Is Apple worried by Windows 7?

Is Apple worried by Windows 7?

Summary: Apple's latest set of ads takes more swipes at the PC platform. But is Apple worried by the good press that Windows 7 has received so far and is now shifting attention to bad-mouthing the PC platform?


Apple's latest set of ads takes more swipes at the PC platform. But is Apple worried by the good press that Windows 7 has received so far and is now shifting attention to bad-mouthing the PC platform?

Here's one of Apple's latest offerings called "Top of the Line":

The other ad, called "Surprise" can be found here.

These ads are spoofs of Microsoft's "Laptop Hunter" ads. But what's interesting about these ads is that not only do they not mention price (a point that Apple is weak on) but they don't make any mention Microsoft, Windows or Windows 7.

Windows 7 has enjoyed a lot of positive press over the past few months and it would be a hard uphill slog to try to go against this (not to mention that the release of Windows 7 is still almost two months away). But it is interesting after so many months of trashing Vista than Apple is now focusing on the PC platform rather than Windows. Maybe the Windows 7 brand is too strong to go up against and that Apple realizes this and is changing tactics.

It'll be interesting to see where Apple goes with its ads over the next few months.  With Snow Leopard and Windows 7 coming out over the next few months, both Apple and Microsoft will be jostling for the attention of the buying public (what remains of them).

Expect to see more ads!

Topics: Operating Systems, Apple, Microsoft, Software, Windows

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Apple should be worried, because...

    ..once again Apple will be the big loser in this round. Why don't we wait until both OSes are out for a while, then look at sales figures, ok? We already got the Apple fanboys telling us how SL was the "bestselling software" on Amazon, so I guess they really want to play the numbers game then, I suppose.

    Let's watch...
    • Are we talking sales or profits?

      Apple spends money on OS X to sell hardware - they have since Day 1.

      And they are profitable because of it - enough profits and free cash to
      buy Dell with cash and no loans.

      Vista, however, kinda gave Windows the reputation of a gal in your
      class with the clap. She might have been cleaned up, but the guys are
      still wary of her.

      Since Apple is steaming along quite happily and MS is busting their
      chops to clean up their reputation after Longhorn (remember them?)
      and Vista I don't think Apple is too worried about competition.
      • LAWL. Apple couldn't...

        I dont think Jobs could afford Dell, Dells worth Twice, yes, twice what Jobs is, Dell could buy out Jobs in cash, today.

        They're not even in the same league. Wozniak was a genius, Jobs is a coat tail riding fool who was fired from Apple once.

        Looking at just revenue

        Apple: 32.8B on 39.5B total assets
        Dell: 61.1B on 27.5B total assets

        Again, not even in the same realm, Dell makes 190% as much as Apple does with 66% of the assets.

        You can't buy a company in cash you dont have, Apple doesn't have 60B+ let alone what they would have to pay for the years and years of profits that Dell will make. In your dreams is Apple more than a corner share company.
      • re Are we talking sales or profits?

        The last time I read, M$ makes more money per employee than apple. And MS does much more volume. So Microsoft has a lot more employee's and they make a lot more per employee. So they [Apple] can be trendy and cool all they want, and they can make better stuff than MS. But Steve Jobs and you will always know this. Bill gates Built a company that smokes the one that Jobs built. When it comes to making money. And that will always eat at Steve Jobs and all the mac fanboys. And yes Windows 7 is that good. I have been using it full time since the first beta. It's rock solid and fast. Of course my computer is fast and stable even with Vista. Hand built by me with all very High quality High performance parts.
        Here is the link to the numbers. Google is first and Microsoft is second, at profit per employee. And no one is even close after that.

        M$ 91,00 Employees, 194,297 profit per employee

        Apple 32,000 Employees, 151,063 per employee.

        These Numbers are from 2008 with vista as their operating system. Apple can steam along all they want bub. But They are not even in the same league as Microsoft. And when Microsoft decides it's time to bust their chops and clean up their reputation, they have the resources to do it. There is only one thing Apple can do now, Keep running the negative ads LOL.
    • % Snow Leopard Sales will dwarf Vista 2.0

      Well of course Vista 2.0 sales will be a bit higher than Snow Leopard, but percentage wise, FAR more people will be updating Macs than Windows.

      Windows just can't keep up with the major updates of Snow Leopard, Vista 1.0 was 4 years behind OSX Tiger when it was released, now Vista 2.0 is 6 years behind Snow Leopard.

      Do you even realize the features we are talking about? Windows users won't see most of this for a decade or more. Educate yourself:
      • Dream on

        Snow Leopard adds less tangible functionality than did SP2 for XP, not to mention the changes from XP to Vista and from Vista to 7.
        Lester Young
      • LOL - man that's funny - nt

      • When will Apple get some important features people actually care about?

        Like being able to play games, like being able to install OSX on any hardware and like making an Apple computer less then over priced. Not many people could care even a little about the other features untill Apple fixes whats really broken.
        • Games, Hardware and Price

          Which games would those be? You mean like World of Warcraft, The
          Sims, Spore and most of the other top titles? Oh yeah, that's right,
          they all support Mac OS X out of the box. :) Macs play games.

          Which price would you be talking about? Last time I checked, a new
          Mac could be had for $599.


          As for the hardware, why do I care if I need a Mac to run the OS? This
          allows Apple to better manage and integrate the drivers so that we
          don't run into compatibility issues like Windows.

          Quit recycling 10-year-old arguments and face the facts. Macs
          compete point-for-point with PCs. It really just comes down to OS
          preference these days. Use what works best for you.

          There are plenty of things my Mac can do that my PC cannot or cannot
          do as elegantly (iMovie, Mac Mail, iCal, Quicklook, Expose, Spaces . . .)
          That is why I am a Mac user. :)
          • Its not a ten year old argument.

            When I had a mac then I could play more games!

            The point is most games do not come out on the mac and if you cant see that then there is no point showing you. Yes there are some but then there are some Linux games too.

            Bear in mind a 599 dollar mac will not stand up well against a PC for the same price especially not for games!

            Wine and cedega give very poor performance when it comes to games either so its not really a good option over running windows native.

            I would disagree that mac mail is better than windows mail or that expose is better than Aero especially in windows 7 but its realy personal preference.
          • More Game devs are starting to develop

            their games for the OSX platform. Honestly do you think that game devs want to develop for a platform when it had just a few percentage points in market share. Now that it is getting up around 10 percent or so of market share game devs are starting to develop for OSX. Honestly if you were a game dev would you develop your game for linux that holds 1% of Market Share on a good day? Not likely. Gaming is not a limitation of the OS, it is whether or not Game devs can justify developing their game for that OS and get a return on their investment.

            I would argue that a $599 computer regardless of brand is not going to be a good gaming machine on any platform. A $599 computer usually has integrated Graphics controller, and typically does not have a dedicated graphics card. **Exception you may be able to custom build a sub $1000 machine that handles games pretty well.

            So overall it really comes down to preference and how much someone is willing to pay for their computing experience. Although I must say that Gaming on computers is starting to dwindle. Don't get me wrong I love playing WAR, WoW, Oblivion, Guild Wars, and whole host of other games. but the shelves of games at the local stores are dwindling. At most I would be lucky to find a 4x5 foot display case of Games of computers, and much of what is there has been out for a long time.

            Yes emulators to make games work suck.
          • More Game devs are starting to develop

            Quote: **Exception you may be able to custom build a sub $1000 machine that handles games pretty well

            Can you build a mac yourself and customize it to run games well under $1000? the answer is absolutely not. With a PC you absolutely can.
          • same song and dance, but youre blindfolded.

            For 599$ I can build a machine that will run wow at 90 FPS at peak server times. Crysis at 60 while running Photoshop. Don't talk about integrated graphics, it's not going to happen. Minimum 8600GTX, the same speed proc, more memory and a case you get to pick. Apple can't touch it, why do you think they're still focusing on the worn out 'viruses, blah blah blah' routine?

            And to top it off the same thing thats been killing windows user for 5 years, social engineering, is now available on the 'virus, blah blah blah' free OSX platform.

            So after failing pwn2own for, what, the last 3 years Apples in a tough spot, they can't compete price-wise (when you buy an apple you're getting the exact same quality hardware as a Dell but paying 2 times more), they can't compete in security (see; Social engineering trumps apple), and they can't compete in style, physical or virtually (See; aero, Coolermaster.)

            So, really what reason is there left to even think about Apple?
          • Custom PC's

            "**Exception you may be able to custom build a sub $1000 machine that handles games pretty well"

            The above quote from a post shows the crux of the debate which Apple hopes no one will understand.
            Apple users are **STUCK** with what Steve Jobs wants them to have; because you *CAN NOT* custom build an apple.
            90+% of computer users out there even if they don't or won't custom build their own computer ***DO*** want the option to do so if they so desire
            If the die hard fan boys would admit it, they also would like the option of custom building an apple; but of course Stevie Boy will NEVER EVER allow that; because that takes the power out of Apple's hands and puts it where it SHOULD BE , in the hands of the users
          • Buried in there was a point . . .

            jdbukis wrote "I would disagree that mac mail is better than windows
            mail or that expose is better than Aero especially in windows 7 but its
            realy personal preference."

            That was my point. The Mac Mini more than holds its own against
            similarly configured PCs. Most of the popular games are now released
            for both Windows and Mac, many times in the same box. So,
            fundamentally the argument is one of personal preference. What OS
            works better for you?

            The fact that you mention Wine and cedega demonstrates that you
            still are missing the point. Nobody wants to run a kludge. Mac games
            are built for the Mac and run out of the box. There is no advantage
            for Windows here.
          • mac mini

            I bought a mac mini and installed windows 7 to use as a media centre pc. apple has nothing to compare to windows media centre.

            I will be trialing the new intel atom/nvidia ion setup to see how it handles media centre as they are less than half the price, better power consumption and smaller form factor.

            Things change rapidly in it. I can't wait till next year.
          • Let's compare shall we?

            This is what I just purchased for just under $1800...

            tHP HDX18t Premium Series Notebook PC
            ? Genuine Windows Vista Home Premium with Service Pack 1 (64-bit)
            ? Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo Processor P8800 (2.66 GHz, 3 MB L2 Cache, 1066MHz FSB)
            ? 6GB DDR3 System Memory (2 Dimm)
            ? FREE Upgrade to 500GB 7200RPM SATA Hard
            ? 1GB Nvidia GeForce GT 130M - For DDR3 Memory
            ? 18.4" diagonal High Definition HP Ultra BrightView Infinity Display (1920x1080p)
            ? Lightscribe Blu-Ray ROM with SuperMulti DVD+/-R/RW Double Layer
            ? Webcam + Fingerprint Reader with HP Imprint Finish (Fluid)
            ? Intel Next-Gen Wireless-N Mini-card with Bluetooth
            ? HP Color Matching Keyboard
            ? Extra 8 Cell Lithium Ion Battery
            ? Targus Carrying Case

            That's under $1800 INCLUDING TAX.

            Price it for the Mac and tell me what it would cost. I'll assume your lack of response means you know you'd look like a fool trying to compare.
            A Gray
          • Yeah Let's compare!

            Well I took your Specs on to the HP site and made it more comparable
            to the Mac. For one, Apple does not offer a crippled version of Mac
            OS X. It would compare to Vista Premium Ultimate so I made that
            correction. HP doesn't offer the the faster 2.8 Ghz or even 2.66 GHZ
            you chose with the same 6Mb of L2 cache Apple has. I didn't add the
            extra battery but did upgrade to the long life battery since apples
            come with a battery rated for 8 hour on one charge that is able to be
            recharged up to 1000 time instead of the standard 200 to 300.

            I did find it interesting that HP didn't list battery ratings on their site.
            I had to choose either a 6 cell or a 8 cell battery. How does that help
            me decided? All apples come with the backlit keyboard. Apple's is
            also ambient light sensing, so it automatically adjust to low light
            areas. I could not find the equivalent to the Macbook Pro's Multi-
            touch track pad for using gestures similar to the Iphone's.
            I tried to find info on whether the HP screen was LED but its not
            mentioned. Apple's is so it comes on immediately on wake up.
            Apple comes with a audio out that doubles as a Digital Optical out and
            a Audio in doubles as an optical as well that I have used with Garage
            Band to record a quick Guitar Idea. I've even recorded old tapes into it
            to burn to CDs. They make really difficult to compare since they are
            vague about things like, which firewire. they list just IEEE 1394 which
            would be the old 400 Mbps instead of the IEEE 1394b that is on the
            Macbook Pro rated at 800 Mbps. Bluetooth 2.1 + EDR (Enhanced Data
            Rate) is included with Apple. HP does offer Blue Ray but since their
            site informs you that the cpu is dedicated to playing the B.R disc and
            to close all programs first. and some advanced content wont work, I
            don't want it yet.

            On graphics the Macbook Pro comes with both an integrated chip and
            a discrete chip, the former providing excellent graphics for daily task
            and maintaining great battery life, while the other is for more
            demanding task like Video editing and Games. The switch is

            I could go on but I don't want to get run off the site for these long
            post. I will add the fact that the Pro weighs only 6.6 lbs compared to
            HP's 8.82 lbs, HP has 30-Days Free Limited Software, 1-year limited
            hardware, While Apple offer 90 Day phone support and free support in
            the Apple retail stores at the Genius Bar. Also the seamless
            integration of the iLife suite for managing music, photos, editing and
            uploading video, making web sites, authoring DVDs and even making
            music is magical and out of the box.

            You can do Video Chats with up to 4 users in iChat,Spotlight does
            intellegent searches across the computer including mail and inside
            PDFs. You can even print to a PDF or backup with Time machine that
            can find and pull past files into the present. I actually backup now!

            Upgrading you HP to include backup software, Photography software,
            DVD Burning Software, and the optional System Disc that the Apple
            comes standard with. This computer is up to over $2300 before
            taxes. Some features can't be duplicated or compared, like the
            Unibody construction or the magsafe connector even being able to
            connect to Microsoft Exchange with not additional fee with Snow

          • First up...

            Snow Leopard compares with Home Premium... Not Ultimate. Ultimate includes Full Windows Domain and Active Directory integration as does Vista Business. Snow Leopard doesn't. Period.

            Multi-touch support? Is that all you have? Honestly? A backlit keyboard? Give me a break. Ok.. I am sure multi-touch is a cool gizmo, but it doesn't make any real difference if I can use a normal mouse, which most of us would rather do anyway!

            Macs don't offer Blu-Ray. This one is kinda huge. Way more so than multi-touch or a backlight on the keyboard. I thought Macs were supposed to be good with video? Guess not.
            I can author blu-ray discs on my Vista Premium machine....why can't you?

            Another point... "Seamless" integration of photo management. I have experienced this. The macbook I bought and connected to my Windows Network tried to import 1TB of photos into the macbook with the 160GB hard disk without first asking if I WANTED to import them. It was "Seamless", and I couldn't even stop it. I had to wait until it ran out of space, because it wouldn't let me turn it off and the battery couldn't be removed. (Nice Design) Then, after removing the files and rebooting, it still had links to them in its iPhoto library and they were no longer on the hard drive... also "Seamless". Several hundred could not find file errors later... and it was returned to Apple for a Vista Machine with Photoshop.

          • Dumb squared...

            At least you can install some Linux on that for free and get some reliable use out of that fine hardware.