Apple Expands Apple Watch Marketing Efforts With New Multi-Page Spread in Vogue Magazine

[Keirasplace]

One of the biggest reasons I think you're seeing tit though is because of the time between announcement and release.

This is one of the first times that I remember where Apple announced a product, months to 1/2 a year before retail availability.

Maybe thats why you're noticing more because the greater length of leadup time?

The Iphone... Many others have said the same.

The main reason they announced early :
- To mess up Android wear sales around Christmas
- Add a selling point to the Iphone
- Hardware design would not change (like for the Iphone), though some specs and the software would
- There would be leaks about it anyways as Apple employees start to test it in the open (might as well, control the message)
- Watchkit needs to be announced in advance
- Use your biggest annual event to announce a totally new product

 

[IJ Reilly]

Since 5PM today. Didn't you get the memo?

Damn. Why am I always the last to know?

 

[Inkling]

Working long hours....

The problem with fashion over function is that fashion is much easier to copy.

All around the world—and particularly in Asia—people working long hours to copy these designs. Apple's watch will hardly be on the market before the clones will begin to appear at a fraction of Apple's prices.

Will Apple sue? Probably. But the problem with simplicity is that the simpler a design is, they less you have to do to copy it. That may haunt them in court.

Apple: "Your honor, this watch has a green wristband just like our watch."

Cloner: "Your honor, defense would like to enter into evidence pictures of over three hundred other wristbands that are also green."

That sort of thing.

 

[KPOM]

I don't think we should wait for the future. You already know Fashion and you already know how your friends react to Fashion.

The Fashion industry will not change because Apple launch 1 item of all the Fashion items of the industry.

But, lets wait and check back in december

Wearable tech needs to straddle two very different worlds. Fashion superficially changes on a whim (though watches change more slowly) while the underlying production processes and materials don't really change much. Technology changes "under the hood" very rapidly, but aesthetic changes occur much more slowly (the basic form of the notebook PC hasn't changed much in 25 years, except that it has gotten thinner as the technology has allowed, and as features such as external media drives have been dropped).

With Apple Watch, Apple needs to get across that this is something personal, and customizable to fit your personality and fashion tastes. That's why they focused so much on the band. They probably can't make very many changes to the actual design of the watch itself (they potentially could make more ornate designs, or rounded or octagonal designs in the future), so the best way to do so is to make lots of different kinds of bands, as well as watch faces. Since the faces are digital, they can add new ones whenever they want. If certain bands prove popular or unpopular, they can change the designs pretty much whenever they want, as well.

In Angela Ahrendts, Apple has an executive who has successfully navigated the fashion industry for 2 decades.

----------

The problem with fashion over function is that fashion is much easier to copy.

All around the world—and particularly in Asia—people working long hours to copy these designs. Apple's watch will hardly be on the market before the clones will begin to appear at a fraction of Apple's prices.

Will Apple sue? Probably. But the problem with simplicity is that the simpler a design is, they less you have to do to copy it. That may haunt them in court.

But if done right, people will pay more for the "real thing." Angela Ahrendts dealt with exactly that problem when she took over at Burberry. There were lots of cheap knock-offs, and they were often purchased by soccer hooligans, which hurt the brand. Burberry did sue/C&D a number of them out of existence and did manage to regain control of its image.

That's probably another reason for the tie to the iPhone, at least initially. Apple can control what does and does not interface with the iPhone, Mac, iPad, or any other product it sells. They can enable tight integration of the Apple Watch into the Apple ecosystem while shutting out the copycats.

 

[Max(IT)]

You're absolutely right. But there's a reason brands in the fashion world produce lots of different looks—to satisfy consumers styles across many demos.

With Apple Watch unfortunately, this "one style fits all" mentality doesn't quite cut it for some. (And interchangeable bands alone aren't going to do it.)

Apple's a smart company however, and they've certainly done their consumer insight research to guage market demand. It'll be very interesting to see how well these sell—especially after all the details come out at the launch event.

They are actually going to sell three different models in two sizes, with a good choice of bands....
The base is the same, and that's quite understandable from a production point of view.
As always, when Apple is involved, people criticize for the sake of it.

 

[KPOM]

I don't really understand why people like you try to make it sound that Apple won't advertise in other publications than women's fashion magazines or that they'll only display the watch in luxury stores. What leads you to such conclusion?

Perhaps they will advertise in other publications, but the fact that the first appearances have been in Vogue China, Colette's boutique in Paris, and now Vogue in the US suggest that Apple is prioritizing fashion avenues over technology avenues. My guess is that tech-oriented people in the Apple ecosystem don't need to be "sold" on the Apple Watch.

I think there is a reason they are calling this the Apple Watch and not the iWatch. They don't want this viewed the same way as an iPhone or iPad. It's a fashion accessory that happens to have technology built in, rather than a tech item that happens to be fashionable. My guess is that Apple cares less what David Pogue or Walt Mossberg think of the Apple Watch than if they can get some celebrities to wear one on the red carpet, or models to wear it on the catwalk.

 

[apolloa]

hmmm... may have to forget this, and the new Pebble Time, because I really want a new phone this year, and that will be the iPhone 6S if it has OIS on the camera.. and that ain't cheap.

Nice to see Apple aiming at the fashion market as they said they would, so it better be on the button for their sake, or the fashion industry may not be so kind in their reviews.

 

[69650]

Strike a pose.

Fall off a stage

 

[LordBeelzebub]

I think what Apple is going for with the seemingly strange tactic of marketing larger displays then turning around and marketing a tiny display, is that they want you to have the big display for reading, movie watching, etc. but have a small display for light interaction.

There is no doubt that having to heft the iPhone 6 and especially the 6 plus out of the pocket for every text can be annoying. Lightweight operation like responding to a text or liking someones comment on your picture is left to the smaller display so that the larger phone is only taken out when it is really needed.

I believe that's the ultimate goal here.

So in a round about way you just confirmed my statements that the watch is nothing more than an extended display for the iPhone that is limited to only doing "lightweight" tasks, yet cost how much?

I don't think people are taking the time to really think about what this product is, does, to what what costs.

No wonder Andriod users call us iSheep. LOL

 

[IJ Reilly]

That's probably another reason for the tie to the iPhone, at least initially. Apple can control what does and does not interface with the iPhone, Mac, iPad, or any other product it sells. They can enable tight integration of the Apple Watch into the Apple ecosystem while shutting out the copycats.

This is a point, but likely secondary to the advantage of designing the "whole widget." Steve was the first to coin that phrase, but Tim Cook used it again not long ago, confirming (to anyone who might have thought otherwise) that end-to-end design is still a big deal at Apple. They know it's one of their advantages over the competition. I would not expect Apple Watch to ever become an "open" platform.

 

[LordVic]

Fall off a stage

I feel this is relevant as of 1 hour ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUqqRfCeENw

 

[IJ Reilly]

I think there is a reason they are calling this the Apple Watch and not the iWatch. They don't want this viewed the same way as an iPhone or iPad. It's a fashion accessory that happens to have technology built in, rather than a tech item that happens to be fashionable. My guess is that Apple cares less what David Pogue or Walt Mossberg think of the Apple Watch than if they can get some celebrities to wear one on the red carpet, or models to wear it on the catwalk.

It's surprising (to me) that they used the word "watch" at all because it conjures up an entire history of watches as single-purpose pieces of jewelry. A large part of the griping we are hearing about it now is from the watch snobs comparing it unfavorably to the fashion watches they know and love. The name also associates with smart watches, a product category that is perceived mainly as geek accessories. This fashion-forward approach is new to Apple. I worry a bit over whether they can pull it off.

 

[GeneralChang]

If anything, so far, it's almost being hidden.

I totally agree that the ads haven't been clear thus far that an iPhone 5 or up will be required to use this fully. But I don't think it's got anything to do with it being hidden. Really all the ads have said so far is "look, it's gorgeous!" They haven't said anything about the technological component since the announcement.

Presumably once they start advertising the actual functionality of the device, that's when we'll start seeing references to the need for an iPhone.

 

[Rogifan]

It's surprising (to me) that they used the word "watch" at all because it conjures up an entire history of watches as single-purpose pieces of jewelry. A large part of the griping we are hearing about it now is from the watch snobs comparing it unfavorably to the fashion watches they know and love. The name also associates with smart watches, a product category that is perceived mainly as geek accessories. This fashion-forward approach is new to Apple. I worry a bit over whether they can pull it off.

The griping is mostly coming from people who post to tech sites and rumor sites like this. I'm sure the average person out there couldn't give a crap less what Apple called it.

 

[GeneralChang]

I honestly cannot believe this is an Apple product.

You honestly can't believe it? I've got some pretty convincing evidence to indicate it actually is. Like the entire Apple Watch section of their website. Though I suppose that might be some kind of elaborate and lengthy hack.

----------

I don't know why I need one and am still waiting for Apple to tell me.

I'm kinda in the same boat. It looks very nice, and notifications + Apple pay on my wrist would be nice. But I need to see one.

 

[KPOM]

This is a point, but likely secondary to the advantage of designing the "whole widget." Steve was the first to coin that phrase, but Tim Cook used it again not long ago, confirming (to anyone who might have thought otherwise) that end-to-end design is still a big deal at Apple. They know it's one of their advantages over the competition. I would not expect Apple Watch to ever become an "open" platform.

It will never be an open platform, but it could become its own platform that would not require an iPhone.

----------

It's surprising (to me) that they used the word "watch" at all because it conjures up an entire history of watches as single-purpose pieces of jewelry. A large part of the griping we are hearing about it now is from the watch snobs comparing it unfavorably to the fashion watches they know and love. The name also associates with smart watches, a product category that is perceived mainly as geek accessories. This fashion-forward approach is new to Apple. I worry a bit over whether they can pull it off.

If they called it a bracelet, that would cut off access to the men's market. Plus, it's quite obvious that they took design cues from watches. The iPhone is a pocket computer that happens to have voice capabilities. The Apple Watch is a fashion-focused wrist computer that happens to tell the time.

 

[69650]

I feel this is relevant as of 1 hour ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUqqRfCeENw

That's gotta hurt lol

 

[Col4bin]

Why not, and says who?

We can already count 28 variations on Apple Watch on Apple.com, and that's assuming a person could buy only the combinations they've shown. Since when is 28 variations "one size fits all?"

Yes, but it's the same ugly-shaped watch no matter how much you try dressing it up. Sorry, it's busted.

 

[AppleScruff1]

How many of us Macrumor visitors actually subscribe to these magazines or shop at these luxury stores? I figure that "most" of us are geeks first and foremost and care mainly about gadgets.

Give it a few more weeks and there will be many.

 

[Col4bin]

So, because Apple doesn't produce several dozens of variants (as many as all other makers do?), they've got "one size fits all"! They've got 3 models and 2 sizes of each. That's as many models as most of the others makers put together! I think that for a brand new product, they've got plenty of variants already, more than for anything else they've launched.

Regardless of how you like to spin it, it's the same basic watch for all its iterations, regardless of its finishing materials or colors. My point being, in the world of fashion, people expect a wide variety of choices.

 

[macs4nw]

.....for someone who doesn't fully understand the functionality of these devices (a good portion of Apple consumers) it really hasn't been completely obvious that you need an iPhone.

I guarentee there will be at least a handful of "I bought the Apple Watch and didn't know I needed an iPhone!" complaints once it is released.

Oh, there might be a few, but don't underestimate the level of sophistication of today's purchasers of 'tech' products. People aren't going to spend $350 and over for a piece of technology, without being informed about what it can and can't do for them.

 

[IJ Reilly]

The griping is mostly coming from people who post to tech sites and rumor sites like this. I'm sure the average person out there couldn't give a crap less what Apple called it.

Product naming is about messaging. The name invites comparisons to known things. The other tough crowd is the watch snobs. I'd personally never been exposed to their opinions before, at least not as much as I have been here recently.

----------

It will never be an open platform, but it could become its own platform that would not require an iPhone.

Possibly more than it is now (the full extent of which is still a matter of speculation), but the form factor is always going to be a limitation. Apple has the perfect excuse to leverage off their existing platform with the Watch.

If they called it a bracelet, that would cut off access to the men's market. Plus, it's quite obvious that they took design cues from watches. The iPhone is a pocket computer that happens to have voice capabilities. The Apple Watch is a fashion-focused wrist computer that happens to tell the time.

Speaking of product names being a form of messaging, "bracelet" would be even more laden with preexisting ideas than watch. What did the name "iPad" conjure up before Apple told us what one was? Nothing, of course. It was a concept they could define from the ground up. Not so with watch. Using it was a conscious choice on Apple's part. I'm just not sure why they made it.

----------

Yes, but it's the same ugly-shaped watch no matter how much you try dressing it up. Sorry, it's busted.

I'm sorry, I didn't realize that your definition of beauty was the only one that counted. I will be certain to defer to your superior views on such matters in the future.

Not.

 

[Rogifan]

Speaking of product names being a form of messaging, "bracelet" would be even more laden with preexisting ideas than watch. What did the name "iPad" conjure up before Apple told us what one was? Nothing, of course. It was a concept they could define from the ground up.

Um I guess you forgot all the feminine hygiene jokes when iPad was announced?

 

[rjlawrencejr]

absolutely nothing.

Apple has always had a pretty hefty marketing budget and campaign. The iPod had years worth of very fancy and expensive commercials on debuting during prime time TV.

so did the iPhone and iPad.

So what if they're advertising the watch? how else are they going to showcase that they have a product for sale for the rest of the world that aren't geeks like us who browse tech sites

Thank you. I get so annoyed by uninformed comments. Since when has Apple NOT marketed something hard. iMac, iPod, iPhone, iPad have all had extensive marketing campaigns. Who can forget the Mac vs PC "Get a Mac" campaign? If they decide to show the flying Apple Watch ad, it is very reminiscent of one of the first iMac ads from 1998 which, correct me if I am wrong, showed different colored iMacs floating through the air.

So to those of you who feel the urge to criticize, by all means you're welcome to, but please do your homework first so that you don't look ignorant.

 

[daftpunker909]

Apple has continually pushed the fashion item aspect of the watch because for many consumers, that is what the Apple Watch will be. This is also why Apple can get away with charging $5,000 or more for the Edition line of watches, because the people that buy the Edition, and many of the people who buy the Sport or Classic Apple Watch, do not want a small phone on their wrist, they want a device that makes people ask "what is that?"

Apple is correct in pursuing this goal. The Apple Watch will appeal to the average, every day, my-phone-does-everything-I-need-it-to-do person, while simultaneously giving a nod to the tech crowd. It can be used for fashion as much as function.

That is the genius of the Apple Watch: anyone can use it, so everyone will want it.

so far I have not seen anything genius of the Apple watch