Re: Apple Has Really Jumped The Shark This Time

On 2024-05-11 15:05:19 +0000, Rich said:

In comp.misc BungleBob <bunglebob@thejungle.com> wrote:

On 2024-05-11 01:56:43 +0000, John McCue said:

follow-ups trimmed to: comp.misc
In comp.misc Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

Seems its new ad, showing a pile of musical instruments and other artistic equipment being destroyed and replaced with an Ipad, has really pissed off many in the creative community.
 <https://www.computerworld.com/article/2099740/apples-worst-ad-ever.html>

 I saw the ad but did not understand it, then I heard how
people hated it but not why.  I did think it was real dumb.
 Anyway, thanks for the post, at least I understand what it
was trying to say :)  And yes, I can see why many Apple
users were upset.  Many like to be thought of as creative
and destroying the tools they would like to use would be
upsetting to them.

 The copncept of the advert is basically that the iPad can (if you want
it to) replace any/all of those other objects - you can use the iPad to
make music, paint images, do animations, etc.

 I did not see the ad itself until after reading the complaint reports.
Hunting down a playable video and watching it, knowing full well the
intended concept, the ad itself fell flat on its face anyway.  There
was no connection made by the ad to the actual intended concept.  It
was an interesting CGI animation of crushing a lot of things, and then
an ipad appeared.  So even without the whiners the ad agency really
missed the mark on conveying their intended meaning.

Literally, all those objects are compressed down into one iPad ... hence the meaning: one iPad can do what all those seperate things can do (if you want to of course).

The whiners are simply a bunch of brainless morons with nothing better
to do trying to get their 2secs of fame

 From the very long HN comments thread on the ad, it appears that a
significant number of the whining creatives actually thought the ad was
showing a real physical press crushing actual physical objects.  There
were numerous comments from folks complaining about how it was such a
waste to crush "so and so favorite item" instead of donating it to an
underprivlidged school or "low on the econimic totem pole foreign
country".  Other comments were of the form of "so sad to crush an X of
such good condition when few X's of that 'nick are left in the world".
This one was often in relation to the video game in the middle that was
"crushed" early on in the ad.  These folks thought they were seeing
actual physical objects being destroyed before there eyes, and could
not separate fantasy from reality sufficient to recognize that the
entire ad was well done CGI.  I suspect a lot of the whiners are also
in the same group that thought they were watching real physical objects
being crushed to nothing.

Probably further prove that "creatives" don't use their logical side of their brain very much.  ;-)
Most adverts require numerous takes and scenes, so if it had been real, they would likely have had to destroy hundreds of the same objects. Just getting those multiple versions of the same object in the exact same positions for continuity would be pretty much impossible, let alone getting them to follow the same path when the crusher is operating.