Well, at least it's honest (to a degree - IE9 might still be worthless, but I wouldn't know), and it's kind of hard to hype a line of products that everyone knows is terrible.
Still, kind of pathetic. Microsoft is supposed to be a tech titan, and instead of being successful in the competitive marketplace, they were able to get away with this for over a decade. Apparently IP monopolies don't always promote quality and efficiency - golly gee, who knew?
Is this a real commercial? If so, kudos to Microsoft. WTH are you talking about Gene, "Is this the best they can do?" This is inconceivably self-deprecating for a major brand to do. I still don't believe this is a real commercial. But if it is, my hats off to Microsoft.
(To be clear, I'm not congratulating IE, I'm congratulating their courage with this ad.)
The difficulty I'm having seeing your point is this: confessional courage is fine if they were at an AA meeting or with a minister. But is it really good marketing?
Once upon a time, Internet Explorer was notable chiefly for being head and shoulders above Netscape. Then along came Firefox, and within a couple of years only demon-possessed illiterates were using it.
What I don't like about IE9 is that the Windows 7 taskbar treats each tab as if it were a separate window. Hence clicking on the IE icon does not bring up IE; you have to hold ALT or select a thumbnail.
I remember the year I decided I didn't need to have a Mac to save money, much to the chagrin of my militantly pro-Apple family (to give an idea of what I mean one of my parents had an original IPod), and was occasionally using I.E. 7. The horror stories I could tell you..
Ancaps often declare, "All rights are property rights." I was thinking about this the other day, in the context of running into libertarians online who insisted that libertarianism supports "the freedom of movement," and realized that this principle actually entails that people without property have no rights at all, let alone any right to "freedom of movement." Of course, immediately, any ancap readers still left here are going to say, "Wait a second! Everyone owns his own body! And so everyone at least has the right to not have his body interfered with." Well, that is true... except that in ancapistan, one has no right to any place to put that body, except if one owns property, or has the permission of at least one property owner to place that body on her land. So, if one is landless and penniless, one had sure better hope that there are kindly disposed property owners aligned in a corridor from wherever one happens to be to wherever the...
In this paper , Hoppe, Hülsmann, and Block (HHB) make their ethical case against fractional reserve banking (FRB) based on the fact that "two individual owners cannot be the exclusive owner of one and the same thing at the same time." They then posit that since fractional reserve bank notes creates multiple titles or claims to the "same" gold, they are inherently fraudulent. In analyzing this claim, the first thing we will have to do is to turn it into a remotely sensible claim. No one who deposits money at a bank thinks they are entitled to the same money back. What they want, when they go to get their money out, is the same amount of money back. What a gold-backed fractional reserve note comprises is a claim to a certain amount of gold, not certain particular pieces of gold. I hope that change to their argument is uncontroversial! So their complaint comes down to this: if a bank issues pieces of paper that allow the bearer to claim a certain amount of gold...
Wow. Just wow.
ReplyDeleteI'm always surprised when I look at Google Analytics and see there are still people using IE.
ReplyDeleteI can't believe that's a real commercial. Ohhhh my...
ReplyDeleteWell, at least it's honest (to a degree - IE9 might still be worthless, but I wouldn't know), and it's kind of hard to hype a line of products that everyone knows is terrible.
ReplyDeleteStill, kind of pathetic. Microsoft is supposed to be a tech titan, and instead of being successful in the competitive marketplace, they were able to get away with this for over a decade. Apparently IP monopolies don't always promote quality and efficiency - golly gee, who knew?
Is this a real commercial? If so, kudos to Microsoft. WTH are you talking about Gene, "Is this the best they can do?" This is inconceivably self-deprecating for a major brand to do. I still don't believe this is a real commercial. But if it is, my hats off to Microsoft.
ReplyDelete(To be clear, I'm not congratulating IE, I'm congratulating their courage with this ad.)
The difficulty I'm having seeing your point is this: confessional courage is fine if they were at an AA meeting or with a minister. But is it really good marketing?
DeleteYes, Bob, it's real. And I don't know, but all of the other commenters seem to get my point.
ReplyDeleteOnce upon a time, Internet Explorer was notable chiefly for being head and shoulders above Netscape. Then along came Firefox, and within a couple of years only demon-possessed illiterates were using it.
ReplyDeleteWhat I don't like about IE9 is that the Windows 7 taskbar treats each tab as if it were a separate window. Hence clicking on the IE icon does not bring up IE; you have to hold ALT or select a thumbnail.
I remember the year I decided I didn't need to have a Mac to save money, much to the chagrin of my militantly pro-Apple family (to give an idea of what I mean one of my parents had an original IPod), and was occasionally using I.E. 7. The horror stories I could tell you..
ReplyDelete"I didn't need to have a Mac to save money"
DeleteYes, it is possible to save money even without a Mac! :-)