langostino: Personally, I think it was the stores, more than the switch campaign that provided Apple the most benefit. That being said, the switch campaign did make people more aware of the stores, and people who walked into the stores didn't necessarily buy there. Many still bought at CompUSA for 6 months no interest, or from outpost.com for free shipping and some other freebie.
I doubt you or Zanny or anyone else for that matter could say which piece of the puzzle was the most beneficial. The fact of the matter is that Apple starts out from a disadvantage in many respects, and has managed to survive. It's not a great growth story, however you can still rank it a solid #2 (behind Dell) for how well it's held up against the competition. (Not in terms of sales, but in terms of the combined overall hardware business - mindshare/profitability/employees, etc.)
Gateway, HP, E-machines, etc. have all shrunk in size. IBM would have too, if not for the fact that it is a very diversified company and has decades of experience and history riding ups and downs.
Regarding advertising, it's very few promotions that are astoundingly memorable and at the same time make a dramatic impact on the consumer. Apple is trying to look professional, and yet it's all the stupid advertising that seems to work. The Dell dude, the Taco bell dog. Annoying stuff you wouldn't want to be associated with. Perhaps Apple is unwilling to stoop to that level due to Steve Job's ego...who knows? The only thing that came close was Ellen Feiss, who never actually even aired on T.V. but yet became the most memorable spokesperson in the Switch campaign. Somebody back there is scared that the advertising that actually works will scare away the enterprise customer perhaps, which is where Apple is concentrating these days, as well as trying to regain education. Ellen being great for the latter, but not perhaps so good for the former.
Market Data 
Markets 
