The question should be, Why should Apple make all their products 'iThis' or 'MacThat'? Stepping away from the 'iPrefix' may not be so bad; iVariety.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New Apple TV ad
- Thread starter Rocketman
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The question should be, Why should Apple make all their products 'iThis' or 'MacThat'? Stepping away from the 'iPrefix' may not be so bad; iVariety.
It doesn't really explain how it works, does it? I think most consumers will be left scratching their heads wondering what it actually does.
Not positive if someone here already asked but...
...is that Jim from The Office speaking!?!?!?!?
...is that Jim from The Office speaking!?!?!?!?
uh...i think rod rod was making a joke, laugh
Yup, it was a joke! I'm sure it matters for some people in Canada that they can't buy movies or TV shows on iTunes. However, the Apple TV is not useless in Canada.
Most people find it easy to convert their music for iTunes (and the iPod). Converting video for iTunes (and the Apple TV) is easy too.
The vast majority of the 100 million iPods sold have never played a song from the iTunes store, even in countries where the iTunes store operates. Being precluded from an online store does not kill the usefulness of the device.
Again the counterpoint.
The "market" for Apple TV is iTunes users, 99% of which are (now fully trained) iPod users. The marketing pitch for Apple TV is simple for a reason. The market for Apple TV is those (now fully trained) iTunes users who want to view video content on their TV or Biga$$ TV.
Since they now sell the aforementioned TV's in Wal-Mart, I find it believable to presume the market for Apple TV is at minimum larger than the market for Macs (800,000 per quarter), and at maximum, 40% of the 100,000,000 iPod installed base.
Rocketman
The problem lies in the last sentence: it confusing. Perhaps Apple's statement should be "It's on your computer. It's on your iPod. And now you can play it on your TV." Not, "Now it's on your TV," because in reality, most of the content available through iTunes was "on my TV" before it was on iTunes.
Most consumers will probably watch this ad, scratch their heads, and say "of course LOST is on my TV - it always has been."
So far I've foundTV is one of the hardest brand name to querry on the internet (google, youtube, etc) so you get relevant results.
"
"Apple TV" gets you mostly other Apple products or non Apple TV sets
"ATV" gets you mostly stuff about all-terrain vehicles.
how do you make the apple symbol???
and yes, i did think that this would generate an issue, since the name is apple(SYMBOL)TV, and not Apple(NAME)TV. I guess it will eventually work itself out, tho.
This is an excellent observation. With the saturation of me-too "i"-this and "i"-that products, there exists the potential for the branding to become meaningless and easily confused.
Today, every facial tissue is called "Kleenex" by the public. This is good and bad. When someone thinks of Kleenex, there's only a fraction of a chance that they're going to buy that actual brand at the store. They may buy any number of inferior brands.
This type of association is great for products that are 2nd or 3rd in the marketplace, but never good for products that dominate since there's nowhere for that association to pull them but down.
Apple shouldn't want their products to be lost in the sea of "i"-everythings... it's time to move on and in a way, the
branding is a means of differentiation that no one else can copy. Not only is the logo convenient for truncating the name for easy mention in advertising and other mentions, but it's an extremely smart protection on Apple's part. There are many ways a company can call a product "Apple" something since the word itself is not trademarkable... However, the bitten-Apple logo IS a trademark, and no product can copy it legally. This type of branding strategy ensures that their product will be remembered as a uniquely Apple, Inc. product and guarantees that no me-too products will be able to dilute the perceived brand value.
Last, the
logo reinforces in every mention on an ad, on a blog, in a news piece, etc. the identity of the company that brings these technologies to the consumer. Sure, it's inconsistent with iPod and iMac, but if Madonna's career in the 80's is any proof of the power of constantly re-inventing one's identity, then it should be evident that Apple, whose product introductions keep setting competitors behind 5 or more years, is taking a direction to keep five steps ahead in the branding game. Given that Apple's name is readily identifiable as the single most admired brand across all product categories and is identified by the general public as synonymous with quality and ease of use, differentiating their corporate brand identity is a very critical component in their ability to command the kind of margins they do and continue to be extremely profitable despite economies of scale.This ad is aided by the 'halo effect', and using the same prefix emphasises that...
Is that Rock School?
It looks bloody funny, I think I gotta go rent that.
My verdict on the ad - nice and quirky.
It looks bloody funny, I think I gotta go rent that.
My verdict on the ad - nice and quirky.
Yeah, and most of the audio content on iTunes was on your stereo before it was on an iPod, which gets plugged right back into the stereo. So what? The iPod content still comes from iTunes, just like the AppleTV's video content comes from iTunes.
You didn't have iTunes files on your TV before. Now you can, without having to resort to an iPod or a full computer in the living room. Yeah, you could always watch it on your TV in the first place--but then you wouldn't be watching iTunes content.
There's no material difference between the two phrases. It's absurd to pick apart a 30 second advertisement when the message is simple and clear.
Your iTunes library, on your computer, is now available on your television. Just like you can put it onto an iPod, you can put it on an Apple TV. That's it.
Funny, you mentioned iTunes quite a bit, yet for some strange reason the ad never says iTunes.
And commercials about the Internet tend not to mention web browsers. Again, it's not a user manual. You've got content on your computer (if you've got a Mac, it's in iTunes; if you have a PC, there's still a strong chance it's in iTunes), you've got content on your iPod (how did it get there? iTunes). iPod commercials don't talk about iTunes anymore because people already understand how iPods work.
If you don't understand iPods, what are the chances you've got a widescreen TV and lots of media on your computer? Commercials about digital cameras don't have to explain plugging in your camera, launching the photo software, importing, and then clicking print. They tend to show people taking pictures and printers spitting them out. People learn the "how" and the caveats when they do research on the products.
I don't know if it has been mentioned, but I saw the ad on Discovery Channel.
Steve
Edit: HAHA! Wow, what great timing, eh? Is it me or does Discovery Channel have some great commercials, mainly Deadliest Catch and Planet Earth?
Steve
Edit: HAHA! Wow, what great timing, eh? Is it me or does Discovery Channel have some great commercials, mainly Deadliest Catch and Planet Earth?
So, Apple should hope everyone in their target audience is clever enough to read between the lines? ...Sure, most may be able to, but should Apple take the chance of loosing a few sales?
What is the downside to being slightly more descriptive? ...There are even ways Apple could have given a better message in the same amount of words:
Instead of saying "It's on your computer..." they could have said "You bought it off iTunes." ...A simple change such as that makes it much clearer. It answers the question of "What's on my computer and how did it get there?" and describes exactly what the AppleTV does without complicating the ad.
Sure, the ad works as it is now, but it could have been much better.
It doesn't have to. It presumes it.
Is your "hobby" activity just as presumptive?
Rocketman
This is about as descriptive as they have ever been. They at least showed real products in real use and closed with an image of the primary promoted product.
Rocketman
It sure does sound like him. Not sure. I would love for him to be the new voice of apple. Better than Jeff Goldbloom.