Brand: Microsoft
Execution: TV
Target: Mac-vulnerable PC Users
Rating: **
Reviewer: David Vinjamuri

Description:
Microsoft’s new Crispin Porter & Bogusky advertising continues with a new campaign intended to show the diversity of PC users.  “I’m a PC and I’ve been made into a stereotype” is the opening line of the spot, delivered by a John Hodgman lookalike (Hodgman is the actor who plays the PC in the “I’m a Mac, I’m a PC” spots by Apple).  The spot then progresses to showing a variety of people, from celebrities like Eva Longoria and Deepak Chopra to astronauts, scuba divers and ordinary people.

What Works:
This is a very interesting attempt to take a common political campaign tactic and bring it to the consumer arena.  The tactic is the “Checkers” ad (from Nixon who once complained that the press was so vicious that they were attacking the gift of a cocker spaniel to his daughters) which complains that the opponent is running a dirty campaign and smearing the candidate.  This type of ad is also a negative ad, of course, as it attempts to impugn the character of the opponent.  Microsoft here is trying to turn the tables on Apple’s successful anti-PC campaign by showing that every type of person uses PCs and that the Apple ads are unfair.

This advertising is far more focused than the brief but expensive campaign that preceded it featuring Bill Gates and Jerry Seinfeld.  These spots also feel crisper with better pacing.

What Doesn’t:
What you almost never see in political campaigns is a candidate who has the support of 90% of voters attacking a challenger with 10% support.  That’s exactly what’s happening here and it reflects the extent to which Apple’s unyielding campaign against Microsoft has rattled Redmond and caused them to respond.  This campaign is well-executed, but fundamentally misguided.  It adds credibility to Apple’s message by acknowledging it and will likely get some people wondering if there’s something to those Macs after all.

The campaign is also misguided because it tries to solve a strategic problem with advertising.  Windows Vista gave PC users something they were not asking for - a more elegant operating system that was less reliable than Windows XP.  This in itself was a reaction to Apple.  Microsoft should have ignored Apple and focused on a more elementary need of PC users - a faster, simpler and more flexible operating system which would be more reliable and adaptable than Windows XP.  Had Microsoft turned in this direction, Apple would have been irrelevant as a competitor.  They would have ceded the high end to Apple while digging a firmer foothold in the everyday world where 90% of computer usage happens.

As it is, Microsoft has given Apple a major strategic opportunity with the Vista debacle.  And now Microsoft is wasting nearly $800 million dollars trying to fix the strategic problem with advertising.  Add that to the $500 million already spent to advertise the Vista launch and you have enough money to accelerate the next generation operating system launch by several years.  Microsoft should stop letting Apple and Steve Jobs push them off of their game and create a “Windows lite.”  Then they can brag.

One last problem with the ads - and this is the only one that Crispin Porter is really responsible for - is that they lack permission to believe.  Watch the Apple campaign and you’ll see that each ad gives specific reasons that Apple is better than PC.  There are no specifics in this Microsoft campaign.

Branding Bottom Line:
There’s a reason that P&G greats like Dawn and Tide never mention competitors.  See you at the debates, PC bitches.

Brand: Microsoft
Execution: Television (”Shoe Circus” , “New Family“)
Target: Insomniacs
Rating: *
Reviewer: David Vinjamuri

Description:
A new campaign for Microsoft features Bill Gates and Jerry Seinfeld experiencing life in the real world.  In the first ad, “Shoe Circus,” Seinfeld spots Gates in a discount shoe store.  He immediately takes over from the lackadaisical clerk and fits Gates for a pair of shoes.  This process takes 1:33 - a huge block of time by advertising standards.  The second ad, “New Family” has Seinfeld and Gates moving in with an average American family to try to understand how they live.  It doesn’t go well, and the pair are eventually set up by the pre-teen daughter and evicted.  Microsoft has already announced that this campaign has ‘run its course’ and will be replaced by an ad mocking the successful “I’m a Mac/I’m a PC” ad campaign from Apple.

What Works:
Precious little.  This ad functions almost as a signature for the style of Crispin Porter + Bogusky in its lack of focus, persuasion or relevance.  However it did draw much more attention than the failed $500 million campaign for Windows Vista.  See this Advertising Blog’s original advice for Microsoft on that campaign here.

What Doesn’t:
Microsoft (with help from Crispin Porter) spends a huge amount of money to remind us of the central failings of Windows: it runs slowly, is out of touch with average people and seems old and dated.  These are the only definitive impressions from nearly 6 minutes worth of primetime advertising.  The ads focus on two men who are no longer doing what they’re famous for.  Bill Gates -  who has left the helm of Microsoft to head the Gates Foundation - and Jerry Seinfeld - who long ago closed his hit sitcom.  The ad portays the two men on an ironic quest to try to understand average people.  They seem to comically fail to do this in both spots.

However the executional choices in the ad give the average viewer all the clues he or she needs about Microsoft.  The ad is as long as Vista boot times.  It’s as unfocused as the thousands of unnecessary features that slow down Microsoft Office.  And it’s as out of touch as Microsoft customer support.

Microsoft advertising ought to be focused on what Microsoft is doing to actually improve our interactions with the personal computer.  This ad only reminds us that we’ve had little choice for many years but to fork over hard-earned money and suffer.

Branding Bottom Line:
Never before have so few spent so much to accomplish so little with advertising

Here at the ThirdWay Advertising Blog we are not shy about our opinions. We often tell our readers that companies are wasting money with ad campaigns. However, we have always stopped short of actually throwing down the gauntlet and challenging a company to stop doing something we think is foolish.

That ends today.

There were two big pieces of news out of Microsoft this week, both of which will affect the Microsoft brand. The first (which we covered in our most recent post) was the launch of the new operating system Windows Vista. We commented that the $500mm being spent to launch this product is wasteful and will not help Microsoft or Vista. We base this on the absurd spending levels, recent Microsoft campaigns and previous Windows launches.

We also pointed out that spending $500mm to promote a product that will get 90% market share without a cent of investment is a little batty, to say the least. It seems that Microsoft is really trying to generate excitement around the product and the company, which sounds more like a job for PR to us.

This is where the second big piece of news comes in. This week, a poll by Harris Interactive and The Wall Street Journal ranked Microsoft as the company with the best corporate reputation, ahead of perennial favorite (and our alma mater) Johnson & Johnson. What was most intriguing about this result is that one of the prime reasons for Microsoft’s huge jump in this poll is the work of the Gates Foundation. After years of being considered the ‘evil empire’, Bill Gates has single-handedly changed the image of his company in the mind of the public with his impressive and original contribution to American Philanthropy. The Gates Foundation is not only huge - it genuinely operates like a business and brings entrepreneurial smarts to big social problems worldwide (like malaria) that were not getting adequate funding and attention.

It turns out that philanthropy has been a better business proposition (in terms of corporate reputation) than the $500 million spent on the ‘People-Ready Software’ campaign last year. Ironically, we predicted this (look at the bottom of our post on People Ready Advertising here). And it makes sense that a company which enjoys a monopoly in many markets should benefit more from image-enhancement and a corporate reputation overhaul than traditional advertising.

So here is our challenge to Microsoft. Cancel the ad buys for Windows Vista. Get a microphone and hold a press conference and say that you’re giving the money to the Gates Foundation on behalf of Windows Vista. And then see what happens. We predict stratospheric media coverage, significant improvement in likeability for Microsoft and even a noticeable sales bump for Windows Vista. Yes - we’re saying this would be a good business investment.

Too much money is spent every year screaming at consumers with messages they have either already heard or do not care about. Microsoft is about to add to the din. Wouldn’t it be refreshing to see a company do something genuinely useful and see good business results for it?

We suspect Microsoft will not listen to the lonely voice of one advertising blog, but they will listen to you. If you are reading this and you blog it, the voices will accumulate and be heard. And perhaps we can do something good for everyone - including Microsoft.

Issue: Windows Vista Ships - Microsoft Announces $500mm Ad Spend
Commentary by: David Vinjamuri
After over five years, Microsoft is shipping a new operating system, Windows Vista.

Just like the Windows launches of yore, Microsoft is trying to make this a big event (remember the Rolling Stones licensing “Start Me Up” for a Windows launch as their first major sell-out to commercialism).

And this time, Microsoft is upping the ante - literally. AdAge reports that Microsoft will invest an eye-popping $500mm to support the Vista launch.

From a branding perspective, this is an obscene waste of money. Why?

1. More frequency isn’t better:
   Microsoft will overdeliver advertising to many television watchers causing ad fatigue and risking a significant backlash against the company.
2. A technology company should spend smarter:
   Instead of creating a clever viral or online campaign Microsoft is blowing the conventional media trumpet and essentially proving that it just doesn’t understand the modern consumer or the Internet.
3. Vista Will Achieve 90% Market Share with $0 Spend Anyway:
   Which makes it incredibly difficult to understand why Microsoft is advertising to begin with. This is a distribution play - Microsoft will ship Vista with every PC sold in the world in just a few months. Companies will be forced to migrate to stay in synch with the market.

Taken together, these three elements make us think that Microsoft just doesn’t understand how the terrain has shifted underneath them in the years since Windows 3.0 originally launched. Even this advertising blog knows it’s not about the operating system any more. Vista is an important release for Microsoft simply because Windows has too many security holes and is giving consumers an excuse to migrate to Apple’s OS-X. Instead of a consumer company, the Windows division of Microsoft should think of themselves as an infrastructure company. The best publicity for this division would be to ensure that the new system works seamlessly, securely and that future releases trim the fat of unnecessary features that add complexity and bleed processing power.

Issue: Microsoft introduces Zune
Commentary by: David

Yesterday, Microsoft launched Zune. Zune is a music/video player which Microsoft hopes can gain a foothold against the Apple iPod. We saw the Zune in person early last week. It is a slick, attractive little device. It has an impressive screen and easy-to-use controls. It can share songs wirelessly and has integrated software. In short it is impressive. And we believe without doubt that it will fail to dislodge Apple and iPod from its leadership role in this industry.

This is not because iPod has a head start. In fact, the story of the IBM PC itself (and much more recent work on the development of the Internet) confirms that the ‘first mover’ advantage is largely mythical. The difference between Zune and the iPod is deeper - a matter of marketing philosophy. Early reviewers of Zune like Walt Mossberg and Stephen Wildstrom sense this fundamental difference between iPod and Zune without being able to put their fingers directly on it.

So what does Steve Jobs know that Steve Ballmer doesn’t? Jobs understands that it’s not about the big picture - it’s about the details. iPod is a better brand than Zune not because the product strategy behind iPod is better (by embracing sharing, Zune may have the better business model), but because the attention to details is superior. Microsoft as a company believes in bringing innovation to the consumer as soon as possible. This comes with flaws, bugs and glitches, but the company makes a conscious tradeoff between degree of done-ness and time to market. Apple doesn’t release products until it believes it has perfected them to the smallest detail. Such is Apple’s obsession with detail that they have invented new manufacturing processes in order to make working products mirror their idealized concepts in execution.

You could say that this is micromanaging and it undoubtedly is. Did the second-generation iPod Nano really need an aluminum skin? No. Did the iMac need to be sheathed in transparent plastic? Certainly not. And yet it is just these details that make the product original and authentic.

Microsoft follows a different path and that is evident with Zune. The case is elegant, but larger than the iPod. The online store creates an intermediate currency “Microsoft points” which have a strange exchange rate with the dollar and seem to do nothing more than add a level of complexity to the process of purchasing music for the Zune. WiFi sharing works easily, but shared songs expire after three plays. And on and on. While each of these foibles is the result of a well-meaning compromise (the sharing issue is a compromise on protection for copyrighted music, for instance), they are clearly compromises and they compromise the design and usability of the Zune.

What Steve Jobs knows that we don’t is that we care more about the small details than the big issues. We love things that feel right, that reward us with an easy and engaging user experience. We cue on small things to build our opinion about the big issues. Most of all, we like things that work 100% at advertised. Even 99% feels like not half as much.

Brand: Microsoft

Execution: TV & Print

Link: Click Here

Target: Corporate Information Technology Managers

Rating: *

Reviewer: David

Description
We see the furrowed rows of a farm at sunrise and hear the hum of insects. A lone bicyclist pedals through the narrow streets of a European village. A Japanese man sleeps as his wife walks through the bedroom. A couple sleeps. A woman wakes up to the call to prayer as we see the Aya Sofia of Istanbul in the background. Another lies awake in her bed. We see an empty office and then another as the lights come on. The sun comes up over Prague. People getting up from their beds in two starkly different apartments. A child jumps on his mother as she stretches. A woman opens the blinds to her room, letting the light shine in on a series of paintings. A man pours a pail of water over his head, a woman puts on mascara, another hands orange juice to her son. We cut to a very different breakfast table in Japan and then another in India. Then some of these people we have seen waking up leave their houses. We see them making their way to work in Japan, in Russia, in Istanbul, in America and Europe. Finally, over the music we hear a male voiceover saying, “The most important part of any business walks through the front door every day. Will they be ready? Ready to have ideas? To build relationships. To help customers and invent new products? Ready to make a difference? They will, if they have the right software. People ready software. Microsoft. Software for the people ready business.” Through the course of this narrative, we see these same people we have tracked through the morning arriving at work and starting their day. The word ’software’ arrives first as a man opens his laptop. The signature line ‘Software for the people ready business,’ is superimposed over the Japanese businessman at his computer. The last screen has the Microsoft logo and the url microsoft.com/peopleready. The print ads (4 executions) show groups of co-workers in different work settings and reinforce the point that people and their imaginations make businesses run - and that software enables this.

What works:
This spot is artwork and it captures our attention. Every frame has been labored over and every shot purposefully conveys a mood. The spot achieves universality by literally roaming the planet and capturing the morning experience in almost every continent. Thus whether you are viewing this from Peoria, Prague or Pusan you will feel the combination of weariness, anticipation and beginning that each morning brings. The basic insight in the spot is both obvious and one that many businesses ignore: at the end of the day, business is about people. If you support them and they are productive, your business may be successful. If you do not, you will not be successful. Although not Tivo-proof, this spot certainly provides some intrinsic value as entertainment through gorgeous cinematography and stark visuals.

What Doesn’t:
Regular readers of this advertising blog know that however much we appreciate the execution and aesthetic merits of an ad, our ratings are based on two criteria:

1. Will the ad increase sales?
2. Will the ad build the brand and increase the value of brand equity?

Ads that fail to do either of these two things cannot succeed, no matter how beautiful they are. And therein lies the problem with this new, $500 million dollar Microsoft campaign. It will not increase sales of Microsoft products and it does not build the brand because the basic message is neither ownable by Microsoft nor uniquely linked to the Microsoft brand. Here are the problems with this spot by the numbers:

1. No Reason for Being - The fundamental issue with this advertising is that we are not exactly sure why it exists and what it is supposed to be doing. Is it image advertising? Category advertising? Corporate advertising? We don’t know. As Ad Age points out, this advertising is driven by the same insight that is driving IBM’s new strategy: that the focus of CEOs for information technology will be to drive growth rather to cut costs. That means that companies will be more focused on how technology drives creativity, productivity and empowers people. This shift in focus works well for IBM because they spent over a decade reincarnating themselves as a consulting company. Microsoft is not perceived as this sort of organization and has not changed the underlying products or organization to accomodate this new advertising strategy.
2. Not Persuasive - After watching this spot and seeing the print elements of the campaign, we agree that people move businesses and that software needs to be focused on unlocking their creativity. But we do not believe that Microsoft is particularly good at doing this and we don’t have any warmer feelings about Windows, Office or any other product.
3. Weak Branding - Microsoft does not show up until well past the halfway point in this :60 second spot. We assume that the $500 million being spent on this campaign will ensure that everyone eventually makes the brand connection, but we would prefer to see stronger branding.
4. Targeting - Microsoft also did not think clearly about whom they are targeting. To the extent that this advertising will change anyone’s mind (and we do not believe it will), it should be most appealing to CEOs or HR Directors. But are they actually making the purchasing decisions for Microsoft products? It seems unlikely. If this spot is targeted at the ordinary worker, then we know it won’t work because ordinary workers never get what they want when it comes to technology. If Microsoft is really targeting chief technology officers, then they must believe that those folks are much, much different as a group than they were just a few years ago. That they are much more aesthetic and less quantitative. We don’t believe it.
5. Media Strategy - If Microsoft is trying to persuade the entire world that they understand people and are uniquely able to provide software to empower creativity, then they have chosen the right media strategy. (Even though we do not find the message persuasive.) But is that the most effective way to build the brand or increase sales? Would one message even play to consumers, corporate IT decision makers and business leaders as well as programmers, educators and everyone else? It seems unlikely. The huge media buy seems like a waste of money and a lack of targeting.

It is easy to pick apart advertising, but harder to offer positive suggestions. So we would offer just one to Microsoft: learn from X-Box. Instead of trying to convince the world that Microsoft is a great company with a vision by screaming it out (however elegantly), show one small product that improves peoples lives in some way. And use that as the metaphor for what you can do as a company. As we have said in the past, we know brilliant, creative people who work at Microsoft. But most people do not and public perception of the company is more driven by Windows security gaps, slow Office applications and memories of the blue screen of death. So in a fundamental way, this campaign argues with people’s perceptions.

Branding Bottom Line:
Spending the $500 million through the Gates Foundation would have done more for Microsoft’s brand.

Brand: Microsoft
Execution: TV

Brand: Microsoft
Execution: Print
Link: Coming Soon
Target: IT Managers
Reviewer: Paul Koulogeorge

Reviewer Profile: Paul is Vice President of Marketing for EB Games, former Director of Marketing at Coca-Cola and former marketing strategist with Kraft. Click Here for more info on Paul.

Rating: ****

What Works:
Dinosaurs. Talk about breaking through the clutter. These adds are running in the Wall Street Journal and every major business publication. I assure you there are NO OTHER ads featuring dinosaurs, no less dinosaurs working in an office setting. Additionally, these are the cheapest looking dinosaur costumes and settings that you’ve ever seen. That also grabs your eye. It isn’t a slick ad, it is all about function.

Microsoft Office has only one competitor…older versions of Microsoft office. They’ve seen the enemy and it is themselves. They can’t criticize Microsoft but they can, subtly, dig at those people who still use Office 2000.

Additionally, they use real world situations featuring these very cheap dinosaur costumes. One features a dinosaur who accidentally sends sensitive data to all his (or is it a her dinosaur?) coworkers. The pictures set up the situation and the copy explains how the latest version of Office would have prevented this mistake. Brilliant. Real world problem solved…but you need to upgrade!!!

Unlike the silly Microsoft Corporate campaign “Your Potential, Our Passion” these ads address real issues and shows real solutions. That approach should build the brand and sales!

Added Bonus, Kids love dinosaurs. I was reading the Wall Street Journal (the least kid friendly periodical around) and when I turned the page to the Microsoft ad and my nieces eyes lit up…”Look Dinosaurs.” Also, who hasn’t once described their co-worker as a dinosaur.

What Doesn’t:
Not much doesn’t work. I would say the one risk in the campaign is does it make the IT department software decision maker feel ridiculed? No one wants to be perceived as a dinosaur. In fact, since everyone uses Microsoft Office do they risk insulting all current users? I’m guessing no. None of the situations involve the IT department so they may laugh at all the problems caused by the dinosaurs. Additionally, the ads are playful so all the current users should look at the dinosaurs as funny spokespeople who have a solution to their real problems.

An additional risk is does the cheap looking and cheap looking dinosaur make the product seem cheap? Again, I’m guessing no. Everyone has used this product so they know about its quality. If this was a new high-end product I wouldn’t recommend going cheap but this is a product we all know and use everyday.

Branding Bottom Line:
The cheap and simple Microsoft Office print ads win the day by using eye catching imagery to solve an everyday problem. It is believable and memorable. This campaign should build the brand by adding some fun to the product and should build sales by pointing out
the problems solved by converting to a newer version of Office!

Brand: Microsoft
Execution: TV and Print
Link: click here
Target: All creative people
Reviewer: David
Rating: *

What Works:
This is gorgeous, touching advertising of the type that wins awards. It is empowering and uplifting. The execution in TV and print spots is precise and beautiful.

What Doesn’t:
Unfortunately, this campaign does absolutely nothing for the brand. First, the proposition is hazy. “Microsoft powers your passion” - something like that. Nobody can argue that Microsoft powers nearly everything - but are we happy about it? Or do we have the sense of a large company giving us things we don’t really need (like Word getting more complex and slower) and exposing us to dangers (virus, hackers, worms, etc.) and generally stifling innovation.

I am not suggesting that this is the true Microsoft. Some of the coolest people I know work there. But starting from the proposition that the mega-brand Microsoft is behind our potential is arguing with the consumer (who doesn’t believe this right now) - and good brands do not argue with the consumer.

There is another Microsoft - an innovator, a company willing to take big risks on the future. But we don’t see that Microsoft in this campaign. Instead, we get The Truman Show - a vision of an idealized world that Microsoft would like us to live in which just reminds us more why we think they are Big Brother.

It doesn’t have to be this way. I’ll give you a great example of where Microsoft has gotten it right. Look at X-Box. The following they have built for that machine is among the most hardcore, geekiest, down-and-dirty real gamers. Exactly the people who in other walks of life hate them and use Macs. But Microsoft presented a clean proposition there - a better system dedicated to real gamers. And they actually used their hard-core enthusiasts to tailor this campaign (one of our trainers is the VP of Marketing for EB Games and has seen the X-Box group at work).

The rest of the boys in Redmond could take a lesson from this. Don’t be broad and vague and dreamy. Show me a vision of the future that is specific and believable. Commit to something that will improve my life. Make the promise. Then fulfill it. Then perhaps I’ll start believing that you support my vision.

DISCLAIMER: Although I think Mac’s are great I don’t own a single one. I am a Microsoft user.

Branding Bottom Line -
Only reminds us what we don’t like about the brand. Can it.