General discussion

Locked

Never said advertising alone sold every Apple product

By Vulpinemac ·
Tags: Off Topic
article root

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

2 total posts (Page 1 of 1)  
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

What you have implied from the first...

by Vulpinemac In reply to Never said advertising al ...

... is that the only reason Apple sells anything is because of its advertising; I've been trying to point out that advertising makes up a relatively small part of its sales efforts. For as much as Apple advertised in magazines and newspapers back in the 80s, their market share continued to slide simply because Microsoft had taken over the enterprise and people became used to its OSes. You may even remember how Intel became so incensed when they discovered that the famous 'Flying Pentium' chip commercials were made on Macs.
With the return of Steve Jobs to Apple, what we saw was a significant change in the 'look' of desktop computing which migrated over to the iPod, iPhone, etc. The idea that you didn't have to be a Techie to set up your home computer but rather simply pull it out of the box, plug in three wires and you could be online is what sold it--more than the advertising itself. Add to this the product placement in TV and movies and you realized more interest. Movies like "Mission Impossible" that used Apple laptops, TV shows like Seinfeld that usually had a recent-model iMac on his desk-- that was the kind of advertising that worked better, but it wasn't the blatant in-your-face kind of advertising.

But beyond it all, advertising only works so long as the product actually does what is advertised. The best advertising in the world is worthless if the product is no good. What that means is that the final arbiter of a product's success is the end user, and Apple is proving that every time they come out with a new and 'slightly' different product. Tablets have been on the market for over ten years--I remember commercials advertising the hybrid tablet/laptops with the swivel screen--why did those fail and the iPad take off. Advertising might have had some effect, but the huge lines and the people who immediately put them to work in ways techies couldn't imagine is what made them take off. Techies looked so hard at the limitations that they totally overlooked the strengths that made it a success. Even now, the Xoom and the Galaxy Tab have shortcomings that can't be overridden by mere specification advantages; they're simply not as usable yet. And that is where Apple is winning.

Collapse -

Android tablets much easier to set up than iPad

by gadgetlover In reply to What you have implied fro ...

My recent PC's have been just as easy, if not easier to set-up than my recent Macs. HP setup is super easy. On the tablet front, Apple is way behind the times. Before you can use it, you must take the iPad home (or have a laptop with you), plug the iPad into a computer that must have iTunes installed, and if you have multiple devices, hope you have transferred all your recently purchased apps to your computer. With Android 2.3 and above, I enter my Google account info once when I start it for the first time, choose my time zone, and all contacts, calendar, and purchased apps (both free, and paid) are downloaded automatically, no computer required. The iPad's method is archaic along with all system updates requiring a massive download, and a computer. Most Android devices do OTA updates. My Nexus One has been updated from 2.1 to 2.2 to 2.3 all OTA.

Setting up any AIO requires minimal wires as well, not just the iMac. iMac was not the first AIO, it was the first heavily advertised AIO, I can't remember when any PC prompted me for any more info than my wireless network name, timezone, and optional name / password for the machine. I owned the iMac G4, and then the G5. The G5 iMac was the most problem plagued machine I ever owned, a lemon from day 1. I never liked the asymmetrical style of the iMac since G5 days, just about any other AIO is better looking for me. I bought the G5 despite not liking its style for the G5 processor (overhyped), and the 20" screen. I realize the new iMacs are sleeker looking with aluminum construction, but I still don't like the asymmetrical look. I do realize that style preference is certainly personal.

Every device has its shortcomings. I own the Tab, the Xoom, and the iPad. For my needs, the Tab, and Xoom do much more than the overly restricted iPad. The iPad is too limited for my needs, the Tab, Xoom, and other Android devices allow me to do more of the tasks I need than a non-jailbroken iPad. The ASUS Transformer is the best featured Android tablet I own, but I do prefer the Tab for mobile use since it is easier to carry around. When I need to accomplish something other than viewing a video, I pick up one of my Android tablets not the iPad due to the iPad's restrictions like no Flash, and no file access.

Bottom line is I respect other opinions, but don't necessarily agree with them. I never said that advertising alone sells all Apple devices, check by prior posts, in fact, check the subject heading for my last post. Of course having a nice device is also required. However, I did say a significant number of devices have been sold by massive, mainstream advertising by Apple (and others as well). The iPod had 90% of the mp3 market, and also did 95%+ of the mainstream advertising for that category. The iPad has the majority of the tablet market, but also did the majority of mainstream marketing for that category. Definitely direct correlations IMO. Apple would have sold many fewer iPods if they did not have all the network TV ads including the very successful silhouette ads that sold hip, and cool. Since the IPad's introduction last year, we have been inundated with mainstream iPad ads.

You mention Seinfeld. I am a Seinfeld addict, and have never seen any of the Macs actually on during any episode. They were just paid for backdrops, just another form of advertising, although as you mentioned not as blatant advertising. Advertising is still advertising which supports my opinion. I am also an avid movie fan. Based on the Apple product placement, you would think Apple has the 90% desktop share.

You could have the best device in a category (iPad is not best in category for my needs, but may be for others); however, massive, effective advertising is necessary to sell significant numbers in just about any product category not just tech gadgets.

I disagree with you comment that the Xoom etc are not as usable as the iPad. For my uses, the Tab, Xoom etal are much more usable than the iPad. If I don't like the default look, I can easily place 20 icons on each page, and smoothly scroll between pages with just about any Android tablet. It does not matter how slick, smooth, and pretty a device may be. If a device does not allow you to complete the tasks you need, it is not usable for you although I respect others may have different needs.

Back to After Hours Forum
2 total posts (Page 1 of 1)  

Related Discussions

Related Forums