsoft servers ). Maybe something like a MobileMS, since MobileMe is a great idea (especially w/SS), but lame/weak in that it is an island, doesn't talk to other platforms, no freeflow of data, but MobileMS should be free for a dumb capped version, w/subscription for an enchanced freeflow version with unlimited bandwidth and storage. Ton of stuff, but the litany is too epic and boring to continue. Multimedia, yatta ya.<br><br>Nobody will pay for software with an unstoppable potential/momentum on a continuum towards virtual free goods status. Nobody can win at that - It's futile - Software will be like water.<br><br>The medium is free - Messaging/advertising costs money. Software is a largely fixed state cost. Advertising is a variable state revenue. Advertising revenue grows disproportionately to a largely fixed cost. All other advertising (including banner ads and print, and the statistical data of their freefalling decline punctuates that) will evaporate and the only thing left at the end of the day will be physical and virtual point-of-sale / NPOS Near Point-of-Sale, and the internet is in its infancy as an NPOS/POS medium. That's where the money's at (well, also in certain subscribable aspects of the user experience mechanisms), but Microsoft will have to completely rethink their gestalt, although there is likely a pareto law in scrabbling the nickels and dimes of software to win the pot of gold.<br><br>Another problem is Ballmer - He's a frickin idiot - He's like Bush, just a glorified dumb-ass frat boy. Instead of throwing resources at stuff, Microsoft needs to slash. They're oversaturated, and are like an oversaturated field of corn with excessive variable inputs of seed, fertilizer and labor producing a stunted crop, except that it is worse - When you produce [censored] and do this, you only grow the weeds that much more when you increase the variable inputs and the laborforce must necessarily increase for mere weed control that only come back that much more hypertrophic and hyperplastic the next day.<br><br>They could do this with a quicker, higher ROI on smaller investment, redistributing and slashing their workforce to the optimal. Their only largesse should be R&D.<br><br>The most practical solution is to sell high . I'm looking forward to the mini-mansion shopping spree when leveraged debt gets upside down to stock options value .<br><br>Ed<br><br>[color:purple]Information isn't a connection - It doesn't stir people</font color=purple><br>
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.