naming


5
Nov 09

Lost in the laptop labyrinth

laptop_configs

Every PC company tries to make it easier for customers to buy their stuff. Unfortunately, there’s a lot more to it than streamlining the checkout process. The real problem is a nasty one, rooted deep in the corporate culture — and all seem powerless to fix it:

Their product lines are bloated to the extreme.

I’ve prepared this handy chart to illustrate the absurdity. This is a look at laptops only (it’s equally horrifying on the desktop side), as presented on each company’s website. Apple offers only three models. Dell weighs in with ten. And HP over-weighs in with 19. It hurt my fingers just to type them.

With Apple, you simply pick one of the three basic models, and then customize based on your needs. Why does this lesson in simplicity elude the monoliths of PC-dom? Because their companies are structured around separate groups that don’t communicate well with each other, each fighting for its own budget and its own survival.

I venture to say that PC customers would be a lot happier if their basic choices were simpler. (The model names are stupefying too, but let’s save that topic for a future post.) Once you have an obvious starting point, its vastly easier for a human being to commit.

Not only would customers be happier with fewer models, the computer companies would shave millions off their operating costs — when razor-thin margins are what’s gotten them into this mess in the first place. Streamlining their offerings would drastically cut spending on manufacturing and marketing.

By spewing models as they do, PC companies actually put more distance between themselves and their customers. They’d bond more deeply if they guided their customers down a well-lit path. The sad fact is, those battleships really are difficult to turn around.


3
Nov 09

I’ve got a crush on Cliq

Just when I thought I was losing my ability to love, comes this spot for Motorola’s new smartphone, the Cliq. Or is it the “Motorola Cliq with Motoblur”? Well, no matter how many syllables they throw my way, I’m sticking to my guns: I love this commercial.

The Cliq’s special power is that it merges contact lists, photos and social networking — Facebook, MySpace and Twitter — into one visual display. Not a bad concept for a phone. And a terrifically good concept for an ad.

In this spot, our hero stands alone in a desolate landscape with his Cliq. We then see his entire, mad, out-of-control world of contacts rushing to meet him — while he’s able to focus on the one contact he’s most interested in at the moment. The girl.

The idea is simple. But everyone who’s tried to turn a simple idea into something special knows how impossible it can be. In this case, they did everything perfectly. The acting is understated and natural. No one tries too hard (except for the wild hordes, but that’s what hordes are supposed to do). The girl gets one damn word, and it’s one of the most charming bits of dialog I’ve ever seen. It’s all in the body language.

But most of the magic is in the production. This could have been filmed a hundred different ways: in a different landscape, with different kinds of people, with different degrees of energy. And the editing could have gone a hundred ways as well. What we get is a frantic cast of thousands, dangerously fun action, with truly hilarious choices in depicting our hero’s “social network.” There’s an artful balance of high energy and dead quiet.

And, lest we forget, every bit of this action is devoted to delivering on the concept. Cliq’s reason for being is hard to miss.

Now let’s return to reality. iPhone became a juggernaut because it raised the bar by an order of magnitude. It’s hard to imagine any company outdoing iPhone by the same margin anytime soon. So the immediate goal is to simply take some wind out of iPhone’s sails. It’s too early to tell if Cliq is the phone to do that, or if future ads will be as good as this one. But I can’t watch this spot enough times. A big thank-you to everyone involved. (If anyone has the credits, please let me know.)


23
Oct 09

The mouse completes its journey

mouse_history3

Okay, it may not be the most spectacular part of the computing experience — but Apple has always had a special place in its heart for the l’il critter that helped launch Revolution #1.

Here’s a quick stroll down memory lane, starting with the very first Macintosh mouse (which clearly shared some DNA with the common chimney brick).

Savor for a moment one of Apple’s most wretched mistakes: the hockey-puck mouse that shipped with the original iMac. Having no obvious “up” or “down” by feel, it sent cursors flying in all the wrong directions. A classic case of over-design. For consumers it was a major annoyance, for pros (it also shipped with the Power Mac) it was an outright insult.

Fortunately, chief designer Jony Ive recovered from that one. Form and function then lived happily ever after as we got the multi-button mouse with no buttons, the innovative scroll wheel (on the questionably named Mighty Mouse), and now, fresh out of the oven, the Magic Mouse. Clearly, this is the mother of all mice — now standard with the new iMacs and also available separately.

I tried one the other day and, creepy as it may sound, it actually made me smile. The entire mouse is a button, the entire surface is touch sensitive. You scroll or flip through pages simply by sliding a finger or two. It really is one of those “what will they think of next” moments. And it gives you the feeling that Apple puts more thinking into their mouse than most computer makers put into their PCs.


2
Oct 09

The curious case of iTunes LP

A cool way to buy online music, curiously named

iTunes moves forward by looking backward, to something we all missed. But about that name...



There are a hundred variables surrounding product naming. No matter what you choose, you can rest assured that many will think it’s the dumbest thing they ever heard. With that in mind, let’s discuss Apple’s decision to call their newest iTunes feature “iTunes LP.”

I find this interesting because there are serious pros and cons to this decision, and it’s fun to imagine yourself being in the room.

iTunes LP is Apple’s way of making the album more appealing. The LP format delivers the album art and liner notes that have been the principle casualty of the online music revolution. If you have enough barnacles, you will recognize the LP name, because that’s what they used to call vinyl albums. It stood for “long-playing.” But does that reference matter — or have any value at all — to the person who’s buying online music today? Or would they have been better off with a more human, more descriptive name?

On the positive side, iTunes LP is indeed long-playing (compared to a single song), and a good reason to buy the album instead of individual tunes. And there is a certain nostalgia that comes with the term. On the negative side, probably only a small percentage of music lovers today are old enough to have that nostalgia. For them, LP is just a couple of letters — about as imaginative as XP. Plus, if you want to get technical, LP refers to the recording format, not the goodies that were a by-product of it.

Naming experts will rightfully tell you to just shut up, because once the first reaction is behind you (a week?), a name is a name. LP is already starting to feel okay. I just find it fascinating because Apple had the opportunity to give this concept a more imaginative name, but didn’t. What would you have said when the table turned to you for an opinion?


8
Sep 09

Crimes against nomenclature

Stop them before they name again

Sony imagination at work

Not sure why these things delight me so, they just do. Sony has unleashed a new line of Blu-Ray DVD players, but apparently forgot to consult with their marketing department. No doubt we’ll all be eager to tell our friends about the BDP-S360, BDZ-RX100, BDZ-EX200, BDZ-RX50 and… well, you get the idea. There are actually six of these little puppies, all named to inflict maximum pain. Maybe when you get yours home, you can give it a pet name.

Now I am obligated to think like a mature adult for just a moment (it hurts), and concede that it’s unfair to criticize without knowing all the marketing issues. But as a general principle, if you have a new technology worthy of launching a whole new line of products, you might want to make it easy for people to talk about your product.

Honorable mention today goes to Kodak. Clearly eager to get a little payback for that whole “digital photography” thing, they are now set to do battle with the Flip — a hugely popular video camera with a hugely famous name. Their soon-to-be released Flip-killer, already getting some good reviews, has been christened … the Zi8. (This is actually a followup to their previous Zi6. At least they’re consistent.) The Zi8 is a temptation, for sure. But I can’t stop dreaming about the BDZ-RX50.


3
Sep 09

Zune phases out, then phases in

You won't see the likes of these anymore

You won't see the likes of these anymore

Yesterday came word that the original Zune is being phased out in favor of the touch-screen Zune HD debuting September 15th. I remain one of the few people who, despite my dripping disdain for the product, its ecosystem and the horse it rode in on, think that the name Zune is pretty cool. I will also say this without a bit of exaggeration: since it launched in November 2006, I have met only one solitary soul who actually owns a Zune. (You know who you are, you live in Austin — confess!) Further, I have no conscious memory of ever seeing anyone actually using a Zune. Not exactly scientific research, but you’d think I would have spotted at least one in the wild by now. Reportedly, Zune has managed to win 10% of the market, so this probably says more about the company I keep than Zune’s adoption rate. I’m just sayin’.

But all this sweet sentiment is making me think back to my favorite “Zune moment”: when most of the world’s Zunes stopped working at the last second of 2008. A little Y2K moment all its own. (Pretty surprising that any technology company would ever fall victim to that one again.) Whatever. Good luck, Zune, with the new lineup. Methinks you still have a bit of a struggle ahead.


12
Aug 09

Shield your eyes!

On the up side, it will probably survive the coming war

Sorry, did you say this was from Acer? Or Amana?

I believe that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I believe you have the right to love the things you love. Even if the computer you love is suspiciously reminiscent of your granddad’s old Pontiac. Here we have the new Acer Aspire G Predator. (You naming enthusiasts will want to refer to it by its proper moniker: Model ASG7710-A41.) Caption contest, anyone?

Okay, so I know what you’re thinking. Ken, you elitist pig. How dare you inflict your so-called design aesthetic upon the rest of us. Good point, good point. I’m just bad that way. I realize full well that I’m not the target 17-year-old gamer. But I’m sorry, some of these things just give me a really good chuckle. Hats off to Acer: a company that strives to deliver a ton of great design — literally — in every computer they make.


11
Aug 09

The not-so-simple art of naming

3GS? 3G S? 3G-box-S? Make up your mind!

3GS? 3G S? 3G-box-S? Make up your mind!

You’d think that by now, most companies would understand that it’s a consumer’s world, and being normal folk, we like things clean and simple — starting with the names of the products we buy. I will be the first to admit that it is getting better. Slowly. Now we have Pre, Slingbox, even Zune (though it hurts to utter the word) that give us a name we can hang onto. But then there’s always the Samsung HT-BD7200 to bring us back down to earth (no kidding, it was one of the “best in show” at CES this year). And every so often, a company that really knows better gets caught up in its own nomenclature. Just so you don’t think I’m an unrelenting Apple apologist, take a look at what they’ve done with the new iPhone 3GS. Or is it the iPhone 3G S. Or the iPhone 3G S-in-a-box. Hard to tell even by reading Apple’s own website. See Exhibit A above: they can’t even get it straight between headline and copy.

What surprised me about this is that Apple normally employs terrific common sense about such things. When the super-thin iPod nano radically changed to the “fat” iPod nano a couple of years ago, the new name was: iPod nano. And when it dramatically changed form yet again last year, the new name was: iPod nano. Apple has always believed it’s kind of like buying a car. Every year, Audi makes a different A4, but it’s always called the Audi A4. We’re all smart enough to figure out that when we go to the showroom, we’ll get the newest model. This logic does fly in the face of some stone-etched laws of retailing, but Apple has never cared much for those laws. Of course there are times when the new product has a distinguishing feature that really sets it apart or would add some great value if it were to appear in the name — like iPod touch. That’s nice and easy. So why the S on top of the 3G? Apple says it stands for “speed” — which, strangely, has not been a big part of the advertising, and I doubt that more than a small handful of people will ever make the connection. But I suspect people would get it in a nanosecond if it were called it the iPhone video — since that feature opens up an incredibly huge new world to iPhone users. Somehow, I think we’d all have quickly “gotten it” if Apple told me that the newest iPhone was also the fastest. And we wouldn’t be left to decipher meaningless letters and numbers in a decidedly non-Apple way.

You might say I’m splitting hairs here. And I certainly am, in the sense that when your product is white-hot and the industry’s #1 object of lust, it’s hardly an issue. But principles are principles, and even the master of product naming can stumble from time to time. Fortunately, it’s easy to forgive a company that does so much cool and smart stuff, which only goes to prove the power of a great brand. You get a hell of a lot more leeway as long as you keep making us happy.