AdAge asks Gates about Hodgman to ill effect

Don't people know any better by now than to taunt Billy G. with Apple's indubitably (and unintentionally) lovable John Hodgman PC character? Check out this exchange from a recent interview of Gatesy by Advertising Age's Bob Garfield:

AdAge: I want to ask you one more thing: Those Mac ads -- how do you feel about the John Hodgman character?
Gates: I can't comment on someone else's ad.
AdAge: OK ... but he's you.
Gates: Yeah, I'm not gonna comment on someone else's ad.
AdAge: OK, well, Bill Gates, thank you so much for joining us.
(Silence)
AdAge: Can I just have a clean goodbye?
(Silence)
AdAge: OK, can you just say goodbye? Thank you or goodbye or something like that?
Gates: Goodbye. [Oh, and it was curt alright.]

Damn son. We might recommend just pretending you're Justin Long (aka Mac) next time, and see what happens.

[Via digg]

[Zadillo @ Mar 15th 2007 10:45PM]

Generally speaking, I don't think there's anything unintentional about Apple's advertising and marketing. I think there are reasons that they do make the PC character lovable..... the most obvious being that if you made the PC totally unlikable, the commercials would come across as even smarmier, and more directly insulting the people that they are trying to get to "switch". Considering some people feel insulted by the ads anyway, or feel that the Mac character is a jerk, it would be even worse if they just made PC completely unlikeable as well. Ultimately I think the purpose of the ads is to sort of communicate this idea of "Hey, we know what you're putting up with, why not try out a Mac?".... although I don't think they all work like this. But I think the more recent Vista commercial with the bodyguard guy simulating UAC is probably the closest at capturing the actual intentions of the campaign.

[clemonator @ Mar 15th 2007 10:56PM]

Zed the thing is like Vista, OSX has something similar UAC... Maybe not as annoying but it does keep a good lock down on a regular user being able to do things and comes up way too often so the use of the UAC in an ad is a little hypocritical. I find it a good tool to know exactly what applications are trying to do to my system and I appreciate it for what it is.

[Zadillo @ Mar 15th 2007 11:08PM]

It's not really hypocritical, because UAC so far is a more annoying feature, and is more intrusive and prevents more things than what OS X does (and Linux for that matter). It would be hypocritical if OS X's own requirements for a user to enter administrative passwords, etc. was as annoying to OS X users as UAC is to Vista users. This isn't really fanboyism, I've seen tons of comments from many Vista users saying they find it annoying, have disabled it because it bothers them so much, etc. (which is a sign of a bad feature, if it is so annoying that people are disabling it).

[clemonator @ Mar 15th 2007 10:48PM]

Good grief. Why is it so amusing to pick on Bill Gates? It seems society finds it humorous to try and make joke of everyone and everything they do not agree with. The whole "im a mac" ads are poor for one simple reason and that is if you have to put down and otherwise beliddle your competition to show your are “better” then them, how better are you really? I assume we're seeing a bunch of these because they are successful, I am just glad I am part of the group they are obviously not reaching. My opinion on AdAge just got lower due to their tactics.

[matthew House @ Mar 15th 2007 11:12PM]

Why do people "pick on" Bill Gates? Seriously?

I will tell you what...If I have 50 billion dollars right...

and I'm a technology legend...

and the most successful businessman the world has ever known...

I *hope* I can, somehow, get over being the pissy high school wallflower that still feels like he's being picked on by the cool kids. God Almighty...how about...

"Yeah, those are cute. I actually think the PC guy is funnier than the Mac guy."
"Hodgman is a bit chunkier than me."
"I really glad that Apple's ad campaign revolves around our product!"
"I think those are funny! My wife and I get a kick out of them."

There has to be a *million* ways to blow it off and sound like you have a good sense of humor in the process. But no, Bill acts like a petulant teen. And not just this time.

I guess no amount of success will ever make him feel secure.

[jgraham @ Mar 16th 2007 11:49AM]

Comments like "The whole "im a mac" ads are poor for one simple reason and that is if you have to put down and otherwise beliddle your competition to show your are “better” then them, how better are you really?"

Are so poorly thought out it's not funny. Even POSITIVE statements about your product are implicitly 'putting down' the competition because you are likely pointing out a feature you have that the competition doesn't. After all what's the point of advertising 'We're just like everyone else'. Not to mention that almost any statement of negatives could be re-written as a statement of positives and vice versa.

Only a moron would take a semantic difference and try to spin it into "moral high ground".

[BandB @ Mar 16th 2007 5:59PM]

There a straight forward reason why Apple choose a campaign that lean heavy on trashing the competition(not that Mac are competitions to PCs). It is because thats what there potential customers are using. Have you not seen, beer commercials "never heat pasturized like our competitiors", "much better than those hard english things" it's called marketing, no mabey not you or the engadget crowd but it is affective to tell the Grey's anatomy watchers that there is something they think is better then a PC.

[bodie @ Mar 15th 2007 10:50PM]

ohh stroppy cow.

[Vince @ Mar 15th 2007 10:55PM]

hah. That's great. Ad-Age got better than what they deserved. Getting a comment from the CEO on one of their competitors' ads is difficult and pressing him (or her) on it is always dicey. But really, telling Bill Gates, the most powerful man in the world--by some measures, that the PC character from Apple's ads is him was just a stupid thing to do.

[Jt Hollister @ Mar 16th 2007 3:12AM]

Hah! Most powerful man in the world? Funny stuff right there!

[Clayj @ Mar 15th 2007 10:57PM]

Apparently the guy from AdAge didn't know that Bill doesn't like it when you talk about stuff he doesn't want to talk about. Anyone else remember how Bill walked out in the middle of an interview with Connie Chung because she likened his business tactics to a knife fight? (See http://archive.salon.com/people/rewind/1999/07/10/chung/index1.html for more detail.)

FWIW, I used to think the Mac/PC ads were cute... but the latest ad, with the "Agent" (acting like Vista's UAC) is hypocritical at best and outright deceptive at worst. Anyone else realize that Macs make you type in a password whenever you try to install new software or make certain system settings changes? BAD Apple.

[Zadillo @ Mar 15th 2007 11:11PM]

If UAC worked exactly like OS X's requirements for an admin password when installing or making system changes, you probably wouldn't hear so many complaints about it. But it doesn't, so I'm not sure what you find hypocritical about it. Again, this isn't some Mac fanboy thing; you can find plenty of Vista users complaining about how UAC works and has been implemented, and the annoyance of it is the point.

[anon @ Mar 15th 2007 11:14PM]

The ONLY time you are required to verify your privileges is when there is an attempt to change system files. It's very discrete and only occurs when it's prudent.

On the other hand, Vista has attempted to resolve user errors, viruses and trojan horse access by going overboard with security. Do none of you recall the 7 Steps to Delete a Vista Shortcut article?

[Geoffrey Sperl @ Mar 16th 2007 2:24PM]

@Clayj: YOu obviously haven't used OS X and Vista side-by-side.

No, OS X does not request the password any where near the amount of times Vista does.

I had to give Vista permission, twice, while installing a printer with a driver that was installed from the Vista CD! WHY?!? Does the OS not even trust itself?

I only see the password prompt when I'm installing software or accessing sensitive system prefs in OS X - and I don't have to give up my password just to look at my network settings!

No, Vista is paranoid about security. Obviously that was MS's answer to the security issues: Make it damn hard to finish.

[clemonator @ Mar 15th 2007 10:58PM]

Zad not Zed... Sorry m8... no editor here :(

[Finite @ Mar 15th 2007 10:59PM]

I think those (SILENCE) markers may be out of place, because, having listened to the audio for that clip, there was literally no pause between the first and second ask for goodbye.

I suppose I would assume that he was getting up to leave and they wanted to make sure they had it wrapped up before he was gone, based on his slightly hurried exit from the daily show interview. Eh, he's a busy man.

Here's where you can listen to the clip:

http://www.fscklog.com/2007/03/bill_gates_alle.html#more

[Mr. B @ Mar 15th 2007 11:07PM]

...obviously not someone with much interviewing experience.

[mesaboogie @ Mar 15th 2007 11:10PM]

bottomline is: AdAge -> iDiots.

[anon @ Mar 15th 2007 11:24PM]

"I really glad that Apple's ad campaign revolves around our product!"

Even though the PC has dresses and looks generic enough to be Gates, the product Apple is comparing itself to is a personal computer. Sure, and OEM PC will have Windows installed, but that is only half the equation what Apple is contrasting itself to in the commercials. Whether you like Apple or not, I think we all can agree that by controlling the HW and SW you have much higher rate and easier time of creating a more stable system and a more unified user experience.

[Frank Tinsley @ Mar 16th 2007 1:24AM]

Probably pretty hard to feel secure about success when you didn't really work that hard in the first place to get it.

[John @ Mar 16th 2007 6:47PM]

considering that Bill Gates did an interview on the Daily Show, I'd guess that it was not so much the 'feeling picked on' as 'executive knows that responding to ads against his company will give the ads more publicity and doesn't want to make a statement that could end up hurting his company'.

[Zadillo @ Mar 15th 2007 11:14PM]

Also, just to clarify, I currently am using Vista (it came installed on my Sony SZ460), and I fully understand where the complaints about UAC are coming from. I think it's silly to complain about these ads or call them hypocritical when plenty of Vista users are encountering exactly what they are talking about. Again, if UAC worked exactly like it does in OS X, I don't think there'd be so much of a problem. Presumably MS is aware of this, and I don't see any reason why people wouldn't want to see MS improve it, rather than try and worry about Apple's ads or calling them hypocritical or deceptive.

[Clayj @ Mar 15th 2007 11:16PM]

Zadillo: I've been using Vista for quite a while now, and while I initially found the Vista UAC prompts to be a bit annoying, my annoyance level has dropped virtually to zero for a couple of reasons... first, now that my system is fully set up, I find myself doing much less of the stuff that UAC is protecting in the first place, so I see the UAC prompts maybe once a week, when I am tinkering.

Second, and more importantly, the UAC prompts are a *new* thing to most PC users, so of course they're annoyed by them. Those of us who also use Macs realize that UAC prompts are a good thing to have and that if you're using your computer "normally", you will almost never see them... in fact, I see my Vista UAC prompts about as often now as I do on my Macs.

So yes, I do think that the Mac "Agent" ad is hypocritical... it's criticizing Vista for adding a feature that Macs have had for years now, while completely failing to acknowledge that most people will not see UAC when using their computer "normally".

[John Doe @ Mar 16th 2007 12:16AM]

define normally. I'm a power user. I'm seeing the prompt at least a half a dozen times a day to the point that I said fuck it and turned off UAC. For your average home user it may be fine. For moderate to power users its a royal PITA. And in NO way shape or form is it like OS X's implementation either. I've got a MBP and other then adding apps the system is much less in your face about it.
Now that being said I expect more tweaking to occur with SP1 this Fall. Actually I expect a lot of things to change with SP1 this fall and is why when my 30 day activation limit ends I'm dumping Vista for XP until then. (free copy that I've tried on 3 of my systems without activating it.) Vista very much is half baked.

[Shmoe @ Mar 15th 2007 11:20PM]

Sounds like Gates froze like a PC, probably had to hit Ctrl+Alt+Delete

[Lee Gibson @ Mar 15th 2007 11:32PM]

I tell you what. You give me Bill Gates' money, and then you can make fun of me as much as you want.

I have zero sympathy for the man. Not any.

[js @ Mar 16th 2007 12:18AM]

You have zero sympathy for a man who donated billions to third world countries and have the whole world making fun of him?

Even Steve Jobs doesn't donate that much money, not even with his $1/year salary and stock options.

[MacVicta @ Mar 15th 2007 11:37PM]

You are feeling a little hot under the collar - Cancel or Allow?

[Clayj @ Mar 15th 2007 11:39PM]

"Whether you like Apple or not, I think we all can agree that by controlling the HW and SW you have much higher rate and easier time of creating a more stable system and a more unified user experience."

Absolutely correct.

If Microsoft alone made PCs and didn't allow anyone else to run Vista, they'd have a much easier time developing new OSes and updates for their very-limited-in-scope (compared the virtually-infinite variety of PCs we have now) hardware platform. Apple only has to write software that runs on what, 6 or 7 models of computers that vary only by memory, hard drive space, and video card? (I'm talking Mac mini, iMac, Mac Pro, MacBook, MacBook Pro, a few legacy machines.) Let's see Apple modify OS X so that it runs on any PC with an Intel Core* CPU and see how long it takes for something to break.

When you live in the niche, life is easier... but the opportunities are fewer. Unless Apple plans to drive all of the PC makers out of business and can pull that off, Microsoft and Windows will be around for a very, very long time.

[Jeff @ Mar 16th 2007 1:16AM]

@Clayj: "Apple only has to write software that runs on what, 6 or 7 models of computers that vary only by memory, hard drive space, and video card? "

Apple does have the advantage of not having to deal with other crappy hardware manufacturers who pinch pennies and fight against new technologies, about that you're right.

but 6 or 7 machines and a handful of legacy machines? you must be joking.

everything up to the very newest versions of OS X will run on literally hundreds of different configurations, even machines made nearly a decade ago. Apple controls their hardware, yes, but there are many many different technologies from generation to generation, including an ___entire processor architecture change___ from PPC to Intel. (that's a completely different instruction set!) both of which are currently being used and supported.

I don't think you give 'em enough credit.

[Yeah...itsEngadget...sowhat @ Mar 15th 2007 11:42PM]

This man's time is very valuable...so respect his time and don't be an ass.

Boo on AdAge.

[John Doe @ Mar 16th 2007 12:22AM]

Yah right. Gates time is about as valuable as my time on the toilet....LOL I initially typed in Jobs time....both are over hyped IMHO, but at least Jobs has his hands in more of the pies at Apple. Gates? The dude is winding down, and rightly so. I've seen mummies age more gracefully. granted if my company was constantly badgered by the gov for the big M all the time, if my products were getting airtime on news broadcasts about OMG PATCH NOW DOOOOOOOM! If my product had the department of homeland insecurity issuing warnings to update or DOOOOOOOOM! If I was pied in the face. If if if. Its amazing the man hasn't died of a heart attack yet. Stress? Naaaa.

[andrew harrison @ Mar 16th 2007 12:37AM]

you don't know how much Steve Jobs or his family donate to any charity. Maybe he doesn't make a big deal about it at all and donates his money anonymously?

[John Doe @ Mar 16th 2007 12:38AM]

Billions. The funny thing is that realistically its a drop in the bucket for him. Really. Its one thing to donate half your fortune to X or Y. Its another to donate a small fraction. Hell I drop $20 for the food shelves in the area once every couple weeks, but its a drop in the bucket of what I make. Does that make me some great humanitarian? Its all about context. while I have NO doubt that what he is doing is helping people around the world, lets be frank here. Its not like what he's left with is some crapshack in the boonies. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Gates'_house
http://jeffmaurone.typepad.com/metanoya/2004/07/more_on_my_dinn.html
The dude is doing pretty alright for himself. Now I'm not saying he's a bastard for enjoying his money. Far from it. If you got it, flaunt it. However what he's donated is hardly stressing the Gates fortune.

[Deezee @ Mar 16th 2007 12:24AM]

I really don't understand where people get this image of Steve Jobs being "cool" and Bill Gates being a nerd. They're both dweebs!

Steve Jobs probably received just as many (if not MORE) wedgies in school. He probably got beat up just as much. Its so freggin anoying how he thinks he's the Fonz of the computer world.

Theres nothing more pathetic than a nerd that thinks he's cool. And Steve jobs being a prime example.

[cooier @ Mar 16th 2007 12:31AM]

Ha-ha! Bill Gates rulez! And AdAge (suck) does not rule.

[peshue @ Mar 16th 2007 12:51AM]

Considering how misleading Mac ads tend to be I don't blame him for not giving a response. I give MS credit for being fairly honest. Apple's entire marketing scheme is based on half truths.

[sean.boots @ Mar 16th 2007 1:09AM]

I'm glad you give Microsoft credit for being fairly honest. You do bring up a good point: that marketing (to a certain extent, regardless of company) is based on half-truths. But I wouldn't side with microsoft on this one.

"Get the Facts"
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver/facts/default.mspx
at least, the Facts microsoft wants you to get.

[Travis @ Mar 16th 2007 12:56AM]

In my opinion, this is a classic example of people resenting someone who has more than they do. The leader of the pack in any situation is a natural target for criticism and "jokes". I respect Bill Gates for what he has accomplished. And, while some may try to detract from his contributions to society, the fact remains that he DOES contribute.

It has been suggested that Steve Jobs may contribute just as much, merely without seeking the praise of the masses. I very strongly doubt that. Anyone who knows anything about Steve Jobs knows how much he is stuck on himself. If he were a major charity donor, he would make sure the world knew it.

There is no perfect person. Gates, Jobs, and every man alive all have flaws. I just don't consider one of them to be "having more than I do." More power to them. To those who want to trash their accomplishments: let's see you do better. When you do, I will be the first to support you.

Just my $.02.

[bgdc @ Mar 16th 2007 1:18AM]

Guess ole bill takes himself too seriously. Dude, you're worth 50 billion dollars; lighten up. He should embrace it, make fun of himself and act flattered. You're worth 50 bill....50! My god, what an ass he is. Hell, George Bush embraced Dana Carvey mocking him for years; yet Bill, who is worth 50 billion dollars, can't see his PR would be better if he weren't so stuck on himself.

[john @ Mar 16th 2007 1:26AM]

He was on the Daily Show recently and Jon Stewart gave him a little ribbing about PCs being hard to use (I don't think he mentioned Apple), but he got up and walked off the stage abruptly at the end of the interview and stormed off. The man's got a temper.

[AesirX @ Mar 16th 2007 1:46AM]

Im not gonna argue that UAC isnt annoying, but its a godsend compared to the crap notification/sercurity system OSX has going for it. I maintain Macs at work (wouldn't own one of the things), and one day I was assigned with installing updates to a MacBook. The stupid thing forced me to enter the admin password no less than 10 times during the install process. A 10 minute or so update took about an hour because the retarted thing just kept dumbly asking for the password over and over at 10%... 20%... 30%... and there was no way I was just gonna sit there and watch it.

I dont hate Macs, They have a lot going for them, but their UAC equivalent is not one of them. For real inspiration on how to run programs at elevated clearances, MS and Apple should look to Linux for inspiration. Secure, yet not too annoying.

[Janne Curtis @ Mar 16th 2007 10:05PM]

This person is dishonest and has never updated a Mac in his life. A password is only required once as anyone would know if they used a Mac.

[Broadside @ Mar 16th 2007 1:54AM]

Listening to the soundfile the interviewer sounded like a smart arse and a rude prick too. I would have given him short shrift just like Gatesy did. There was no silence, the transcript is mieleading.

I am not a fan of M$ but I am a fan of the wonderful things Bill Gates is doing with his money i.e. charity, disease, Africa etc. Good on him, makes the brutal monopolistic behaviour of Microsoft more palatable when a lot of the money will be used for niceness and not evil.

[keith waddington @ Mar 16th 2007 2:56AM]

He has zero sense of humour. In the common vernacular, he's a jerk. And that's why he has knee-jerk reactions and that's why Windows jerks users around.

That's my jerky opinion any way.

keep smiling.
waddo

[Deezee @ Mar 16th 2007 3:00AM]

Heres a nice vid of Stevie Jobs kissing Bill Gates's ass straight up. Liying to his followers who will believe anything he says of course.

What ever happened to this Steve?

Starting at around 7:20

"If we wanna move forward and see apple healthy and prosper, we have to let go of a few things. We have to let go of the notion that for Apple to win, microsoft has to loose"

"And if others are gonna help us thats great, because we need all the help we can get"

"THE ERA OF SETTING THIS UP AS A COMPETITION BETWEEN APPLE AND MICROSOFT IS OVER"

--Steve Jobs. 1997


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY

[substance12 @ Mar 16th 2007 3:12AM]

I just want Hodgeman to suit up in the Borg outfit. Tell me that wouldn't be money...

[pcbuilderchris @ Mar 16th 2007 4:10AM]

how do these people get interview with gates?

do they contact thier pr Wag?

ill take an interview with gates or ballmer any day

i have some ideas ive been working on for 6 years that i want Micro-soft to take over

[xbit @ Mar 16th 2007 6:14AM]

In the UK, the roles of the PC and Mac are played by a duo of comedians called Mitchell & Webb. Mitchell & Webb are most widely known for their (hilarious) sitcom "Peep Show".

Here's the description of the series from the DVD release:

"Meet Mark and Jeremy. Mark's the sensible one, a working professional with a slightly disconcerting interest in WWII. Jeremy is a lazy waster with half-arsed dreams of becoming a musician but can never get his act together."

So I guess what they're trying to say is that both PCs and Macs are deeply flawed, just in different ways.

[PEZ @ Mar 16th 2007 9:20AM]

I think you have to stop buggin gthe guy about the MS verus MAc thing. Hes basically just a face for MS at this point. I dont see Apple donating their fortunes to finding a cure for anything except the PC. (Hahaha, funny!) at least gates is using his money for good. Curing AIDS.

Take a bite out of that, apple.