▲ 62 points
back
64 comments
The funny thing about this commercial, marketing-wise, is that it isn't making fun of older IE versions. It's making fun of us geeks who hated older IE versions.
The primary message is: "you geeks who hated us, give us a chance!" But I get the feeling the subtext is more important: "normal non-geeky people have always preferred IE, and now all you normal non-geeky people have an excuse to ignore all those silly geeks who tell you to uninstall it."
Edit: one other thing -
This commercial has the anti-IE guy trying to "uninstall" older versions of IE. It looks like he's dragging the icon to the trash bin. That bit was interesting primarily because, as I recall, you couldn't uninstall IE before Windows 7, particularly not by doing anything as simple as dragging it to the trash bin. I guess he's just doing what a lot of us have done: trying to make sure an unsuspecting family member doesn't just have the icon there to reflexively click on.
We're doing that geeky thing now where we're delving too deep into minutiae, but:
> as I recall, you couldn't uninstall IE before Windows 7, particularly not by doing anything as simple as dragging it to the trash bin.
Sorta, kinda. In XP, you could "uninstall" IE by going to the "Windows features" part of Add/Remove Programs. This would make IE no longer the default browser on the user's system, and make it slightly harder to access, but it was still there.
Dragging the desktop icon to the recycle bin would trigger some warning I don't clearly recall, but would still leave IE as the default web browser on the user's system, available at the top of the Start menu.
The best way to remove IE on older machines was to re-purpose the icon to open Firefox or Chrome.
The best way to remove IE is to install Linux :-)
From the rest of the page (references to PBR, fixies, moustaches etc.) it appears to be attacking hipsters and accusing you of being hipster if you still don't like IE, because it's not "cool". So they're implying IE has always been good, it just went out of fashion amongst a certain set of people, (that no-one on the internet seems to like).
>"It's making fun of us geeks who hated older IE versions."
It's also making fun of people who are still ranting about browser wars in the post-LoLcat era, e.g. all those people who used IE to download other browsers.
At a deeper level it reminds me of the WP7 "Really?" campaign by the contrast it draws between obsessive behavior in regards to technology and life away from the screen. It even shares the motif of a woman in bed being ignored.
Well, maybe. There is a very clear admission that yes, IE5 did drive us crazy. At least, that's how I see it.
I know that the article says this is a comedy website, but are they also trying to be "funny" on their testimonials page. (Capitalisation is direct copy/paste, I'm not shouting! )
> "IE9 OFFERS FUNCTIONALITY THAT'S NOT AVAILABLE IN ANY OTHER BROWSER."
Like, lack of developer tools and the requirement to buy a new operating system?
> "IE9 is one of PCWorlds best products"
That reminds me why I haven't shopped at PCWorld ever.
> "INTERNET EXPLORER 9 TAKES THE BROWSER SECURITY CROWN."
Just no. This one won't even hard to disrepute.
> Chrome sucks, freezes on FB, back on IE and it seems to be great! #Chrome #FB #IE9
This is in the testimonials page by some randomer with 5 followers. https://twitter.com/#!/NimanthiR
* -------- Edit Update ----------
Yeah, everything on their testimonials page is totally a bag of lies. I actually thought whoever made the site was trying to be serious, but then I saw they quoted Engadget.
> "The new IE is way better than Chrome, especially in terms of safety. You are only fooling yourself to stay loyal to one browser"
Engadget have never said this. The article they link to for this testimonial is actually,
http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/06/microsoft-expands-interne...
Dig through the comments to that post and you'll find the quote on page four: http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/06/microsoft-expands-interne...
That's one damn misleading citation from Microsoft. Almost makes you think they couldn't find a decent one...
IE 8+ has dev tools. They are not designed very well but they provide a lot of the functionality of Chrome/Fx.
Sorry, IE has had built in dev tools for ages. The current dev tools in IE9 are better than those shipped with Firefox, and on par with Chrome's. (and I say this as someone who's been using Firefox as a primary browser for years).
They should be making fun of IE9, too. It's about 2 years behind in HTML5 specs adoption, maybe more.
And here's the evidence, if anyone's interested.
aren't a bunch of those unsupported features in draft mode?
shhhhhh don't try to break the narrative of microsoft writing terrible software
The reason developers hate working with IE isn't because they're teenage nerds with OCD. Why are they trying to ostracize the very people who are responsible for converting the home market to other browsers? It's not like soccer moms and CIOs are the audience for this video. And why focus on selling IE9/Windows 7 when IE10/Windows 8 is around the corner?
Well, I'd love to do that (upgrade to IE9 and get the magical wonderful experience that no other browser offers). Let's try...oh wait, you mean I need to buy a new version of Windows? Hmm, uh, well, okay then...oh wait, you mean I'd also need to buy a new computer to go with it? Well screw that, I'm staying right here with Opera, Chrome, and FF. Buying a new computer just to pin Pandora seems the tiniest little bit of an overkill - no other browser offers that, indeed.
Yep, you'll have to upgrade your 12-year-old operating system. Positively absurd isn't it?
Editted to elaborate:
It's not upgrading for the sake of upgrading. 12 years may as well be 100 years in the tech sector. Windows XP is end-of-life'd in 2014. Why on Earth would Microsoft release a brand new browser on a dead OS? They're not going to spend another 5 years of time and money on that dinosaur patching security issues for something they haven't even sold in God knows how long. Expecting them to is completely unreasonable. The fact that they've supported us XP users for even this long shows how committed they are.
It's also not upgrading simply because the OS is old. Lots of old things still run fine. Windows XP is not in that class of things. It will continue to have security issues for as long as people are on the platform.
Also, if you're worried about whether you'll be able to eat tomorrow or pay your rent then upgrading your computer and upgrading to IE9 are both very irrelevant to your life right now.
@politician: Because Chrome and FireFox strive for platform independence while Microsoft does not, which allows them to take advantage of Windows-only features and APIs; Some of which may actually be quite useful (like some kind of native DirectX rendering of pages, for example). It does come down to money though. As I said before, they don't have a good reason to support a new browser and its various security fixes on an operating system they're about to stop updating forever.
Do you have a better reason why he should buy new software other than, "because it's old"? Sounds like his current setup does everything he needs it to do right now. I haven't seen any compelling reason why Windows 7 is better than XP for day-to-day use. A lot of people are getting Windows 7 now only because the computers they're running XP on are slowly dying out, and you generally can't buy a new computer with XP.
Come to think of it, I have an entire shop full of all kinds of tools, many of which are more than 12 years old. Should I replace my workhorse power drill? My cylinder hone? My bench grinder? Heck, I've got a 1940's DeWalt radial arm saw with a neat feature -- I can unbolt the motor and flip it over and turn it into a router. Should I replace that with a new thing too?
The choice between (1) 12-year-old operating system and (2) current operating system seems like a no-brainer. But I suspect the choice for some people is between (1) upgrading 12-year-old operating system and (2) paying rent/eating.
Well, y'know, back in the day, we used to say "if it's not broken, don't throw it out." Of course, that was before the current tech boom, where you absolutely must throw away anything that's older than a year (correction: older than two weeks), whether it works or not, else you'd be a social outcast - because the New And Shinier point release Sucks Less, And You NEED It. New iThisOrThat, gotta catch 'em all!
As for that 12-year old operating system I paid for and which I still keep inside of a VM: I'd drop it, but the damn IE just refuses to run anywhere else. And now I'm supposed to shell out for another Win to run alongside that? Yes, I'm aware that's MS's main business model; happiness is not currently required for purchase (IANAL of course).
Edit: I am definitely not facing a choice of food versus W7, that was some other poster; it just seems to me that I don't see that much extra benefit for me from paying MS for a new OS. (and no, XP is not my primary OS; that one was released some months ago)
> Elaboration:
Care to explain why Chrome and Firefox run just fine on XP? It seems to me that every excuse for upgrading the OS is rendered moot by the observation that the two primary competitors have no problem running on XP.
Just call it what it is - an attempt to increase the price of browsers from free to non-free by tying upgrades to the OS.
Meanwhile in the smartphone world, people are complaining that Android apps don't advantage of newer APIs in order to support OSes that are only a few years old.
I'm not sure that's how people think of it, if someone just came up to you and said that your desk is coming up on 5 years and you should replace it, or your car is nearing a decade and you should replace it "just because", I'd be pretty hesitant.
If it's still being supported, why should they? Has it gone stale? Bad case of rust in the networking stack? Or is it just because it would suit Microsoft's business model better if it did rust away?
One of the greatest factors that's been holding MSFT back in recent years has been its need to maintaining this backward compatibility (among other things)..
Sure, with an OS like Windows (which, let’s be honest, much of the world depends heavily on) it's somewhat necessary, but the plug has to be cut somewhere. I’d say in the case of XP that should have been a few years ago, but, at this point, 2014 makes sense as it gives Windows 8 some time to mature in the market before forcing mass enterprise adoption.
This need to maintain backwards compatibility has presented a huge competitive disadvantage for them as players like AAPL, who freely ditches compatibility in favour of performance (and sales) regularly, can produce higher quality products utilizing the latest technological developments.
MSFT seems to have finally realized this (likely in part due to looming threats to its dominance and in part from what appears to be a refreshed outlook on product development), and this is for the better.
..And come on, you're really still using XP?
Yes, quite a lot of notebooks (not to mention netbooks) still use XP around here (most were upgraded from Vista); usually not directly exposed to the internet. They're sloooooowly getting replaced with new hardware with W7, but yes, XP is still the predominant OS around here. For the users, "nuke and reinstall" is still faster and cheaper than "buy a new OS, and install"; and there is a significant "screw this, I'm getting a Macbook" crowd amongst those who would consider an upgrade.
As for me, personally - I use XP when I need IE, and then in a limited VM, for as long as needed; so the scenario of always-on, open-to-internet XP box doesn't apply. (I would still be using XP today - but for a new laptop with Vista and no upgrade options some time ago: it drove my frustration high enough to leave Windows as my primary OS altogether.) So yes, I use XP in a limited way, if I need it.
Well if IE is so important to you and you're running it virtually anyways, might as well jump up a couple generations and grab the Windows 8 Consumer Preview:
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-8/consumer-previe...
I have to say that in using it over the past few weeks as essentially my primary OS I'm really liking it and actually think MSFT's heading in a good direction with it. Plus you get IE10.
>> you mean I need to buy a new version of Windows?
+1
you mean I need to buy a version of Windows?
Redefine the competition as IE6, IE7, and IE8 and suddenly IE9 is king of the browsers.
What I wonder is, how do "normal" people actually find these sites? Microsoft have these campaigns every now and then, highlighting the capabilities of their new versions, but why would John Smith visit "browserfame.com"?
They tend to run offline campaigns at the same time: some time ago, at IE9 launch, there was a huge promotional campaign trying to credit HTML5 to MS - something like "We're changing the web. Forever." (Gee thanks, but doing that once with IE6 was quite enough) staring at you from every RL advertising space anywhere.
I can't wait until they're making fun of themselves for this fucking horrible ad. The people who hate IE, like koeselitz said, are the tech geeks who know what's wrong with it. I can't imagine a stupid ad like this that rests its merit on childish cat humor and will appeal to much of IE's hate-base. I don't think Microsoft will ever be able to come across as cute and playful no matter how hard they try at this point.
How's the silent browser update from Microsoft coming? Australia and Brazil were lined up for January. Is it making a difference getting all XP users on IE8 and Vista and Win7 users on IE9, and hopefully IE10 later this year.
In this article they also mention the GMailMan ad (to promote Office 365) I followed the link, and found that it was very interesting as a satyre of contextual/personalized advertising.
IE9 is the only browser among safari/chrome/firefox/ie that I can't get to render html5 audio tags, or respect document.createElement('audio').canPlayType tests. Ridiculous.
It will be very interesting to see this strategy applied to, let's say, Windows XP, the Start menu, the WIMP paradigm etc.. when Microsoft is tired of those!
If folks have to use IE, I suppose I'd rather they're using IE9. So I guess I reluctantly support this site?
I've always loved this style of microsoft advertising. nobody else in the industry has this kind of humor.
I like that they include a cute cat as a point of reference, so I can tell how outdated IE9 is by comparing it to Peak Lolcat on Google Trends[0]. I realize this is a bit unfair to IE9, but it's not too far off.
Still not funny.
Does it run on mac/linux?
I spend more time convincing clients to switch over to FF/Chrome to view my work hah!
Just tried downloading IE9 from their site.
It gave me IE8 because I am running XP. HAH.