Mac History
20 HN mentions · mentioned in 18 months, 2016–2025
1:00 · 6.5M views · Feb 1, 2012
The famous 1984 Super Bowl commercial introducing the Apple Macintosh, directed by Ridley Scott and based on Orwell's novel.
HN mostly references it as a cultural touchstone, either praised as one of the most powerful ads ever or used ironically to criticize Apple's later behavior.
20 comments from Hacker News
All advertising must have these two criteria: 1. Who is this advertisement for? 2. How persuasive is it for that person? Compare and contrast Apple's two other advertising campaigns: the black-and-white dancers for iPod [0], and the 'resistance' 1984 for Macintosh [1]. In the former, the target were people who wanted to have a good time but also highlighted the fashionable white chord that was unique to iPods of the time. It said you could have fun and be cool (if you bought an iPod). In the latter case, the target were people who wanted to be free from soulless computers and express themselves. It said you could have freedom and be unique (if you bought a Macintosh). Now lets compare the newest advertisement. If you are a creator, watching a bunch of the things you like and create destroyed is unsettling. If you like appreciating those creations, then watching a bunch of artwork, games, etc destroyed is unsettling. If you like to preserve things, watching a bunch of well-crafted instruments and technology that last decades destroyed and replaced by a device that barely lasts a few years is unsettling. Every advertisement has one job: Persuade TARGET to do ACTION. Advertising is designed to manipulate your feelings toward this end. This advertisement is not just a flop, but is triggering strong negative feelings in the very target demographic. It became an organic and viral Anti-Marketing campaign for Apple itself. From a marketing perspective I would want to yank and kill th
- The following is based on traditional (television/film/etc) advertising; I am assuming it holds true for internet based advertising. There's some [literal] marketing 101 stuff most people aren't aware of. For large companies the value in marketing isn't really about directly selling you products, but about instilling a positive subconscious perception of a product in your mind. Coke is the classic example. Dominant marketshare, defacto monopoly in many regions, and a loyal customer base. Yet they advertise endlessly and at great cost. The reason is so when you look at a bottle of Coke you don't think 'sugar, heart disease, obese people drink this' but instead 'crisp, cool, refreshing, athletic people drink this'. And it's all subconscious because of course we all consciously know its the former rather than the latter, but advertising can effectively make people do and think things that they might not otherwise. And there is significant research and practice to confirm all of this. Companies aren't just spending out of inertia. This [1] is considered one of the most effective and powerful ads of all-time. It's Apple's 1984 Ad about the first Mac. A 60 second clip with zero information on the product/capabilities, zero information on pricing, etc. And Apple spent big on the ad (which was, for instance, directed by Ridley Scott) and tried to get it out everywhere, including in theaters. It seems like a completely absurd ad, until you understand how advertising works. [1] - [VI
Don't you hate it when you're an evil big-brother dictator giving a frenzied political rally, with your menacing visage projected onto a gigantic monochromatic screen towering above the audience, in a dystopian, industrial setting in blue and grayish tones, with a line of people of ambiguous gender marching in unison through a long tunnel monitored by a string of television screens, and a full-color nameless running female competitive track and field athlete wearing an athletic "uniform" with red athletic shorts, running shoes, a white tank top with a cubist picture of Apple's Macintosh computer, a white sweat band on her left wrist, and a red one on her right, runs in carrying a large brass-headed sledgehammer, striding past rows of marching minions evoking the opening scenes of Metropolis, while you continue to speak inspiringly to your raptured audience about the first glorious anniversary of the Information Purification Directives, as your four police officers, presumably agents of the Thought Police, wearing black uniforms, protected by riot gear, helmets with visors covering their faces, and armed with large night sticks, chase her towards the large screen with the glaring image of your Big Brother-like facade as you give your speech, and then close to the screen, she hurls her hammer towards it, right at the moment you announce, “we shall prevail!”, gob-smacking you right in the nose, and in a flurry of light and smoke, the screen with your face is destroyed, leaving t
Enough people need to put pressure on these companies to stop censorship. These companies still care a bit about emails and customer reviews. This is why cancel culture gets away with it because they mass email them to take down and de-platform people. Here's an email template. You can modify it as needed and send it. I sent it to these two emails WHICH ARE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE ON THEIR SITE so I am not doxxing: product-security@apple.com tcook@apple.com ----------- TEMPLATE: I wasn't able to find a specific place to send this feedback so using this email. Please forward to the relevant department. I am a brown immigrant to Canada. I usually don't mention my race but it seems relevant in this topic. I as well as my family own several Apple products including iPhones, MacBooks, Mac Minis etc. Several of us and my friends are also developers for the App Store. I am deeply disappointed in Apple threatening censorship and banning of apps which don't align with Apple staff's views. I understand calls to violence are unacceptable but Apple banning apps like Parler just for political speech which isn't violence is deeply disappointing. I am not sure if you are aware but apps like Twitter, Reddit have and allow porn, illegal porn, and regularly calls to violence. Twitter allows violent terrorists like Antifa, Iranian dictator who calls for assassination and violence to stay on their platform but has banned a democratically elected President just because they disagree with him. Facebook
The whole point of somewhere like Google is that they don't want people who will do what they're told, because such people are only capable of doing what they're told. You can't order someone to innovate unless they have no other choice. Silicon Valley has spent years setting itself up as an inheritor of the counterculture, a place where it's possible to "think different". Employees are given a share of the business (via a complicated tax shelter of options). Startups want "contributors", people who buy into the idea that they're engaged in a positive-sum contribution to the world rather than just bringing home a paycheck. They provide all sorts of office features to encourage people to "bring their whole self to work". (I could go on, but I expect this thread to be buried) Edit: exhibit A, hollywood social justice warrior proudly being a nuisance, disrupting law abiding citizens with a hammer: this video ; the "1984" Macintosh commercial and its successor "Think Different" [LINK] are as close to an official statement of SV founding ideology as you're going to get)