Yeah, I used to love the iPod adverts with the hip, trendy silhouette dancing away. Then you would see the average user on the train. Spotty, not especially attractive, and definitely not cool. But I guess that image wouldn't sell much.

I would say that Apple's advertising has become far more relatable recently. Most people can relate to a christmas event with a detached kid, or calling home to Facetime with their family. Granted, the people are unrealistically good looking and well dressed, but it's far more down to earth than this Facebook piece. I found the overly-hip nature of the characters in this extremely un-relatable. I could feel the jealously and dislike inside me. I know that's horrible, and I suppressed it like a good social being, but it was there. Advertising shouldn't create those kinds of feelings. I don't know what the trick is to avoiding them, but many successful advertisers do.

"I could see the SQL injection happening; I pretended it wasn't happening, like a good developer, but it was there. Website users shouldn't create those kinds of problems. I don't know what the trick is to avoiding them, but many of users do".

Er, you totally read that wrong. Switch the terms "developer" and "user" in your analogy.

I don't think I misread it; I was poking at you to illustrate that your internal feelings of jealousy and anger are not the responsibility of the advertiser to avoid triggering, and suppressing them is not "being a good person" (or a 'bad' person), it's "covering over a problem you have and pretending it's not a problem hoping it will go away".

Correctly functioning (neither judged as good or bad) humans don't get angry and jealous at seeing imaginary people's imaginary success, or real people's real success for that matter.

> your internal feelings of jealousy and anger are not the responsibility of the advertiser to avoid triggering.

They kind of are. I mean, for most other jobs, you're right--your emotions are your own responsibility. But advertising (inasmuch as it's more than simply "getting the word out") is all about harnessing peoples' irrationalities in profitable ways. And that means avoiding triggering irrationalities and biases people have that might scare them away from buying what you're selling.

For example, the last thing you want to show in a computer ad is a picture of the machine with an IDE open. Because IDEs are intimidating to a lot of people, reminding them of skills they lack ("I'm not good with computers.") And "intimidated" is not a buying mood.

(Also, as an aside, I'm not sure in which sense you meant "you," but to be sure, I wasn't the poster you first replied to.)

It's worth noting that the person you're replying to wasn't me. I don't mind being poked fun of. I often do it myself :)

Framing this as a "responsibility" is the wrong way to look at it. If an advertisement makes a significant number of people feel negative emotions, it won't be effective, and what good is ineffective advertising? Who cares who's right, wrong, good, or bad? Much less who is responsible?

I'm a flawed person. I openly accept that. I don't think my emotions in this situation are unique though, and I don't think they're basis to refer to someone as incorrectly functioning. It's what we do with those emotions that make us "correctly functioning" or not.

This funny/true infographic about iPad marketing vs usage comes to mind: http://thedoghousediaries.com/5608

iPhone commericals have gotten creepy - everyone staring off into their silent screen..

Fortunately not as creepy as the competition.

But what you're describing is "brand advertising". This approach is specifically for things people already use and already understand. If you are trying to sell a new experience people haven't had before, you do have to tell them what that experience is.

I guess the right word for that would be hipster. I say that without any judgmental purpose, but that's what I think when I see the vintage product + cheap&chic design + sun flare scenery.

Indeed. And the irony, is, the real hipsters already move beyond their vintage typewriters, and Lomo camera. What the promotion video just shows us some cliches what the team think is cool. Not me.

It'd be better if that world was not set in the 70s. Polaroid and typewriters? Who the hell has even seen them in person?

Erm, people who were alive in the seventies, maybe?

Have you really never laid eyes on a typewriter?

I have only seen a typewriter and used it once; and that was because it was my fathers and he wanted to show it off to me. I have never, ever, ever seen one in public.

I have!

But then, I'm in my 30s, so admittedly I'm pretty antediluvian.

We had an electric typewriter in my house for years even after we got our first computer, and only got rid of it recently. So sad :[

You can still use typewriters in the "modern" age http://www.usbtypewriter.com/

lots of people, surprisingly...