Sony-Ericsson is about to ship their newest entry into the smartphone market — a Symbian-based little fella.
Not sure about the phone yet, but clearly S-E senses a pending attack by the world’s copyright infringement community. That moniker is sporting as horsey a TM as I’ve ever seen in my life.
Hint to Sony: there’s no legal requirement that your TM be visible from across the room. And with a name like Vivaz … well, I think it’s safe to go on low-alert with this one.
No one denies the power of brands. We silly humans are just happier buying from “the better brand.” That’s why companies like Archos struggle to get noticed in the shadow of stronger brands like HP. And a brand like Apple can more easily venture into new markets with such fanfare.
Some companies have sub-brands that are as just as powerful as the master brand. For example, iPod is as big a deal for customers as Apple. While Vostro is but a distant echo of Dell.
There are endless ways to build a brand or sub-brand. One old favorite is to stick the word right in your customer’s face. Put it on the product where people have to stare at it every day. Interesting to note, though, that some of the stronger sub-brands don’t even bother.
iMac is a good example. For all of Apple’s design elegance, this baby had long touted the super-sized “iMac” on its backside, big enough to be seen from a block away. Now it’s gone altogether. All we get is an Apple logo under the front bezel. Still fairly jumbo, but no iMac word. Yet no one overlooks the fact that Apple sells iMacs.
In fact, you don’t see a product name on any of Apple’s desktop computers, from Mac mini to Mac Pro. Just a logo. Is that because Apple is actively shifting us to think of Apple first, and the sub-brand second? Or simply because the sub-brand has become so powerful, it doesn’t need to be so flagrant anymore? Once you figure that out, you can start wondering why MacBook, iPod and iPhone are clearly labeled by both product name and Apple logo.
Obviously, the way you adorn your products reflects an overall strategy. It says something about how you wish your customers to think of you — but it also demonstrates how you think of your customers. If you respect them enough, you’ll treat them to a little simplicity.
Was this really necessary?
Congratulations to Comcast on taking the #1 position in Time’s “Top 10 Worst Corporate Name Changes.”
Unlike those who seem to have been made physically ill by the name Xfinity, I actually don’t have a problem with it — even if it does sound like a Hugh Hefner production. Lots of successful companies have names that get scorched in their fledgling state. My problem is the basic idea of it. The obvious question being: why bother? It’s a massive, costly effort for no apparent reason. The kind of thing shareholders get very nasty about.
Instead of investing their money to polish a brand with instant name recognition, Comcast will now squander untold millions to re-educate customers by advertising, repainting countless vans, and revamping systems and materials across the organization. It’s such an odd decision, you start wondering if there’s some deep, dark secret we don’t know about. On the circumstantial evidence, we’ll have to find Comcast guilty of brand-squandering in the first degree.
Another item on Time’s list is a personal favorite. Last fall, Sci-Fi Channel changed its name to Syfy.
Ah, this changes everything
Unlike Comcast, these guys were facing a real marketing issue. Their audience growth rate had hit a ceiling. They needed to extend their programming beyond conventional sci-fi to attract a more varied audience — but the name Sci-Fi Channel was a turn-off to the non-dweeb crowd. They needed an idea.
That brilliant idea was a new name that’s pronounced exactly like the old name — just spelled differently. I can only imagine the conversations that result. “You gotta see this great new show tonight — it’s on Syfy Channel,” followed by, “Nah, I hate sci-fi.” Even when you see a promo on TV, you still pronounce it “sci-fi” in your head. Oh, to have been a fly on the wall when someone pitched this idea.
Other interesting tales on Time’s Top 10 Worst Corporate Name Changes pages.
What did Apple know, and when did it know it?
Ever wonder exactly how far ahead Apple sees into the future? Some have suggested that iPad was in development for years.
You may be tempted to file this under “Things We’ll Never Know.” But in the case of iPad, the answer may not be too hard to divine.
Stand back and let me interrogate the witness on this one:
Q. Good morning. Would you be so kind as to identify the name of iPhone’s operating system when it was launched in 2007.
A. Yes, that would be OS X.
Q. And explain to the court why you chose that name.
A. It was to distinguish iPhone from Mac. It was OS X vs. Mac OS X.
Q. I see. And where were you on the evening of March 27, 2008?
A. I don’t remember.
Q. Allow me to refresh your memory. That was the date Apple released the iPhone Developer’s Kit — and changed the name of iPhone’s operating system from OS X to iPhone OS.
A. Oh, right. I remember that now.
Q. Uh huh. And when you chose the name iPhone OS, were you aware that Apple was already working on a revolutionary new kind of computer, a tablet that would be based on the same operating system?
A. I, uh, don’t recall.
Q. You’re under oath, sir.
A. Okay, okay. I remember now. Yes, I was aware of that.
Q. And did you not consider the absurdity of putting something called iPhone OS into a revolutionary product that was not a phone?
A. Uh… yeah, that did kind of strike me, yes.
Q. Why on earth then, sir, would you not choose a name that would allow just a little flexibility in the future… OS X Mobile, perhaps?
A.
Q. Hello?
A. Uh … I’ll take the Fifth.
Q. No further questions, Your Honor.
My point is, Apple has always demonstrated tremendous common sense. It’s just hard to believe they’d choose the name iPhone OS if iPad was already on the drawing board. My inner Sherlock tells me iPad wasn’t even a twinkle in Apple’s eye until well after March, 2008. That’s still plenty of time to make one hell of a device — but not nearly as much time as some have suggested.
Fujitsu iPad: no multitouch — just multibutton
Take that, Apple. Turns out Fujitsu makes an iPad too. And by my count, it has 24 more buttons than yours. Okay, so their touchscreen is a tad smaller (3.5 inches), but they did start selling this little eyesore long before iPad was a twinkle in your eye (2002). Their lawyers are currently huddling to consider a lawsuit.
Meanwhile, they’re talking tough in China too.
Hey Apple! You stole our design!
Shenzhen Great Loong Brother Industrial Co., Ltd. believes iPad is way too similar to their magical P88 Tablet PC — which itself looks way too similar to Apple’s iPhone. “We don’t understand,” says company executive Huang Xiaofang, “why did they make the same thing as us?” Some mysteries may never be solved. Yet they’re considering a lawsuit as well.
But wait, there’s more.
Sorry, it's just so confusing
Lingerie maker Coconut Grove Pads owns the right to market iPad-brand padded bras — so they’re a bit shaken by Apple’s new baby too. And they may have a case. One can only imagine the loss of income these guys would suffer as confused bra shoppers accidentally purchase an Apple iPad instead.
How times have changed. In days of old (AAPL @ $14), there just wasn’t much incentive to sue Apple. There’s only so much blood you can squeeze from a stone. But man, that $29 billion in cash reserves today looks pretty darn appetizing.
I do hope the courts find no merit in these cases. It would totally pop my bubble if I were to discover that Jony Ive found his inspiration on Shenzhen Great Loong Brother Industrial Co.’s website.
First the Jesus phone, now this?
Some stream-of-consciousness thoughts about yesterday’s launch of iPad:
Understatement of the day. CNN included this statement in their pre-event coverage: Apple CEO Steve Jobs is said to have taken an active role in the development of the company’s rumored tablet device.
The name iPad. It had been growing on me prior to launch. Back-rationalizing aside (or is that back-pedaling?), there’s a lot of logic to it. My idealized version of Apple just isn’t quite so logical. The good news is: the name is short, heavily branded and looks damn good on the device. Remember, names are only scrutinized at the beginning. After that, they’re just names. (Google? Get out.) And yes, this does give our little friend i a new lease on life.
Home-grown processor. A double big deal. Those who played with iPad after the show reported that it’s wicked fast. Even better, Apple makes the A4 processor themselves. That’s a ton cheaper than buying it from Intel, and clearly the main reason it’s as affordable as it is. Good name, too. I can just imagine the conversation. “It’s Apple’s first processor, so let’s call it A1.” “Nah, doesn’t sound very advanced. A4 is three generations faster.”
Leaks hurt. When product details leaked in advance of past Macworld shows, the event never seemed quite as exciting. Yesterday felt a bit like that — because so much about iPad had been rumored or predicted with fair accuracy. iPhone looked nothing like the rumors had it.
Professional jealousy. I know from experience that all this fanfare and anticipation often grates on other technology companies. “5% of the market share, 95% of the PR,” they moan. Hey, nothing’s stopping Dell from holding a major press event to announce their newest Inspiron.
User switching. iPad feels like the perfect device to keep on the coffee table for the whole family to use. So how does email work when you pass the device to another user? Log off/log on? Fast user switching? Just curious.
Category overload. Steve took special care to present iPad as a third category of product, positioned between iPhone and MacBook. He even concluded the show by asking “do we have what it takes to establish a third category of products?” I get that. Not to be a stickler, but Steve did introduce iPhone three years ago as Apple’s third category of products. Those are the product tabs currently on apple.com (Mac, iPod, iPhone). So how many categories of product does Apple now sell? Three or four? Will the tabs on the website change, or does iPad join forces with iPhone? (Even though it is actually more similar to iPod touch.)
Multitasking. Missing in action. Big problem. Especially when even Droid is out there multitasking its little heart out. iPad runs zillions of apps — but only one at a time. Fix, please.
No camera. Big problem #2. How can you have offer such a natural, trend-setting, socially-minded device without the ability to video chat? Probably some physical reason why, but Apple has bent the laws of physics before.
Where’s iLife ’10? Okay, so I was wrong about this prediction. But now that I am humbled, I do remember how Mac OS X was once delayed for six months because Apple’s software resources were focused on developing iPhone. We have to remember that Apple isn’t Microsoft. (Like that’s tough to remember.) They don’t have thousands of programmers. When they have a major challenge, it’s all-hands-on-deck time. Maybe we’ll get a new iLife by spring? I will continue to predict until I get it right.
Apple logo. Is that big Apple logo on the back facing the right way? It’s correct in portrait position, but it’s sideways in landscape position. The images on apple.com seem to be a 50-50 mix of vertical and horizontal orientation, so there is no right or wrong here. I think it’s time for the world’s first accelerometer-based swiveling logo.
Questionable icon. My eyes, my eyes. What’s with the iBooks icon? Click the right arrow on the iPad Gallery page to see the icon lineup. They’re all colorful and beautifully designed — until you get to iBooks. It’s Zune brown, and feels a few decades behind. Can we send that one back?
Overall: iPad has a lot to love, but nirvana is still up the road apiece. But that’s not necessarily a bad thing — Apple’s starting point is light years beyond the other guys’ ending point.
Almost showtime
Only a few hours till T-Day. I’ll be damned if I’m going to be left out when they count all the blogs that hyped the tablet today. Just a few miscellaneous observations:
Steve. Everyone is so focused on the tablet, nobody’s even mentioned Steve’s health lately. But the Steve-watch will be back in the news, for sure. Expect many reports to start with “A healthier-looking Steve Jobs took the stage today to announce…” At least I hope they do.
Ressurection. For those who think Apple might recycle the Newton or iBook names — forget it. Impossible to imagine Apple naming a thoroughly new device after a thoroughly dead device. Remember also, there are still lots of iBooks out there. How confusing would that be? I’m crossing my fingers for something more imaginative, but the Vegas oddsmakers are heavy on iSlate. iPad is making a late surge around the home stretch.
To i or not to i. Keep an eye on that pesky little letter — for the future starts here. Should the tablet escape without an i, it will be a good indication of where things are going. If the i sucks the tablet into its orbit, assume we’ll be living with it for the rest of our natural lives.
Collateral damage. Black-and-white e-readers, anyone? I’m sure you’ll see some great deals real soon.
The warm-up act. I believe we’ll see more than the tablet tomorrow. We’ll need a major iTunes Store update to present all the new media that will be available there. It’s time for the annual iLife update too. After Steve shows us how magazines will reinvent themselves on the tablet, imagine if he shows us a fantastic new way to share our lives. Use the new features in iLife to create your own “magazine” with words, pictures and videos. It may even call for a new iLife app. iMag? iPub? iNews?
Unfathomably moronic. Rob Enderle says the venue for the announcement indicates that Apple wants to “distance itself from this offering,” as if it’s “a product the company isn’t that sure of.” I had no idea human beings were even capable of such dribble.
Macworld who? Just a year ago we were sobbing over Apple’s rejection of Macworld. We’re better now. Way better. Didn’t exactly seem to hurt the buzz factor, did it?
That’s it. No more tablet talk till we see the whites of its eyes. Enjoy the show.
In the naming biz, this is a dream job
What a difference a few billion eyeballs can make.
While some new products lead a pauper’s life when it comes to advertising and PR, Apple’s new tablet will be born into obscene riches. It will become a TV star, a global headline, grace the cover of hundreds of magazines and be analyzed in thousands of blogs. Whatever name Apple gives it — that word will echo across the land.
Naming experts will tell you that even silly names are accepted quickly, as soon as they become familiar. (See Verizon, Virgin and Google.) Clearly the tablet’s name will become familiar with breathtaking speed.
This gives Apple license to be incredibly brave. They can make the name as creative as the product itself. But how brave will they be? If you try to go by Apple history, it will only confuse you. Here, you’ll find two totally opposite examples: iPod and iPhone.
iPod is a classic name for the ages. No one could have predicted it, since it said nothing about the product other than vaguely describe its form factor. It had as little to do with music as the name Macintosh did with computers. But by creating such a magnificent user experience, Apple would soon make the name iPod synonymous with music — and one of the most powerful brand names on earth.
iPhone took a completely different path. The product was hotly anticipated for months, and the prognosticators had already dubbed it the iPhone. The familiar “i” made it an Apple product, and the device would be … a phone. Not Apple’s most imaginative moment.
With iPhone, the category named the product. With iPod, the product named the category.
My hope is that the tablet’s naming will be more in the creative tradition of iPod and less in the obvious tradition of iPhone. Granted, slate describes the shape of the product just as pod did before. The difference here is that the industry is already overflowing with tablets and slates. It was a feisty and original Apple that shook up the music business with the word iPod. It would be great to see that same Apple show up on Wednesday.
The only real argument for iSlate is that it eliminates the need to educate customers. But with all the world’s attention already so intensely focused, I don’t see the need to educate — only the need to amaze.
We’ll soon see which side of the brain won the debate.
Okay, Samsung — what's your excuse?
Product naming is a recurring theme in this blog, so I’m going to make this an official Observatory feature. With your help, I’d like to assemble a rogues gallery of delightfully bad product names so we can crown a winner at year’s end. Kindly send me your nominees as you discover them.
Kicking off the new year I present the Samsung Galaxy Spica i5700 phone. It’s hard not to admire a name you’re not sure how to pronounce. I would have thought “speek-a,” but I just saw a video calling it “spike-a.” Whatever, that’s the least of its offenses. We have two words, lots of syllables, a space theme, a concealed ethnic slur and a lovely assortment of numbers, all rolled into one.
Now don’t get cocky, Samsung. You’ve got the pole position. But I get the feeling this competition is going to heat up in the months ahead.
Stand back — another iPhone killer is born
Droid, Pre, Storm, Cliq — kindly step aside. The real Clash of the Titans is taking shape. In a single day, ad giant Google unveiled the Nexus One while phone giant Apple bought itself a mobile ad company. This should be fun. But first things first. A few instant reactions to Google’s new baby:
Name. Lame. You’ve got a killer brand, a high-end entry into the world’s hottest market, months of global anticipation for a “Google phone” … and you call it what? Ya know, sometimes obvious really is best. Ask iPhone. GooglePhone, Gphone, take your pick. (Oh, and if you really, really had to go this route — and you didn’t — was that “One” really necessary?) Extra points for iPhone before the rumble even starts.
Features. Overall: spotty. Some cool things (better screen than iPhone, 5-megapixel camera, voice-enabled so you can write an email simply by speaking). Some duds (no multi-touch, a microscopic 190MB allotted for downloaded apps, wimpy app store, dismal music player).
OS. Google presented Nexus One as “the best Android device.” Brazen, considering the co-CEO of Motorola was in attendance — presumably with the second-best Android device, Droid, in his pocket. Wouldn’t there be fighting in the streets if Microsoft suddenly started selling “the best Windows computer”? Google says it’s not trying to reap profits from the sales of Nexus One, just “broadening the availability of Android handsets.” Uh huh. Already, Nexus One has features that are merely “coming soon” to other Android phones.
Price. $529 unlocked, $179 with a 2-year T-Mobile “subsidized” contract. To be honest, this industry-wide subsidy thing has always sounded fishy to me. If Apple can haul in the cash selling a 16GB iPod touch for $199, how much more can it cost to add telephony to that? Conspiracy theorists, unite!
Design. Hmm, now where have I seen this look before…
I’m eager to see some real reviews now that Nexus One is among us. I think the competition between former buddies Apple and Google will be good for the industry and riveting to watch. But make no mistake: there will be blood.