PC versus Mac

Watching TV this morning one of those clever Mac/PC commercials came on. That is some of the best marketing I have seen in awhile, and PCs have never been able to combat it. I think one main reason is that because PC isn't really a company. Sure, Microsoft is the face because they make Windows, but they don't make the computers (just the crappy software). Instead, it is the Dell's, Toshiba's, HP, and IBMs of the world that sell the computers that compete with Apple's, and it is difficult to get everyone on the same page to create a marketing campaign to do that.

So the commercial got me thinking, so I then updated my twitter to ask the question of why these companies, including Microsoft, don't just say the obvious-- we are more popular because we are more affordable. I quickly received a response from a twitterer (not a word) that I have never spoken to before, but evidently he found what I had to say funny because he was ROTFL (had to Google that to learn what it meant). He seemed to think that the computers do cost the same for what you get. And that might be true (it isn't). Honestly, it doesn't matter, and here is why (I needed more than 140 characters).

Apple versus PC isn't coke versus pepsi, it is more Lexus versus a GM car. Every car that Lexus makes is super nice and expensive (or pick another fancy car brand if you want). GM makes some very nice, and expensive cars, but they also make cars that folks like me can afford. If you walk into the local 'Apple Store,' you cannot find a laptop for less than $999. The $999 model has a 13" screen. If you log onto Dell's website you can find a laptop with a 13" screen for $499.

Now, before @davesag and other Mac/Apple people claim I don't know what I am talking about and start rolling on the floor laughing, I know Apple's product is better. I get that, but I don't think it really matters. People buy computers based on price. People don't even know what features make a Mac worth it. They know that a new computer is new, just like most people don't know the difference between the drive shaft in a Ford Focus versus a Chevy Cobalt. New is new. Not saying it is right, just saying that is how it works.

What Apple needs to figure out is what is their desired market-share. Do they really want to compete with PCs? Lexus and BMW don't compete with Kia. Should Apple decide that they want to compete with PC, they need a more modestly priced system. They need a system to infiltrate the average computer buyer. They need a $600 laptop that isn't 10". Then they can use their numerous competitive advantages (brand loyalty, brand prestige, and superior product) to compete. Maybe get more businesses to use Apple's as opposed to PCs, that would be a HUGE benefit because then people would use them without needing to buy them, thus getting them hooked.

Anyways. As I am someone that will soon be in the market for a new laptop (and I want an Apple by cannot justify spending $2000 on one), I will likely get a Dell. Sure it will run slower and crash once a year. Such is the life of a PC user I guess.

Corporate lessons from The Wire

So I am engrossed in the TV show ‘The Wire’ I am watching it through Netflix, so I am only on the 4^th season. I was watching it this morning and realized that everything you need to know about business and corporate culture you really can learn from ‘The Wire.’

Lesson 1: Who you know matters more than any ability or accomplishments you might have.

You might be the smartest, most talented person in the room, but it doesn’t matter if the right people don’t know you and like you. The Wire shows this with the police and their promotions. You can be great at your job, crack all the cases, but if (like McNulty), the higher ups don’t like you, it doesn’t matter. This is the same in the corporate world. If the important people don’t like you there isn’t a chance. Furthermore, it helps if people feel that they owe you. This is probably more likely once you are in the director/executive level. Think of people that sit on the board or directors for companies... A lot of that is 'I will scratch your back if you scratch mine."

Lesson 2: You need to work your way up despite lesson 1

This lesson is shown by the drug dealers. Even if you are well connected, you need to start at the bottom. Many of the ‘runners’ have brothers and father higher up in the drug-dealing ranks, but they still start as runners. They move up quicker due to lesson one. Not sure if this is true in the corporate world, but I imagine it is (I am not well connected).

Lesson 3: Shut your mouth and wait your turn

Import lesson learned both in the drug-dealing world and the police department. You need to shut up because no one higher up wants to hear your ideas or solutions. They don’t pay you for that. Instead, you need to shut up, do your job, and wait for your turn to make those decisions. You can only hurt yourself by spouting off your ideas when not asked.

Lesson 4: Manage your image

Changing people’s perception of you is almost impossible to change. Hence the phrase “you only get one chance to make a first impression.” Stringer was always a drug dealer , nothing he did in the business world would change that. McNulty was always a rouge cop, nothing he did would change that. You get my point. You need to manage your image in the office right away. Work overtime, come in early, leave late, and do it right away. You can get lazy once that first impression is solidified.

So these are only four. I could probably write a book about this (or at least a few more lessons). Just sort of interesting that the show is about a dysfunctional police department and drug dealers, but it really parallels real life.

When will we get it?

Okay, I am getting up on my soap box...

Few things in our culture bother me more than our obsession with celebrity. People and US Weekly are more read that REAL magazines. People use Twitter to follow their favorite celebrities so they feel a part of their life (not me of course...). We care more about Tom Cruise's kid than we do our own it seems. Well maybe some good will finally come out of this...

The other day a pitcher for the Anaheim Angels baseball team was killed by a drunk driver. Granted, there were two others killed in the crash, but you know we will publicize Nick Adenhart more than the 13,000 other drunk driving related deaths. My initial reaction to the crash scares me. In Wisconsin we don't really even get fazed about this stuff anymore. Driving drunk is the norm (sadly). Earlier this year, or at the end of last I forget, the Journal Sentinel here in Milwaukee ran a staggering series about our drunk driving problem and how little the state has done to fight it. Sadly, drunk drivers seem to either vote or pay for the people that run for office. Not sure.

Either way, my question is when will we get it? Who needs to die? Unfortunate as it may be, Nick Adenhart probably isn't a big enough name to make a difference. What if it were Brett Favre? Then would people care? Would people then think twice before getting blitzed and then driving? I can online IMAGINE the average BAC after the Brewers game yesterday. Like most things, we don't care until it impacts us. I remember growing up when there were two high schoolers in my hometown that were killed by a drunk driver. One of the girls mothers became an advocate (is that the right word?) for MADD and would come in and give talks. MADD loves to use staggering statistics, but does it make a difference? I stand by my stance that most people don't tend to care about an issue until it impacts their lives. My family wasn't aware of the dangers of a stroke until December 27th, but we are all now well versed.

I wish I could say it matters and that people will learn, but you know me, I am way too cynical (or realistic) to believe that.

Creating healthy incentives

So this is a topic near and dear to my heart-- health and exercise.

BusinessWeek ran an article giving tips on how to fit in workouts when you have a busy work schedule.

It starts by talking about how this 28 year old doesn't have time to work out because he is working too much. This may be the case for many, but really, is that the case for most?

To contrast this, I would like to point at that the average American watches over 3 hours of television a day. Not to say that watching TV contributes to that... or drinking 9 sodas... or eating out for lunch contribute to that, but maybe they do :o)

Employers should encourage employees to keep themselves in better shape because studies show (I am not going to look them up because I know they exist) that healthy employees tend to be more productive. And yes, working 50 hours a week (even 40 in a stressful position) hurt the ability and drive to work out. I get that, and if I were in charge of a HR department (which I hope to be sometime) I would give real incentives for people to be in decent shape. Encourage not only exercising, but eating and drinking healthier as well. Sleeping more. Whenever an office orders lunch, what do they order? My experience is typically things like pizza (with soda of course).

Most wellness programs seem to be those 'token' programs where employers pretend that they care, but don't really give employees any incentives to live a healthy lifestyle. I can only imagine how much worse it is now that most employees are fearing for their jobs.