On the left, Microsoft has television ads which compares the Surface Pro hybrid tablet PC to Apple’s iPad and MacBook. On the right, Apple has a series of television ads which tell you wonderful things you can do with your iPhone, iPad, and Mac. The two ad campaigns are as different as their respective companies.
Tit For Tat For Snark
Microsoft’s television commercials highlighting the benefits of a Surface Pro over an iPad and MacBook Air are visually compelling.
The Surface Pro does what the iPad cannot and does what the Mac cannot. Therefore, ipso facto, Surface Pro is better than either an iPad or a MacBook Air.
The problem here is typical Microsoft.
The Surface Pro is a hybrid device, which is more notebook than tablet, though it tries to be both. Based on sales vs. the Mac and iPad, Surface Pro hasn’t caught on with buying customers as much as it has with TV watchers who love a little snark.
The comparison is a false comparison. As a tablet, Surface Pro is terrible; too heavy, too expensive, does not have tablet optimized applications, and so on. As a notebook, it’s quite well tricked out, but also expensive.
How does Microsoft’s ad campaigns compare to Apple’s recent and entertaining iPhone television commercials featuring Justin Timberlake and Jimmy Fallon?
All the iPhone television commercials do in 30-seconds is to show a viewer new and usable features, including Health, options to make phone calls from multiple devices, text with your voice (avoiding words that are difficult to spell), view 3D maps, slow motion video, time-lapse video, image stabilization, and more.
The differences are obvious. Microsoft is in to making comparisons where comparisons should not exist (apples to oranges), while Apple is in to demonstrating useful functionality in an entertaining and effective way.
Is it any wonder why Apple leads the mobile revolution while Microsoft struggles to find any success beyond Windows and Office, and remains but a footnote among those who manufacture and sell mobile devices?