Briefly About the Show

When I first read Christopher Null's headline, Debunking Mac's Self-Created Hype I actually expected a somewhat honest look at Apple's new ad campaign. I think it's fairly pointless to debunk advertising when an ad cannot and should not try to explain the ins and outs of every point it's meant to make in 30 seconds, but whatever, this guy chose to try.

The problem is, his "debunking" is done with vast inaccuracies and innuendo that leads readers to believe that these ads are based on utter nonsense.

I'll take his points one at a time...

Networking is easier on a Mac, as is adding peripherals. The ad begins with the Mac and PC holding hands because, true enough, you can network the two platforms together without difficulty. Then a digital camera (represented by a Japanese woman) joins the network. And it "just works." Never mind that you don't network a camera the way you do a computer, but I'd argue that far more peripherals are compatible with a PC than with a Mac. As well, I've seen countless computers have trouble with Bluetooth connections, even using Mac hardware with a Mac computer. This one's just plain wrong.

His first point - to never mind that you don't network a camera the way you do a computer - first off, sure you can - there are WiFi cameras on the market. Second, pay attention to the ad's point - that networking "and" adding peripherals. It's not claiming they're one in the same, neither should you.

Then he goes on to make statements as if they're simple facts. "I've seen" is not a fact. That's an experience. Guess what? I haven't seen a cell phone sync via bluetooth with a Windows XP machine with zero additional software installed and almost zero config. Possible and happens often with iSync and a Mac. So what? To me this is a subjective point and one not worth arguing. Want to see what the ad means? Buy an external hard drive and plug it in to your PC - watch all the prompts and notices appear. Plug it into your Mac - nothing. Just a new drive available. Setup a printer on Windows XP - you get to install new software from HP or Epson. Plug the same printer into a Mac. One thing changes... you can print to that new printer next time you want to print something.

As for the accuracy of the ad - it too is subjective. I find Mac networking much easier, but that's my experience and not a matter of empirical truth.

Macs are easier at creating websites and editing photos. Not really. The software is largely identical on both platforms, and Cnet's recent tests showed that Photoshop is faster on Windows than on MacOS. Editing movies, however, is much better on the Mac.

First, I love how he cites an article as proof that Photoshop runs slower on Mac than Windows, but doesn't explain that the article is referring to how Photoshop runs NON-natively under Rosetta in the test they conducted. No shit it runs slower on Intel Macs. It's compiled to run on a PowerPC chip. Irresponsible not to clarify that or to even bring this point up at all. And other than Photoshop, he doesn't even address the point made - out of the box Macs come with iWeb for creating web sites and a full running copy of iPhoto and Preview, both of which allow for basic editing, converting and organizing of Photos - Windows has no software nearly as capable out of the box. If he's talking about what's "available" then that's another story. And Windows comes with nothing that creates or manages web sites, unless you count Text Editor.

Macs never have to be restarted. Sure they do, but not as often. PCs are more crash-prone, particularly older hardware running newer OSes and applications.

I don't think the ad says "never" - it insinuates much less often, which you concede.

Ask anyone trying to run OS X on a 1999-era Mac if they have trouble with it (or if that's even possible) and you'll be comparing apples to apples. Now new PCs may indeed be less stable than new Macs, but modern PCs honestly don't crash constantly and when apps do crash, Windows is much better at recovering without a reboot than it used to be.

Well it's the very breadth of Windows' legacy support that makes it more unstable. Whine all you want to, but that's one of the key differences between Windows and OS X. OS X supports hardware from maybe 5 years ago and runs like a dream for it. Windows XP is meant to try and support everything everywhere and hence is prone to more crashing. I'm not saying it's wrong for XP to do this, but the bottom line is that it's true. Macs on the whole crash "much less" than Windows XP machines. Give all the reasons you like, still true. Vista may change this, but we're not talking future maybes here.

Sure, IF OS X supported all that old 3rd party hardware it'd probably be as problematic. It doesn't and it isn't. Done.

In this next point, he agrees with the ad, but then says something really dumb...

Macs don't have virus problems. ... New Mac viruses are slowly starting to pop up in the wild, and the Mac platform is not inherently bulletproof.

Popping up? Makes it sound like there have been a few viruses running in the wild and infecting people who have OS X doesn't it? Fact is, there isn't a SINGLE WILD virus for Mac OS X. Exploits and vulnerabilities are not viruses. If they were, Windows would have double the number it does. I agree that it's only a matter of time, but don't write shit that makes people believe they're appearing here and there and more often. They're not.

PCs aren't built for "fun" but rather for making pie charts.

I actually agree with him that the ad is a bit silly. PCs can and do handle much more than just spreadsheets, but then his final point is equally as silly...

Oddly, every Mac enthusiast I know also has an Xbox, which is a Microsoft product. Strange.

Um, your point? Consumers aren't in cults. It's not as if all Mac users swear off any MS products. And by the way, most of the people I know who game have an X-Box, so what does that even mean? I love X-Box. It's an awesome platform and you don't have to boot a computer to play. Silly man.

You can run Windows on a Mac. Yep. Works pretty well. Costs more to do it, though.

Makes it sound like there's some fee for running Windows on a Mac. In fact if you own Windows (even an OEM copy) and want to run it on your Mac, you can do so at no extra cost. And since most people who have Windows, also have a computer to run it on, I'd say that most people could do this for free by using Bootcamp (free) - but if you "must" buy a new license of Windows XP, it's only $99. For a dual-boot system? Big deal. Hell it's the same "extra cost" if you want to dual-boot your PC with Windows 2000 & XP, so don't skew the facts by making it sound like there's some hidden fee.

Setting up your PC takes an eternity, as you have to delete trial software and downlod new drivers. Depends on the vendor. Dell and Sony are generally the worst at bundling shovelware on their machines. Uninstalling it all does take time, as does running all the Microsoft security updates. Generally drivers are largely up to date on new PCs, though video drivers are constantly being upgraded. Unless you're reformatting your hard drive, this process shouldn't take more than an hour, and you can "read the manuals" while that's happening.

Depends on the vendor? Okay, then to clarify, this applies to Dell, Gateway, HP, Sony, Toshiba, Acer, and Lenevo. What's that, about 80% of the market? I guess he means companies such as VooDoo and Falcon Northwest. I don't think a national ad campaign is going to target people who assemble their own machines or buy specialized systems. They're probably going after the average consumer who deals with the big OEMs that I listed above.

And sorry, but getting rid of "all" of the crap on a new machine (including reboots etc...) takes well over an hour my friend. Doesn't matter how technically adept you are, it's time consuming and the average mother of two can't understand half of what needs to be done. Try to get a computer illiterate person to remove Real Player or the auto-help systems that run automatically on new PCs. It'll take them hours, if they ever figure it out. While the ad isn't dead on fact in all cases, it sure does hit home with the people they're targeting and is pretty damned true. Open a Mac, turn it on, you're set to go. Don't need to remove anything and there's little to nothing running in the background. Unless you count iCal.

Walt Mossberg loves Macs.

Uh, yeah - I don't give a shit about Walt Mossberg either. This ad is lame.

PC users don't know how to tie a necktie, and Mac users wear hoodies.Now that's just silly.

Sometimes ads are just meant to be funny. Please tell me you're not seriously trying to "debunk" this one. Next you're going to be telling me that Red Bull doesn't actually give me wings. I'm going to fly, I don't care what you say!

All in all I'd say Mr. Null's notes on the Apple ads are vague, misleading, and sometimes flat out inaccurate. Maybe he's trying to make a subtle metaphoric point by making his review of what he believes to be inaccurate equally inaccurate. Now that would be genius. That would be "Thinking Different."

Alas, I don't think that's the case because Apple's ads have taught me that people who are not Mac users are not creative and lack imagination. Wow, those ads are powerful.

Update: Looks like this post got picked up by Digg. Click here to Digg it yourself. We also made some tiny corrections.