strategy

apple / apple news / observatory / strategy — 26 Comments
30
Jun 11

Apple: revising the definition of Pro

If you haven't visited Apple's Creative Pro page for two years, you haven't missed a thing

SCENE 1 — INTERIOR

VIDEO EDITOR returns home to find that his long-time companion has packed and left. His head swirls with multiple emotions, from anger to revenge.

That’s basically the scene that played out in the heads of the Pro crowd when Apple unveiled Final Cut Pro X.

I get the feeling that a deeper truth will be revealed in the scenes to come.

Because Apple isn’t actually abandoning the Pros. They’re simply redefining what the word Pro means. FCPX is only the most recent indicator.

For proof of Apple’s diminishing interest in the old definition, take a look at the Creative Pro page on apple.com. The most recent case study here is almost two years old. In technology years, that’s the equivalent of 1.4 eternities.

This page is so ignored by Apple, it still features Final Cut Studio as one of the Pro products, even though we’re all painfully aware of its death. (Interestingly, they updated the link but left the image. Wake up, fellas!)

As the definition of Pro has changed, so have Apple’s priorities. That’s why iMac is now faster than Mac Pro. That’s why Aperture has remained an also-ran to Adobe Lightroom. That’s why the upgrade to FCP7 took forever, and why FCPX turned out as it did.

In the world of Apple, a Pro product used to mean “designed for high-end professionals with needs far beyond those of mortal men.” Now it simply means “the high-performance model.”

Most people don’t want a MacBook Pro because they’re Pros. They want it because it’s more powerful than a MacBook. Most people won’t buy FCPX because they’re Pros. They’ll buy it because it’s powerful and intuitive — and way better than iMovie.

So basically, if you aspire to owning the faster/better/more advanced computer or software — congratulations, you’re a Pro.

I’m not criticizing this change, I’m simply observing it. This is a business decision by Apple, reflecting a point in the company’s evolution when they need to delight the millions, not the thousands.

That’s not to say that Apple won’t continue to create products that are very useful for the high-end pros. It just means we’ve all got some adjusting to do.

SCENE 33 — INTERIOR

SUPER: Two years later.
Doorbell rings. VIDEO EDITOR opens the door to find his former companion, FCP. Warily, he invites FCP in. Things are different now. They’ve both changed. But despite their troubled relationship, somehow the spark is still there…

apple / apple news / observatory / strategy / technology — 47 Comments
24
Jun 11

Final Cut Pro X: the natives get restless

Well, well. This is something you don’t see every day: an open revolt by some of Apple’s most loyal customers.

It’s not that Final Cut Pro X is a bad product. Quite the opposite. It’s actually a tremendously cool and bold product. (I’ve been playing with it for two days now.) The problem is, for those who make a living with Final Cut Pro, it’s disturbingly incomplete.

To best appreciate the depth of frustration out there, you need to understand FCP’s history. Released by Apple in 1999, FCP had to do battle with the far more popular editing software from Avid and Adobe. Over the years, it grew more and more sophisticated, ultimately turning into Final Cut Studio — a full suite of high-end apps for video, sound, titling/effects, DVD authoring, color correction and compression.

Starting with nothing, FCP became the darling of Hollywood and the first choice among pro editors and video hobbyists. An amazing success.

But FCP was seriously due for an upgrade. So when Apple let loose that an all-new 64-bit version of FCP was coming, there was joy across the land.

It was a joy that came to an abrupt halt this week when Final Cut Pro X was released.

FCPX is indeed 64-bit, but it arrived missing features that many pros simply cannot live without. And Apple knows that.

For example, FCPX doesn’t support multiple cameras — which are a standard setup in many productions. It can’t open projects from previous FCP versions. It doesn’t support XML. (See what a big deal Apple made about XML in its own announcement two years ago.)

Apple said it was killing off a bunch of Final Cut Studio apps — Soundtrack Pro, Color and DVD Studio Pro — because their functions were now built into FCPX. However, FCPX offers up only streamlined versions of these apps.

Unfortunately, the list goes on. Creative Cow provides a thorough picture of what’s missing here.

The criticism that FCPX is really “iMovie Pro” is not far from the mark. For people like me, a high-end consumer app is a fabulous thing. For professional editors, broadcast news organizations and production companies, it’s a sad and disorienting thing.

This whole affair seems very out of character for Apple. Why would they create a product that is so forward-looking and revolutionary (it is), but do it in a manner that will provoke such a predictable backlash?

Some point out the obvious, that this is a “typical” Apple launch. The 1.0 version has a limited feature set, but provides a solid foundation for more advanced versions to come. That’s how it worked with iPod, iPhone and iPad.

Unfortunately, that argument has a big, gaping flaw. Apple did not introduce any of the i-things to a large existing customer base that relied on those products to earn a living. The FCPX intro is so illogical, I have to suspect there’s a deeper truth hiding in there.

As we know, Apple does not have infinite software resources. Mac OS X Lion and iOS5 have clearly been the main focus. With an update to FCP being way overdue, chances are that Apple simply set a goal for this product that became too difficult to reach.

Apple did not make a mistake in creating FCPX. They made a mistake presenting it as a high-end pro solution.

Imagine if they had unveiled FCPX as the new Final Cut Express instead. Buyers of that product would have been absolutely delighted by the many leaps forward in power and simplicity, and the missing features would have been insignificant to them. A new Final Cut Express would also have given pro editors a tantalizing preview of a new FCPX to come.

I only get disappointed by Apple when they create a problem that didn’t need to be created. By choosing the route they did, they created the impression that they’re oblivious to the needs of the editing pro — which we know is not true.

Apple’s response has been to say that the missing features will be added back in with updates coming soon. I’m sure they will. And you know what — that’s a perfectly acceptable solution. There’s little reason why the pros can’t continue to use the current Final Cut Studio until there’s a product that meets their needs.

And that’s my whole point. The only problem here is the manner in which Apple introduced FCPX. Great a product as it is, it’s just not a replacement for Final Cut Studio. Yet.

If there is no crisis, I’m puzzled why Apple would choose to create one.

apple / apple news / iMac / iPad / iPhone / iPod / itunes / mac / observatory / steve jobs / strategy / tablets / technology — 3 Comments
7
Jun 11

WWDC 2011: the morning after

Ah, the joy of software. This really is the stuff that makes Apple Apple, and it was fun to see such widespread improvements in one fell swoop.

As usual, some random day-after thoughts.

Mac OS X

Full-screen apps. This is a personal favorite. Can’t wait to see it in action. I currently use full-screen with all apps that enable it, and always appreciate the focus it brings. We’ve got the screen space — it’s a shame not to use it all.

Auto-Save. I look forward to not repeating some of the more humbling failures of my past. Turning the window title into a pop-up menu to access past versions is a nice touch. Being able to copy and paste from old versions is even nicer.

The feature count. Poor Lion. Only 250 new features. Leopard had 300.

Lion power, kitty price. $29 is amazing. Snow Leopard was the aberration at $29, compared to all the $129 Mac OS X upgrades before. But there was a reason for that — Snow Leopard’s changes were mostly in the plumbing. Lion is as rich an upgrade as any upgrade in history, but the price stays remarkably low. Why? My guess is that (a) Apple wants to move the entire base forward, because (b) there is far more money to be made down the road with a new foundation. I’m not being cynical, it’s just good business. The more people shopping in the Mac App Store and purchasing future iCloud capabilities, the merrier.

Space travel. I don’t know about you, but I’m sick to death of the current log-in star field and Time Machine theme. It wore out its welcome a long time ago, so I expected it to be replaced — but not by another space scene. Apparently, now we have a galaxy image. Apple has always delivered simplicity and elegance, and the space thing always felt like someone else’s idea of “cool.” Can’t we just pick our own backgrounds?

iOS

Feature count, revisited. Only 200 new features in iOS, compared to Lion’s 250 features. Obviously it’s harder to fit new features in a smaller screen.

The big payoff. To excite the crowd, Forstall showed off a slide stating that Apple has paid developers a total of $2.5 billion. It’s a great number until you do the math with the slide right before: customers have downloaded 14 billion apps from the App Store. Let’s see … 2.4 billion divided by 14 billion … that’s about 18 cents an app. Obviously, this says a lot about how many free apps are downloaded.

Notifications. Yippee! At last! It’s interesting that Forstall first confessed that there are problems current notifications, and then said, “We’ve built something that solves some of the problems…” Some?

Safari Reader. One of my favorite features. People may accept that ads pay the bills, but the ultimate reading experience will always be an ad-free zone.

Reading List. Love it. File away an article to be read later, and have that list appear on all your devices.

The geo-fence. Probably my favorite new term from the show (and very cool feature). In telling how Reminders work, Forstall talked about setting up a geo-fence around Moscone, so when he left the building he’d get a reminder. Hopefully, by winter we’ll have geothermal fences.

Camera. Despite talk about the quality of the iPhone camera, I rarely use it. One reason is the damn shutter button on the screen. Sorry, it’s awkward and just not the way we’re accustomed to using cameras. Using the hard Volume Up button as a shutter button makes me an instant fan. Photo-taking is also way improved by the new editing capabilities.

iMessage. It was presented as working across all iOS devices. What about the Mac? Wouldn’t I want to text people while I’m stuck at my desk?

iPhone 5 clue. With iOS 5 coming in the fall, the obvious conclusion is that it will come hand-in-hand with iPhone 5. I can hang in there that long.

iCloud

Demoting the PC. What a great example of Steve Jobs’ ability to simplify in the boldest way. He said they were demoting computers to be just devices, and moving the center of your digital life to the cloud. You get it in a second. And what PC company CEO on earth would say they’re “demoting” one of their biggest moneymakers?

Facing facts. When promoting iCloud, Steve paused to say: “Now why should I believe them? They’re the ones who brought me MobileMe … MobileMe was not our finest hour.” Say what you will about Steve, he dares to be honest.

DropBox killer? Nope. At least not yet. And I’m glad, because DropBox remains one of the greatest Mac utilities ever created. DropBox far out-iDisked iDisk, and its makers deserve to be rewarded, not obsoleted.

What about Me? Obviously the me.com site will ultimately be the icloud.com site. Do we still want me.com email addresses (did we ever?). Does the “me” word really have a place in the iCloud concept? We’ll soon find out…

Documents in the Cloud. Not the shortest name Apple has come up with. But it does have that “gorillas in the mist” meter going for it.

iTunes Match. Huge question mark. No one seems to know if this is a way to subscribe to iTunes versions of the songs you already own, or if your $24.99/year allows you to download the higher-quality versions of your songs to your own computer forever. So $24.99 is either one of the world’s great bargains — or not.

Antiquities. On one of the slides appearing behind Steve Jobs is a stack of CDs. Damn, they’re hideous. Did we ever actually use those things?

AAPL is down. It dropped five bucks yesterday. Down another $3.50 as I write this. Call this “iPad Syndrome.” Remember the industry’s reaction to the original iPad? “Just a big iPhone.” “No surprises, no new breakthroughs.” “Apple’s first dud.” The stock dropped. In broad strokes, just about everything we saw yesterday was “expected.” However, what’s expected can be the start of a whole new world. Like iPad.

The prognosticators. Not that we need to be reminded to take people’s opinions with a grain of salt, but… John Gruber’s pre-WWDC idea was “Think of iCloud as the new iTunes.” In fact, he’s still describing it that way after the show. It’s a good sound bite, but not totally accurate. In truth, iCloud is exactly what Steve Jobs said: the new hub of your digital life. Yes, that includes your iTunes content, but it also includes the things you create. For now, that includes the documents you create in iWork, but that capability will no doubt expand. iCloud is about your whole life — documents, photos, contacts, calendars, etc. — not just your entertainment. The Cult of Mac’s “exclusive” was obviously absurd, yet was quoted by many blogs and news services. They said iCloud would not be hosted in Apple’s new data center after all, but instead would reside on your Time Capsule (purchase required if you don’t already own one). Somehow it never struck them that Apple was signing contracts with the music companies for the rights to do something new with their music, not just store it on a personal hard disk.

All in all, good show. Let’s do it again sometime.

blackberry / observatory / strategy / tablets / technology — 3 Comments
18
Apr 11

Plight of the PlayBook speechwriter

Some jobs in this world are too daunting for us regular folk to ponder: astronaut … fireman … flagpole sitter … PlayBook speechwriter…

I mean it takes some fancy writing to get around the challenges of a tablet flung into head-on competition with iPad when it’s not yet fully cooked. I can only imagine the call RIM co-CEO Jim Balsillie made to his speechwriter before his recent Bloomberg interview.

BALSILLIE: Listen, Tex, I need your help. We gave some PlayBooks out to reporters, and the reviews are coming back pretty bad.

TEX: Geez, Jim. Why’d you go and do something like that? I thought that thing wasn’t going to be ready for another six months.

BALSILLIE: Water under the bridge. I need some good quotes fast. I’m on Bloomberg in an hour.

TEX: Okay, but I get my hazardous duty rate for this.

BALSILLIE: Yeah, whatever. Listen, you can bet your booties that the Bloomberg lady is going to go right for the jugular. She’s going to ask why PlayBook doesn’t have a built-in email client.

TEX: You’re kidding me. It doesn’t? How can you ship a tablet without built-in email?

BALSILLIE: It’s not so bad. You just have to connect it to a BlackBerry and do your email through that.

TEX (covering the receiver to hide his chuckling): If I have my BlackBerry with me, why wouldn’t I just use that to do my email?

BALSILLIE: You’re missing the point. PlayBook is a tablet. People love tablets. They’re buying millions of iPads.

TEX: Well, yeah, but iPad has built-in email.

BALSILLIE: Okay, I’ve got an idea. What if I say, “You can pair it with your BlackBerry for free.” People love free things, right? It’s cool that PlayBook doesn’t have built-in email because you can get it for free by plugging it into your BlackBerry.

TEX: But it’s already free on iPad.

BALSILLIE: Exactly. We’ll both have it for free!

TEX: (eye roll)

BALSILLIE: Good, so we’ll do that. Now about this app thing. Little problem there.

TEX: Like?

BALSILLIE: Like we have 3,000 apps and iPad has over 60,000.

TEX: How about “they’re really, really great apps”?

BALSILLIE: I was thinking of another approach. How about “We’ve got 100,000 apps”?

TEX: You just said you only had 3,000 apps.

BALSILLIE: We do. But we’re going to get more.

TEX: You’re confusing me.

BALSILLIE: We’re figuring out a way to run Android apps on this puppy. Probably in the summer.

TEX: Still, you’d be talking about something you don’t have now. And who knows how well this “Android emulation” thing will really work.

BALSILLIE: Your point?

TEX: Look, I think your best way out of this mess is to just do what Steve Jobs does. Use a lot of superlatives. Keep repeating them.

BALSILLIE: I don’t get it.

TEX: Think style, not substance. I’ve jotted down half a dozen quips here already. Memorize these: “It’s super-super fast.” “It’s ultraportable.” “It’s an amazing platform.” “We’re in an exceptional position.” “I feel incredibly bullish.”

BALSILLIE: Wow. You’re good.

TEX: You can do this, Jim. Remember, they have email, we have email. They have apps, we have apps. They have 3G, we have—

BALSILLIE: Uh, we don’t have 3G yet. Coming soon.

TEX: What? How can you possibly sell a tablet to business people without 3G?

BALSILLIE: Uh … can we just find a superlative for that?

advertising / app store / apple / creative / iPhone / observatory / strategy — 7 Comments
7
Apr 11

Thanks for the ads, but no thanks

Confession: I’m an advertising guy who doesn’t like advertising.

Don’t misunderstand. I love great ads. I get that advertising is what keeps the Internet humming — and I’m kind of attached to the Internet.

What I’m saying is that if I had a choice between seeing a page with ads or no ads, I’d go for the clean look. That’s only because the really great ads are few and far between. The rest, we mostly endure.

I thought Apple was right with me when they added the Reader feature to Safari. Now I can make the ads fade away with a click. It’s a nice way to read.

Over the years, we’ve achieved a level of balance. Ads have proliferated, but people generally accept the necessity for them. I’m fine with that.

What gets me steamed is when a company acts like they’re doing me a favor by putting ads in front of me. Trust me, I have yet to wake up in the morning eager to see today’s ads.

The people call Google to the witness stand.

Google is now testing ways to improve the relevance of ads they serve up in Gmail. A friend of mine recently reported that when she made a joking reference to a mustache while composing an email, she saw an ad for the Shick Hydra.

Google may call this “increased relevance.” I call it creepy. I’d feel like I was being stalked.

As I understand it, you can turn off the relevance thing. Nonetheless, Google serves up this type of thing as a “feature” rather than a new way to annoy you.

Relevant or irrelevant, it’s an ad. You live with it to get free email — you don’t get free email to see the ad.

Sit back down, Apple. You’re next.

iPhone was a revolution — and apps were the revolution on the revolution. Apps also gave Apple the opening to get into the advertising game. With iAds, they could sell ad space inside their apps, where Google could not go. iAds are more interesting than typical ads, because Apple enforces creative standards.

Having built up a number of advertisers now, Apple has now seen fit to introduce the free iAd Gallery for iPhone. Technically, it’s an app. But it’s really just a collection of the iAds intruding on people in various real apps.

Over at Scoopertino, we sometimes invent imaginary products from Apple. We usually start with something Apple-like, then exaggerate it into an absurdity. When I first saw the iAd Gallery, I was crushed that we hadn’t thought of it first. I could just see the headline:

“Where’s the app? Apple releases new app that’s 100% ads.”

The only thing that could have made the story funnier would be if Apple was offering an ad-free version for $2.99.

Obviously, the iAd Gallery will be useful as a tool for agencies and developers to sell their clients on the idea of putting iAds in apps. But one can’t help but get the feeling Apple thinks they’re doing us a big favor by letting us see the fabulous iAds.

So thanks, Google and Apple, for doing your part to bump up the relevance and quality of ads. But if I pay you, can I just turn them off?

advertising / apple / apple news / creative / iPad / observatory / strategy — 10 Comments
4
Apr 11

Finally! A different kind of iPad ad

Houston, we have liftoff. After more than three years of generally sticking to a formula for iPhone, iPod and iPad ads, Apple has given us a little surprise.

This new iPad 2 ad, which debuted on Saturday, is from a different world. Gone is the series of apps displayed on a device held by an inhumanly perfect hand.

Shot against black, this ad feels more elegant, more important. That’s because it’s not just a commercial for iPad 2 — it’s a brand ad wrapped in product ad.

Cleverly, it still manages to communicate a wide range of apps — but it does so only in service of the brand message. This ad is about how Apple’s unique philosophy leads to products that are “even more delightful” and yes, “magical.” (I’ll save the issue of Apple’s adjective addiction for another time.)

Personally, I’d been disappointed that Apple had allowed itself to wander into formula territory in the first place. I was genuinely surprised when the launch of iPad — a fresh, world-changing technology — was advertised in the style of ads that had been running for two years before.

To be fair, many marketing experts would totally support what Apple has done. If you’re revolutionizing the world, you’re the center of attention and you’re selling products faster than you can make them, why on earth would you ever change the formula?

My best answer: “Because it’s a formula.”

Apple doesn’t do formulas. It’s in Apple’s blood to relentlessly make things better, even when they’re pretty amazing already. This is what they do with their products (like killing iPod mini at the height of its popularity), and this is historically what they’ve done with their advertising.

So, in my opinion, this extended period of sameness on behalf of the world’s most revolutionary products was an aberration. Now, at long last, Apple is taking us someplace we haven’t been before.

The big question is: how do we like the new ad?

Judging by the comments I’ve seen on blogs so far, it’s safe to say this ad is going to be a big hit with the Apple crowd. That alone would make it a smart investment for Apple. It gives their customers a flag to rally behind, and a good argument to carry forth into the world.

I buy the message of this commercial 100%. Apple products are absolutely different from competitors’ products — and they are different precisely for the reasons described in the ad. That this can be conveyed in just 30 seconds is a good example of Apple’s ability to distill a message into its simplest, most understandable form.

Not to spoil the euphoria, but I feel duty-bound to point out that this ad is not without a downside. While the message may resonate with Apple customers, it is by no means a slam-dunk with the rest of the world.

This is the type of message that is ordinarily delivered by Steve Jobs personally, at such events as the iPad launch. It’s perfectly natural for Steve to get on stage and say things like, “We believe…”

It’s a very different thing when a TV commercial interrupts what we really want to be watching and starts telling us, “We believe…” Some will take that as pretentious and condescending.

While the believers cheer the message that ”magic” involves more than tech specs, those aware of competitors touting superior specs might roll their eyes and take it as Apple being defensive. “Oh, so that’s why you put crappy cameras in iPad 2. That’s part of the magic?”

But no commercial can please everyone, and Apple isn’t trying to convince the die-hard haters. They’re simply trying to get their message out to the vast number of potential iPad buyers, many of whom do not know Apple particularly well.

Personally, I love the fact that Apple is taking a risk by doing something unusual. By doing so, they reinforce the fact that they’re not like the other guys. They honestly believe this message, and they’re willing to spend major money to broadcast it. (And I can guarantee that they did not test this message with 20 focus groups first.)

Once the euphoria fades, though, it does make you wonder: what next?

If this is the “stake in the ground” commercial, where does the advertising go from here? Or is this just a breather, designed to take advantage of iPad’s “moment,” and then we go right back to what we had before?

Surely iPad deserves something better than a series of app shots on the screen. If iPod had the energetic silhouette campaign, and Macs had the endlessly entertaining Mac vs. PC campaign, what does iPad get? Or does Apple scrap tradition and create a “mobility” campaign that encompasses all of its i-products?

Apple and its agency TBWA\Chiat\Day have amazing creative resources, literally around the world. And most creative people would kill for the opportunity to work on such a project.

So I’m going to cross my fingers that the best is yet to come. I hope we can soon return to the days when morning conversations often started with, “Hey, did you see that Apple commercial last night?”

advertising / apple / apple news / iPad / iPhone / iPod / mac / observatory / steve jobs / strategy / tablets — 2 Comments
29
Mar 11

The mystery of iPhone 5

It’s a wacky world when CNN.com is compelled to run the front-page headline, “No iPhone 5 coming in June?”

Even wackier is that the reported delay of iPhone 5′s birthday is really only based on the opinions of two bloggers: John Paczkowski and Jim Dalrymple.

I have respect for both of them, and Dalrymple in particular is known for having reliable sources. However, parts of this story sound fishy to me.

Dalrymple starts his article with this sentence:

Apple closed the door this morning on any speculation that it would announce new hardware at its Worldwide Developers Conference saying it would focus on iOS and Mac OS.

The door-closing to which he refers is actually Apple’s press release describing WWDC 2011. The release contains this quote from Phil Schiller:

“At this year’s conference we are going to unveil the future of iOS and Mac OS. If you are an iOS or Mac OS X software developer, this is the event that you do not want to miss.”

Now, I’ve heard a few doors close in my day — and I’m sorry, but this doesn’t exactly sound like one. It sounds more like Apple inviting software developers to a software developers conference.

True, Apple has announced iPhones and Macs at certain past WWDCs. However, I’ll venture a guess that the official announcement for those events looked very much like the one Apple released yesterday. It’s a software event.

Though I wouldn’t waste too much effort reading between the lines of a press release three months prior to the event, Paczkowski does offer a “delayed iPhone 5″ theory that sounds pretty good.

He thinks iPhone 5 may be designed to run on 4G LTE networks, and AT&T’s next-generation network won’t be ready till mid-summer. (Verizon’s is already working.) If this is true, there would be good reason to delay iPhone 5 until July or August, when they can stage a dedicated event to unveil a redesigned iPhone running at top speed with both Verizon and AT&T.

What does not make sense to me is Apple delaying iPhone 5 till the fall. Creative and unpredictable as they may be, Apple is extremely logical about their product scheduling. What they have now works beautifully: iPad in March, iPhone in June, iPod in September, Macs whenever they damn well please.

The reason they do this is that Steve Jobs believes in having one big message at a time. When a product is launched, it becomes the focus of all Apple communications: home page, TV, print, outdoor, Apple Stores. If iPhone 5 is delayed till October, there would be two launches to support at once — iPod and iPhone. I’m not saying it couldn’t happen, but it’s something I’ve never seen Apple do.

On a side note, this is also why I’m doubtful about the recent rumor of an all-new iPad 3 coming for the holiday season. (A) I don’t think Apple wants or needs to update iPad more than once per year, and (B) a new iPad for the holiday would siphon off attention from the new iPods.

Of course, if Apple were dabbling with that seven-inch iPad they claim to have no interest in, it might be a different story. That wouldn’t be an iPad 3, it would simply be a new model of iPad 2 — and it would be one irresistible holiday toy. (Now you know what to get me.)

But back to iPhone 5. I’m not sure when it’s coming, but I’m already concerned that I’ll have to pay a penalty to upgrade. I don’t see any mention of that in Apple’s WWDC press release.

advertising / android / iPad / observatory / strategy — 2 Comments
28
Mar 11

Samsung tries a Reality Distortion Field

Steve Jobs should have patented his Reality Distortion Field while he had the chance.

Now it seems like any company — Samsung, for instance — has no qualms about getting up on stage and creating a fantastic world of make-believe. Only problem is, their distortion ends up feeling like distortion.

Brimming with confidence, Samsung puts a series of obvious actors on the screen and passes them off as “true-life stories of Galaxy Tab users.”

Steve Jobs’ version is called the Reality Distortion Field because he’s so damn good at it. He has a genuine passion for marketing. He truly believes what he says. He’s incapable of any deliberate action that would cheapen the Apple brand.

Samsung, like many other companies, merely sees marketing as a necessary process. It’s less a labor of love, and more a checklist of things to do. And being authentic isn’t exactly their number one priority.

You can see that vividly in the above video, which shows Samsung unveiling their new family of Galaxy Tabs at an industry conference last week. They’ve got the demos and specs, but they can’t resist the temptation to present imaginary customers as real ones.

These testimonials are not only fabricated, they’re ineptly fabricated. They radiate fakery, sounding more like the brainchild of a marketing hack than a real writer. If you ignore the wrongheadedness of them, they can actually be entertaining — in much the same way it can be fun to watch a bad band perform.

We get Joan Hess, playing the role of freelance travel writer, forced to utter the words “mobility and connectivity are just perfect for my life.” She observes that the Galaxy Tab is “portable, connected, it’s sleek, it’s practical, it’s sexy — like me.” She delivers her lines with the smile of a toothpaste model.

Karl Shefelman is the independent film director, age 42. He’s the marketing guy’s image of cool, so he comes off as completely uncool. For him, the Galaxy Tab is “fast — like my life.”

This is where Samsung’s Chief Product and Technology Officer, Omar Kahn, chimes in: “It’s always interesting to see true-life stories of Galaxy Tab users.” Watch this scene a few times and you’ll actually see his nose grow longer.

Omar then cues up Joseph Kolinski, real estate executive. He’s not only a wretched actor, he’s one of the few people on earth who speaks entirely in marketing lingo: “I’m on the go 24/7 … I move fast, I take charge, I get things done … once I picked up the Galaxy Tab 8.9, I just couldn’t put it down.” (Never mind that he’s using the 8.9-inch model that isn’t even shipping yet.)

To be fair, it’s not like Apple doesn’t dabble in the imaginary. Look at their tear-jerker iPad and FaceTime commercials. Those aren’t real people. They’re actors pretending to have emotional family moments, set to moody music.

The difference is, Apple isn’t telling us these are real people. They’re simply commercials. And the people in the commercials aren’t babbling marketing-speak.

The Samsungs of the world really need to be careful. If you’re not certified to create a Reality Distortion Field, you can easily get sucked into it yourself.

apple / apple news / iPad / iPhone / iPod / observatory / strategy — 10 Comments
21
Mar 11

Why MobileMe will be free

MobileMe has always been the bad boy of the Apple product portfolio. It’s not like Apple doesn’t give it frequent makeovers. It just never seems to attract a crowd.

So it’s not surprising there is speculation out there about the future of MobileMe.

Who knows what Apple will do in the end, but there are some compelling reasons to believe it will become a free service.

MobileMe is a tough sell. It’s always been a tough sell. And Apple is really good at turning a problem into an advantage.

When I say it’s a tough sell, I’m talking specifically about what goes on in the Apple Stores. When a customer buys any Mac or i-device, the sales person is trained to sell them on two additional purchases: AppleCare and MobileMe.

AppleCare is a no-brainer. That’s because it’s easy to understand and worth the price. Pay a modest fee and get two additional years on your warranty.

MobileMe is another story. It’s got lots of parts, so it’s hard to explain. And the fact is, most people just don’t need all the parts. So they decline the opportunity to plunk down 99 bucks.

Every so often, some anonymous Apple employee dares to go public, as this one did recently. He confirms how difficult it is to sell MobileMe. I usually take these things with a grain of salt, but this is consistent with what I’ve read elsewhere and what I’ve heard from my own sources.

Apple has made some gallant efforts to spice up MobileMe, but the result has always been the same. People are lukewarm on it at best.

But now that so many years have passed, the current version of MobileMe faces more vexing problems than its previous iterations ever did. It has competitors who offer pretty good products — most of which are free.

If you’ve had an email address for years, chances are you won’t get too excited about having a me.com address.

If you use Dropbox to sync files amongst multiple computers, you probably won’t get too excited about iDisk.

If you sync calendars and contacts with Google, you probably won’t care much about iCal and Address Book syncing.

If you want to share your photos online, you can easily do that any number of ways.

So what’s the big advantage of MobileMe these days? Like most Apple solutions, its advantage is simplicity. Even if you only have a Mac and an iPhone, the convenience of MobileMe is hard to beat. Just turn it on and your stuff is automatically synced. Don’t underestimate the power of that.

Though MobileMe is a good thing, it’s not a $99 thing. It’s the kind of advantage you expect from Apple, but don’t expect to pay for.

Unless Apple has a secret plan to turn MobileMe into MagicMe, it’s time to officially make the service what it should be — a basic part of the Apple experience.

This way, MobileMe would simply be one more reason to choose the Apple way. It would stop being a “one more thing” message from the sales person, and become part of the main sell. It would delight new customers and strengthen the loyalty of current ones.

Millions would happily buy into the idea of MobileMe — as long as they’re not asked to buy it.

advertising / dell / observatory / strategy — 1 Comment
17
Feb 11

Again, Dell proves it isn’t Apple

Dell’s latest quarterly numbers are a beautiful synopsis of the company’s plight: income on business computers nicely up, income on consumer computers disturbingly down.

And bear in mind, this decline occurred during the holiday quarter — when visions of laptops and Streaks should have been dancing in consumers’ heads like sugar-plums.

Dell’s problem becomes more obvious with each passing year. They radiate “innovation envy,” but rarely innovate. They imagine themselves to be in Apple’s league, but demonstrate — product after product — why they are not.

A laptop that wasn't exactly laptop-friendly

Not that we need more proof, but consider Dell’s latest disappointment: the super-thin, and now super-dead, Adamo laptop.

Like most of Dell’s products, Adamo was less of an innovation, and more of a reaction to someone else’s innovation. (Zino — Mac mini, Streak — iPad, etc.) Adamo was Dell’s ode to MacBook Air. It didn’t exactly blaze new trails. It was created, Dell-style, to “cash in on that thin computer thing.”

Unfortunately, the cash didn’t quite materialize. With the high cost of miniaturization, Dell had to price their echo of an innovation at more than $2,000 — which is unsettling to a customer base trained over many years to expect value pricing.

Clearly, Dell wished to copy Apple’s success. Just as clearly, their own brand DNA made that impossible. Suffering poor sales, they tried to innovate their way to a turnaround by offering up the even thinner Adamo XPS — which was a bit of innovation gone amok. With its oddly hinged display, Adamo became the first laptop that was tough to use on a lap.

While Dell imagines itself to be an innovator in computers, it also imagines itself an innovator in marketing — with similarly unimpressive results. The marketing of Adamo fell somewhere between ill-conceived and laughable.

The ads here are representative of the overall Adamo campaign, which used ultra-fashiony, super-chic models to appeal to those interested in a razor-thin laptop. Never mind that half the ads didn’t even show the razor-thin part. Some future Mad Men-type show will have a field day with this one.

Given all of the above, it’s inaccurate to say that Dell killed Adamo last week. Looks like a suicide to me.

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →