Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Top 10 Most Memorable Tech Super Bowl Ads

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the hee-she-throws-a-hammer dept.

It's funny.  Laugh. 179

theodp writes "From 1977's lovable Xeroxing Monk to 2007's smug-and-rich SalesGenie pitch man, Valleywag has rounded up videos for its Top 10 most memorable tech-oriented Super Bowl commercials. The commercials are: Apple (1984), Monster (1999), CareerBuilder (2005), GoDaddy (2005), Xerox (1977), E*Trade (1999), Pets.com (2000), Computer.com (2000), SalesGenie.com (2007) and OurBeginning (2000). This year's ads are coming soon." I've always been a fan of the Outpost.com gerbil cannon spot.

cancel ×

179 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

digg? (5, Insightful)

loconet (415875) | more than 6 years ago | (#22285808)

/me checks the URL. Yes, it says slashdot.org . wtf is going on? I'm scared.

Re:digg? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22285850)

Can slashdot users handle the super bowl geared articles today? Will their nerdcentric minds be able to grasp the fact that there is more to life than tweaking xorg-x11 or compiling a new kernel? Stay tuned!

Re:digg? (4, Interesting)

sqrt(2) (786011) | more than 6 years ago | (#22285888)

Hey, I'm a nerd AND I like football. Go figure.

But anyway, this is scaring me. Why is slashdot trying to copy and compete with the likes of Digg? I come here because this place is DIFFERENT, the discourse is often intelligent and insightful. If I wanted mindless links to ads, Ron Paul you tube videos, and funny pictures I wouldn't be on a site that purports to cover "News for Nerds".

Re:digg? (3, Insightful)

scottv67 (731709) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286116)

I come here because this place is DIFFERENT, the discourse is often intelligent and insightful.

You must be new here. You can count on Slashdot discussions to contain gems of wisdom like:
  1. That story about the guy who ate other people's shit
  2. The story about the old farmhand who played with the "pecker" of the young farmhand
  3. The plague of Minicity links
  4. Every story is tagged "whatcouldpossiblygowrong" by third-graders who visit /. while their teacher isn't looking
  5. The GNAA posts
  6. The angry atheist comments (http://www.somethingawful.com/d/news/atheist-atheism.php)
Sometimes it's really hard to find the wheat amongst the chaff.

Re:digg? (4, Insightful)

sqrt(2) (786011) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286194)

Of course there are trolls. You're going to deal with people like that everywhere you go, on and offline (They're just more prevalent and egregious when they have anonymity). I've read genuinely interesting and informative posts too, and they usually out number the people that are just making noise.

Re:digg? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22286250)

Sometimes it's really hard to find the wheat amongst the chaff.
Sure. You're looking for wheat in a chaff field.

Mod Parent Up (1)

Iftekhar25 (802052) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286992)

That's really an excellent description of recent slashdot trends.

Re:digg? (1)

ibentmywookie (819547) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286646)

This article makes a lot of sense really. The game is so damn boring, that the ads are really the highlight.

No, I'm not from the US :-)

Re:digg? (4, Insightful)

AmaDaden (794446) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286870)

Why is slashdot trying to copy and compete with the likes of Digg?
Why shouldn't it? The core of Slashdot is and always will be the same. Adding more on the edges (the Idle section) is unlikely to effect that. As for the layout if the site that is known to be 'news for nerds' fell behind tech wise it would be a laughing stock. They need to try new things every so often. If no one likes it they will go back to the old design.

Side note: Scrolling in this new comment system does suck. Go in to Prefs and turn off "Enable Dynamic Discussions" for a speed boost.

Re:digg? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22285970)

I'm a former jock and I don't give a damn about professional sports. What the hell do I care about some massive corporation pitting its employees against each other in arenas that were subsidized by tax payers? You might as well be rooting for coke versus pepsi. Incredibly retarded, but I guess sports suits the goal of placating and soothing the masses so they don't have time or energy to care about important things that are affecting them.

Re:digg? (5, Interesting)

rossz (67331) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286162)

I'd moderate you up, but I don't have any points at the moment.

The millionaires who demand subsidies to build stadiums or they'll move their team elsewhere insisted that their sporting events helped the local economy by bringing in tax revenues. The first baseball strike proved what a lie that was. What actually happened was people did other things in their cities. They went to dinner and a movie or the theater, etc. They spent roughly the same amount of money except they spread it across multiple businesses instead of only at the stadium. This was actually BETTER for the local economy. More businesses benefited and the tax revenues were often bigger because the professional sports team often received a tax break to stay in town.

Screw professional sports. The next time one demands the taxpayer's cough up money or they'll walk, show them the door.

Re:digg? (1)

Jezz (267249) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286056)

Err, is this actually about the Football? Nope! It's actually about the tech ads aired in the biggest slot available (the superbowl).

Now is it interesting? Probably not. But isn't Football a nerd sport? (One there are lots of stats? Baseball might be the ultimate nerd sport, but American Football has to come pretty close)

Of course if you count Chess as a sport... (I do, but hell I'm a nerd - but you knew that already)

Re:digg? (4, Interesting)

astrosmash (3561) | more than 6 years ago | (#22285978)

Well, using the dark "Slashdot" green background for the entire story description is a little much.

But I really like the updated layout. They're no longer wasting valuable real estate on the pointless left-hand column.

Re:digg? (1)

akita (16773) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286038)

But they changed the font size. This one is tiny.
And the green header, WTF?
At least Digg is readable.

Re:digg? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22286558)

ctrl-+ changes font size. Seems to work fine for me. What's your problem chuckles?

Re:digg? (1)

goatpunch (668594) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286306)

Yes, getting rid of the junk on the left hand side for every story is great.

Breaks page down and page up (2, Insightful)

LinEagle (1180795) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286384)

Yes but it breaks page down and page up, because the left hand bar is now hovering at the top of the screen... so some text gets hidden when moving between pages because my browser (Firefox 2.0.0.11) does not realize the bar is there at the top.

Re:digg? (1)

dysfunct (940221) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286408)

They're no longer wasting valuable real estate

It's pretty nice - at least until you realize that long horizontal lines of text are more strenuous to read. Shorter lines with more rows are a lot easier on the eyes.

Grumpy old men... (5, Interesting)

adam (1231) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286012)

Damn kids, get off my lawn!

Jeeeeez people, calm down. As of composing this, about 75% of the comments are complaining of digg similarities, the new discussion system, blah blah. Calm down, people.. it's still slashdot. As best I can tell, they've just debuted a new section (idle.slashdot). You can still post your retarded memes (In soviet Russia our new CSS web 2.0 overlords welcome I, for one), and otherwise go about your typical slashdot business.

Back to the actual article.. I'd never heard of computer.com.. I guess it would help if I watched the superbowl.. but, yea, I don't. After viewing all the ads in TFA, some are decent (and I've seen re-run later), and some aren't terribly memorable (the salesgenie ad looks like something a 12 year old kid could storyboard in about an hour). Most of the dotcom ads are from companies I'm aware of (monster, pets.com, etc), although I never heard of computer.com or ourbeginning.com.

I tried to do some research on computer.com to see what its story was (currently a doorway page [computer.com] for a linkfarm).. and as best I can tell, it burned out right away (Seattle PI story from 2yrs later [nwsource.com] ). (They raised $6M+ in venture funding [medialifemagazine.com] , and blew $3M on the superbowl ads). There's even a 3yr old /. story [slashdot.org] that has computer.com in the comments, but TFA doesn't seem to mention computer.com directly (and the linked "video dot-bombs" from TFA doesn't seem to work for me). I'm curious if anyone here knows the full story?

Re:Grumpy old men... (1)

SleepyHappyDoc (813919) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286730)

Wikipedia seems to think computer.com is now TigerDirect. You might have heard of them.

NOT tigerdirect (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22286920)

well, wikipedia search for "computer.com [wikipedia.org] " does indeed redirect to tigerdirect's wikipedia page.

Logic would dictate, however, that is TD really owned this domain, it wouldn't be a linkfarm, but would re-direct to their site. Perhaps at some point they did.. but I don't believe they now do. So I'll ask again if anyone knows the complete story (like if they ever made any money at all, how long they stayed in business, etc).

WHOIS:

Registrant:
Parked.com, LLC
5505 W. Gray St
Tampa, FL 33609
US
813-382-2800

Domain Name: COMPUTER.COM

Administrative Contact:
Domains, Parked admin@parked.com
5505 W. Gray St
Tampa, FL 33609
US
813-382-2800

Technical Contact:
Domains, Parked admin@parked.com
5505 W. Gray St
Tampa, FL 33609
US
813-382-2800

Record last updated 12-02-2007 10:02:50
Record expires on 12-02-2017
Record created on 08-11-1994

Domain servers in listed order:
NS1.PARKED.COM 69.46.233.250
NS2.PARKED.COM 69.46.234.250

Re:digg? (2, Funny)

PrvtBurrito (557287) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286080)

You'll get over it.

Re:digg? (1)

pippadaisy (196729) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286342)

I take it that no one actually reads anything about Slashdot. See the idle up there in the URL? They added stuff that isn't tech. For those who do have other interests.

I'd also like to ask where the heck is the EDS herding cats ad? That one was awesome. And I have no recollection of salesgenie's from last year. This year's was forgettable already.

This new look... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22285838)

Is just horrible: Don't go the same way as Digg, or you'll also start attracting the same crowd. I don't need pictures of the movie: If I'm interested enough, I'll click the freaking link...

Re:This new look... (5, Funny)

jmv (93421) | more than 6 years ago | (#22285898)

If I'm interested enough, I'll click the freaking link...

I'm sorry, this is against the Slashdot terms of conduct.

There are links ...? (1)

pbhj (607776) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286708)

There are links ...?

Why didn't anyone say?

Re:This new look... (2, Insightful)

AstrumPreliator (708436) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286526)

I'm going to have to guess that this move is to attract a larger user base and get some more ad revenue. Having a site devoted to geeky tech articles limits your user base considerably. Internet/Tech pop-culture is an extremely easy way to widen your target audience. Sites like Digg have tapped into this audience and Slashdot apparently wants a piece of the pie.

On the plus side it's in its own section with a design so gaudy I can easily avoid it. That's the only plus though. The bad part is it will attract Digg-like users. Now as I stated in this [slashdot.org] comment I come to Slashdot to read what others have to say about an article. The article itself isn't the most important part, it just gives a topic of discussion. I've seen the quality of comments slipping for a while now. People don't so much debate things any more as they bicker over them. Comments which are flat out wrong will be modded informative/insightful implying that not only do the users have no desire to do a little research before they shoot off their two cents, but moderators aren't even willing to do a little research to make sure a comment deserves an insightful/informative modifier.

Slashdot now has an idle section for internet/tech pop-culture, it has the firehouse, and it has a new comment system even though the old one was picture perfect (I still use it). There's only so many "Web 2.0" features you can add before this becomes another Digg.

Now it's not like I'm going to e-mail CmdrTaco and complain, but I may look for an alternative to Slashdot. This is just my opinion though.

Re:This new look... (1)

Scaba (183684) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286550)

Don't go the same way as Digg, or you'll also start attracting the same crowd

What, people who aren't afraid of change?

Re:This new look... (1)

rampant mac (561036) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286694)

"I don't need pictures of the movie: If I'm interested enough, I'll click the freaking link..."

No one, and I mean no one, reads the f*cking articles here. Click the picture. n00b.

help! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22285842)

Slashdot is showing images on the front page, even though i've set it to simple. Also the page view for comments is all messed up even though comments are set to the old simple mode.

Arrrghhh.

You would think... (5, Insightful)

computerman413 (1122419) | more than 6 years ago | (#22285844)

That Slashdot would bother to announce a major change to its layout. I don't like it any more than I like the new discussion system.

Re:You would think... (1)

bersl2 (689221) | more than 6 years ago | (#22285862)

I think this is just for this subdomain, which I don't remember being announced anyway.

Re:You would think... (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 6 years ago | (#22285884)

idle = diggdot?

Re:You would think... (1)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286504)

idle = diggdot?
I used to love that game! Wait...

Re:You would think... (1)

Punto (100573) | more than 6 years ago | (#22285874)

yeah, they should have told us that they were going to start covering sports

Wait, wait, wait... SPORTS?! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22286062)

You mean this thing on TV isn't a Madden game? I wondered when they started adding commercials to the load screens.

Re:Wait, wait, wait... SPORTS?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22286442)

This is definitely not Madden

Re:You would think... (2, Interesting)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 6 years ago | (#22285902)

I like most of it! I like how it separates the text from the comments in a distinct way. I also like how the new comment system works faster for me than the old one, and the extra features it brings.

I don't like the now very small text boxes to input text in though, among a few things. :-S

This message was brought to you to by the Resistance From Geeks Reluctant To Change.

Also Updated Firehose - http://idle.slashdot.org/ (1)

Myriad (89793) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286392)

Interesting... if you remove the story from the link, going straight to http://idle.slashdot.org/ [slashdot.org] you still get the Superbowl ad story, but under it you'll see an Idle Firehose in a new interface. The page title becomes Firehose as well.

Changes are afoot!

Re:You would think... (1)

Mike89 (1006497) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286594)

We are talking about the 'I am willing to help test Slashdot's New Discussion System.', right? It's horrible! I like it the way it is.. I can open a dozen stories, and they DON'T lag my browser out!? What on earth!? Why would anyone want this!

Also the new comment system doesn't work on my Wii. The scrolling bit just takes up the whole screen. :(.

Re:You would think... (1)

Trogre (513942) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286030)

It wouldn't be so bad if you could change it like the other sections. Like the IT section. Just change it.shashdot.org.. to shit.slashdot.org/... and the ugly white/brown goes away. Not so here. Maybe they've 'fixed' the other sections too now.

Re:You would think... (4, Insightful)

VultureMN (116540) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286084)

If only they had some way to post articles about the changes...

Salesgenie.com ad... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22285858)

Not so memorable...

errr..... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22285860)

I preferred the ponies.

Idle (4, Funny)

icegreentea (974342) | more than 6 years ago | (#22285876)

Apparently Slashdot now has a section specifically for nonsensible and pointless articles. And they even made it look like digg!

Re:Idle (5, Interesting)

Planky (761118) | more than 6 years ago | (#22285988)

It's just an idle dig at Digg...

Re:Idle (1)

Seumas (6865) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286002)

Apparently Slashdot now has a section specifically for nonsensible and pointless articles. And they even made it look like digg!
Nonsensible?!

It looks like Slashdot is trying to pull for the Digg audience. Instead of having fewer articles that have a little more thought (though still not much) put into their selection, they want to grab the addicted eyeballs that will stay around reading, clicking, voting, watching as long as there is still content to read, click, vote on and watch. Even if it's crap.

I can't say if I think this is good or bad. I don't care to spend my time at Digg and would not mind having a little more besides the general articles on Slashdot for my consumption... but it all depends on how it is executed. I'll give it some time before flying my hate flag.

Re:Idle (1)

saibot834 (1061528) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286124)

Why would they need a section for that? I thought wasting away geeks' time was the whole point of Slashdot.

Re:Idle (2, Informative)

Idiomatik (1228742) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286132)

Not only that, its enforced pointlessness.
http://slashdot.org/users.pl?op=edithome [slashdot.org]
Its the only section that you can't shutoff from showing up on the main page. Obviously just forgotten but still ironic they'd miss the only section a significant number of members will shut off.

Join! (1)

Daimanta (1140543) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286636)

And Slashdot this comment!

Stupid /. Article (1)

Fat Wang (1230914) | more than 6 years ago | (#22285904)

Nerds don't like football. Those top ten advertisements were lame. Half of them used the 'lets put a monkey in the commercial' formula, and the rest were boring as shit. Slashdot is really going downhill.

I Don't Remember these ads (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22285908)

And I've watched the Super-Bowl every year, it's like the columnist just included the 10 he remembered and labeled them "The Most memorable Ads" Besides Officemax's Rubberband Man is the most memorable superbowl ad.

Re:I Don't Remember these ads (2, Insightful)

Dadoo (899435) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286456)

Besides Officemax's Rubberband Man is the most memorable superbowl ad.

While I'll agree Rubber Band Man should be on that list, and a few that are on the list shouldn't be (I mean, come on, what's funny or interesting about the SalesGenie.com or GoDaddy.com commercials?), there's no question the 1984 Macintosh ad is the best, so far, and will probably remain the best for a while. Seriously - the thing was directed by Ridley Scott. Of course, if you actually watched it when it originally aired, it was a lot more powerful.

oh my god (5, Funny)

hav0x (984818) | more than 6 years ago | (#22285912)

the goggles! they do nothing!

Re:oh my god (0)

owlnation (858981) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286346)

In Soviet Slashdot, page lays out you.

Re:oh my god (1)

MarkRose (820682) | more than 6 years ago | (#22287078)

Here, you can borrow these [shifted.ca] !

WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22285916)

Seriously I hate this new look.. it looks pathetic.. i was like WTF?.. is it my slashdot? .what happened to my precious :( me iz sad :(

Poor article got the shaft (2, Funny)

CharAznable (702598) | more than 6 years ago | (#22285918)

I predict there will be close to zero posts about the article itself.

Re:Poor article got the shaft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22285946)

Gah! It's even fucked up the comment posting page!

Anyway, *cough* as I was going to say...

Maybe that's the point. Football? On /.? WTF?

Re:Poor article got the shaft (2, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286212)

Just to prove you wrong:

The 1984 Apple advert was clearly a classic and the 1977 Xerox one (while seriously dated) was pretty entertaining. The rest, it seems, were really scraping the bottom of the barrel. Were there really no good superbowl commercials in the last 30 years? The pets.com one looks like the kind of thing that made me give up having a television in my house.

Back off topic, I quite like the new layout but the comment submission page sucks beyond belief. Was the CareerBuilder.com advert filmed in the Slashdot office?

Re:Poor article got the shaft (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286682)

IMO, almost all of them are crap.

The only one worth my time is the E*Trade one, which appealed to the cynic in me :)

BTW, where is The Dot? (2, Informative)

D4C5CE (578304) | more than 6 years ago | (#22285924)

Probably this Sun did not rise in the Superbowl break, but they did make a movie trailer of "Just when your competition thought it was safe to do business [salon.com] " back in the day.

And then there were IBM's OS/2-toting nuns ("my mobile") & gears supplier (to Japanese clients)... Sightings, anyone?

Re:BTW, where is The Dot? (1)

Trogre (513942) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286420)

Yeah. I live in NZ and those Nuns and the Surfers were the only OS/2 commercials we got here. Pity they're not on Youtube. All the OS/2 ads on there seem to be dry business folks drooling at a screen we can't see.

wait a second... (4, Insightful)

hjf (703092) | more than 6 years ago | (#22285962)

I thought I read "tech-oriented"? Then why the hell is Monster.com, CareerBuilder.com, SalesGenie.com and *gasp* OurBeginnings.com in that list? Everything with ".com" in the name is "tech-oriented" now? Sheesh.

Re:wait a second... (1)

grommit (97148) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286126)

No shit. Then there's the fact that it's supposed to be the "most memorable" ads. Did the editors even *look* at that Salesgenie ad? One of the most boring and tired ads I've seen.

Re:wait a second... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22286224)

*concurs* Though I really liked this year's CareerBuilder.com ad... quite funny.

Re:wait a second... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22286394)

Don't worry... this is not /. this is just some phishing website... See this layout is not /. layout... I just had too much beer trying to not be a geek and enjoy Superbowl... Everything is going to get back to normal tomorrow... Just calm down and use Google cache to see old /. pages, until this new layout goes away...

Still waiting... (2, Informative)

MousePotato (124958) | more than 6 years ago | (#22285984)

Back in the early 90's they had an IBM ad for a slick phone/wearable computer/heads-up display. Some guy was trading pork belly's in a park on the other side of the world while feeding pidgeons. They showed it again on the last episode of Star Trek TNG. Probably a few times after that. The product never made it to market and even if they launched it today would probably be the iphone killer that every geek dreams of.

My vote for the biggest vaporware product ad evah.

Re:Still waiting... (1)

hitmark (640295) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286366)

quick setup:
http://www.myvu.com/ [myvu.com] for display.
some random umpc for computing.
a mobile phone doing hsdpa or evdo for connectivity.

problem is input and battery life...

godaddy (1)

rucs_hack (784150) | more than 6 years ago | (#22285990)

Wasn't GoDaddy the company that paid lots for the superbowl advert, then died?

I ask purely because I know there was one famous dot com bust faliure known for a great superbowl advert that failed soon after, and I can't recall the name.

There, and I didn't mention the hideous new layout once....

Re:godaddy (1)

Seumas (6865) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286028)

The godaddy ads are terrible. The whole idea is "look -- hot chick!" but then they stick a chick who is only mildly attractive but has enormous tits in the ad. Yes, I'm such a stupid red blooded male that the only thing I care about is breast size. Whatever, GoDaddy... lame. At least be unique and pick hot geek girls to sling your ads during the superbowl.

Re:godaddy (2, Informative)

Grimoire (28962) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286034)

That would be pets.com [wikipedia.org] . Now the sock hawks car loans.

Re:godaddy (2, Informative)

slashdotmsiriv (922939) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286106)

I believe that was pets.com. Godaddy is still alive and kicking.

It seems that computers.com did not fare good as well.

Re:godaddy (1)

afidel (530433) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286518)

Their website isn't alive and well though! Their Danika ad apparently slashdotted their site into oblivion. Glad I'm not trying to do any domain operations with them tonight, I'd be pissed that they fucked up their site with a stupid ad stunt that they should have been prepared for.

Outpost.com gerbil cannon spot (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286022)

i liked it mainly because i couldn't imagine an ad that would piss off PETA more

Budwiser should fire their add agency (2, Funny)

tkrotchko (124118) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286078)

The fire breathing beer commercial was so dumb that the CEO should probably fire their agency and marketing department.

And they paid first commercial money for that. Ouch.

Really? The go daddy ad? (2, Funny)

SynapseLapse (644398) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286110)

A woman with large breasts is all it takes to be memorable? Didn't realize /. had been purchased by fark.com.

Re:Really? The go daddy ad? (2, Insightful)

Faylone (880739) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286226)

No, but it sure helps.

Re:Really? The go daddy ad? (2, Funny)

TimHunter (174406) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286264)

A woman with large breasts is all it takes to be memorable?
You're gay, aren't you?

Re:Really? The go daddy ad? (0)

Dadoo (899435) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286496)

You're gay, aren't you?

Are you sure you belong on this site? Remember: Slashdot is "News for nerds, stuff that matters". If you were actually a nerd, you'd have access to all the porn you could ever want. Why would you want to see breasts that are covered up?

Re:Really? The go daddy ad? (1)

florescent_beige (608235) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286520)

A woman with large breasts is all it takes to be memorable?
Um...you...I mean...ok but...well...yes?

Why..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22286216)

...are some of these considered "tech" commercials? because the company has a website, or perhaps does business via a website? Were mail order firms in the 1980's considered "tech"? They probably had cutting edge phone technology at the time.

I can't post now... (1)

borgalicious (750617) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286288)

I'm watching some ball game on television.

My personal favorite (3, Funny)

wkitchen (581276) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286320)

The EDS cat herding commercial: http://youtube.com/watch?v=Pk7yqlTMvp8 [youtube.com]

Re:My personal favorite (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286726)

just silly, IMO

The only one I've seen so far that's worth mentioning is the E*Trade one from TFA.

I'm not from the US and so don't see the commercials, but even I've heard they're supposed to be good...nothing that memorable yet.

IMO, the Apple vs PC ones are way better...

Arrrgh... top 10 lists (3, Funny)

owlnation (858981) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286334)

layout change... disconcerted...confused... make. it. stop. ...

ok... trying to focus...

Top 10 lists. Is it just me? Or does everyone when they see any kind of "top 10" list they immediately think:

1. Lazy worthless journalists.
2. Product placement / viral marketing / ad by stealth

I need to work 10 list of things I'd like to do to journalists. But it'll have to wait until after I have recovered from the brain damage that is this new layout...

apple ad, prophecy? (3, Funny)

hitmark (640295) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286386)

the more i read about locked iphones, itunes and whatsnot it strikes me as kinda ironic that apple ran a ad about 1984...

Re:apple ad, prophecy? (1)

Joe U (443617) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286530)

Why does everyone seem to think that Apple is represented by the woman with the hammer in that commercial?

Re:apple ad, prophecy? (3, Interesting)

that this is not und (1026860) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286974)

The historical context for the Apple '1984' ad was that in that era, most computing was locked up in Mainframe operations. There was a crew with labcoats on who where the only people allowed to touch actual computer hardware. If you needed a printout, you filled out a form and put it in the basket next to the half-door that separated 'users' from the IT staff.

Microsoft and Apple were both 'liberating' from that computer culture, with the notion of everybody having their own computer on their desk.

The 'IBM' being decried at that time was not the 'IBM' that Apple marketed against for the decade following 1984.

Re:apple ad, prophecy? (1)

rueger (210566) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286578)

Agreed. Trouble is Apple fans confuse snotty and arrogant with "iconic".

I really wonder who Apple's ads are aimed at (like the endlessly irritating Mac vs PC ads). Surely they aren't intended to convince PC users to switch - insulting someone usually isn't an effective way to do that - so the only point of them must be to keep the Apple brethren convinced of their innate superiority.

(this comment composed on a G4 Powerbook, freshly rebooted after the latest kernel panic)

Re:apple ad, prophecy? (2, Insightful)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22287070)

However, most PC users are quite annoyed with their computer experience. Most of the recent Mac commercials I've seen poke fun at all the problems that PCs usually have, like viruses, ugly computer design, and the fact that they come installed with tons of adware. Mac commercials say, here's a list of all the problems we know you have, and we know you hate. And if you want something more out of your computer, then buy a Mac. I'm typing this on a Windows machine myself, which I don't really have a problem using. However, I think that Windows does a terrible job for the general populous.

WTF? (2, Insightful)

rnws (554280) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286488)

I do hope this is just a section (idle.slashdot) change and not intended to be a site-wide change. Looks not good and way too many active widgets in the page.

what (1)

takeya (825259) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286508)

I already come here to idly pass my time away with tech news, not shitty popularly selected pop-news articles.

Re:what (1)

rnws (554280) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286538)

Damn right. Time for an angry mob I say, if I could just find a pitchfork...

I don't know or care about football games, but.. (1)

Fantastic Lad (198284) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286638)

I enjoyed a couple of IBM's ads promoting Linux.

This odd little number which reminds me of THX1138 and 2001 [youtube.com]

And. . .

Sisko doing Morpheus [youtube.com]

These tap into the love of geeks for sci-fi and ideals about freedom in a manner which must have been fun for the guys making these ads. --Which goes to show that having a huge ad budget means you can do some cool stuff from time to time.


-FL

Re:I don't know or care about football games, but. (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286748)

They're ok, I guess. Lost on the masses, I guess.

I still prefer the E*Trade one from TFA.

Super Bowl?!! (2, Funny)

CyberLife (63954) | more than 6 years ago | (#22286868)

What's the Super Bowl? Is that anything like Puppy Bowl? :P

Well, you just saw... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22287016)

(Those of you who were watching) a superbowl game get thrown. Good job, guys. Excellent job selling out your perfect season for those chumps in Vegas that didn't want to pay up on those hundreds of millions of dollars in bets out there. They cashed in and so did you, cause you went all in for the underdogs. We aren't stupid, you know.

I can't filter idle? (4, Insightful)

Night Goat (18437) | more than 6 years ago | (#22287044)

So when is Slashdot going to let me start filtering out all idle.slashdot.org articles? This is not good, Digg is not something to emulate.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?