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.
Verizon Goes on Offensive Against iPhone Again With 'Droid Does' Teasers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think the big deal is that this is Verizon's first REALLY good smartphone. The initial impressions have not be any less than stellar. The OS is similar the iPhone: a smart phone built for the general public.
Oh yeah, and a couple more compelling reasons that I currently don't have an iPhone as much as I love all things apple:
I don't want to drive over an hour to an Apple store to get a warranty replacement (assuming I can get an appointment at a convenient time for me and the folks at the Genius Bar)
Phone Insurance is a pain, but kinda handy
(The Blackberry Tour is $150, btw, for whoever asked, and having dual radios with high speed data on both domestic and international networks is kinda cool)
Ok, it's late, and this is getting too flame war-ish, even for me. At the end of the day, more options for consumers and more competition between carriers/manufacturers can never be a bad thing. iPhone user or not, if the Droid sells large, we're all gonna benefit.
I don't want to drive over an hour to an Apple store to get a warranty replacement (assuming I can get an appointment at a convenient time for me and the folks at the Genius Bar)
Phone Insurance is a pain, but kinda handy
(The Blackberry Tour is $150, btw, for whoever asked, and having dual radios with high speed data on both domestic and international networks is kinda cool)
Ok, it's late, and this is getting too flame war-ish, even for me. At the end of the day, more options for consumers and more competition between carriers/manufacturers can never be a bad thing. iPhone user or not, if the Droid sells large, we're all gonna benefit.
EARTH TO iBLUE
The iPhone was offered to Verizon first -
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/wireless/2007-05-21-at&t-iphone_N.htm
The iPhone was offered to Verizon first -
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/wireless/2007-05-21-at&t-iphone_N.htm
The GSM international-travel argument is a moot point unless people like paying through the ass for AT&T's international roaming service.
The iPhone is SIM locked so it's not like you can take a trip to Europe and pop in a local card and avoid the horrific charges AT&T wants.
The iPhone is SIM locked so it's not like you can take a trip to Europe and pop in a local card and avoid the horrific charges AT&T wants.
AT&T does the same thing. On my original IPhone I paid $20 per month for the Data plan with 200 free text messages. Now with the new 3GS I pay $30 per month for the Data plan with NO free text messages.
This has been my experience, walk into the AT$T store. They look at me, make an appointment for me at the Apple store 15 miles away, then point at the door!
Verizon, I have never had a problem in the 5 years I have been with them. Which moron did you go with?
Okay, then the Wall Street Journal. And Verizon themselves.
There is no question at all, that the iPhone was offered to Verizon. None.
What most people don't get, though, is:
1) Verizon never saw one. It didn't exist at the time. The only other Apple related phone around was the ROKR, which even Jobs disliked.
2) Negotiatons with Verizon allowed Apple to up their price with Cingular. Verizon knew it, and therefore they did not take Apple that seriously.
Cingular already knew in early 2005 that Apple was going to do a phone. Apple went to Verizon in the summer of 2005. Apple spent a year, off and on, trying to get Verizon signed up. Then Apple gave up, went back to Cingular and signed an exclusive.
Just like to point out that it was not free texting.
You were paying $15 for media net (dumb phone internet) and then $5 for 200 text messages.
Good to know that Verizon themselves confirmed that. All I ever heard was from other sources but never anything official.
We don't know. Maybe?
What's the problem? When they get the iPhone contract, then they can just change the ads accordingly.
Apple told us for years that the PowerPC is the fastest option on the market. I'm sure they didn't lose any customers when they admitted that they were bullsh
ing us and changed to Intel...Leaving aside the possible merits of the phone, I have to say that I found the ad itself to be very unappealing. For one thing, how many consumers (and I'm not talking about people on this site who pay attention to these things) actually know what a Widget is? How many consumers know what open development is or give rat's patuti? The end of the ad seemed like a tone-deaf appeal to my 13-year-old. Anyway, I've had all of the CellCo's as providers, including Verison. Last phone I had with them had crippled bluetooth that was later the subject of a successful class action. Far as I'm concerned, you could put all of them in a burlap bag and take them down to the river. In that company, AT&T has been just fine for me.
Personal Opinion here so please don't shoot me:
I think both Andiod and WebOS look more better/promising than the Mobile OSX in its current state. The biggest negative of Andriod to me is so far every phone have had a tad bit too weak of specs.
Howver the Moto Droid looks to fix this so it could be a REALLY good phone.
I currently have a Palm Pre (it'll take A LOT to move me off of my cheap Sprint plan) and notification system/card swaping makes using other phones a pain at this point.
As someone else said, iPhones biggest strength is def. the app store and the iTunes ecosystem and thats plenty to keep people on your platform however.
I think both Andiod and WebOS look more better/promising than the Mobile OSX in its current state. The biggest negative of Andriod to me is so far every phone have had a tad bit too weak of specs.
Howver the Moto Droid looks to fix this so it could be a REALLY good phone.
I currently have a Palm Pre (it'll take A LOT to move me off of my cheap Sprint plan) and notification system/card swaping makes using other phones a pain at this point.
As someone else said, iPhones biggest strength is def. the app store and the iTunes ecosystem and thats plenty to keep people on your platform however.
iDon't understand this list, att nickels and dimes even more than verizon, when i first got the iphone it was 20/mo that included texting, now its 50/mo. for the same service, i sold the iphone, and never looked back, what a joke its STILL panning out to be, iphone users have close to NO control over what apps are on their phones, why is that even listed as such, and iphone users traveling internationally have received $30k phone bills. 85 thousand apps, cnet reports over 80% of apps dl'd get deleted or never used, the app store is a wasteland of girth and bloat, and a giant giant disappointment, sorry but you can't pretend like the iphone is gleaming with exclusive features, because it has NONE. it's only exclusive feature "visual voicemail" is now available on multiple carriers, over multiple platforms, and even works better than apples. as far as carriers "limiting or disabling features that don't benefit their "bottomline"" apple is best at that, apple is the only brand of phone not supporting google voice, RIM and android both have this working on att, its not att, its apple, i used to think apple had a fairly intelligent fanbase and consumer market. as the years go by i see people believe that they are purchasing some sort of elite membership, this simply isn't true, theres nothing better about their products, while i'll say i prefer os x to windows, i'll also tell you that i'm running it retail natively on a pc, with everything working, on a machine that out benchmarks $5k macpro models and i built it for under a grand. sorry mac folks, your phone sucks compared to other models by rim nokia and android now, at the time of its initial release i think it was pretty nice, but at this point, all they've really done is add a faster cpu, and FINALLY MMS. seriously, adding mms was a big story, please.
Odd effect
I've been involved in advertising and marketing in one way or another or more for 30 years. I've written and directed ads. So I was applying a pro eye and ear when I watched at that ad.
If you listen to the first bit - nice tune that's sort of Apple ad like, you feel relaxed. Even though the text is refreshing too quickly, there's an Apple ad feel to it. But because the text is refreshing too quickly, you can't really read the message. But you're left with an impression of a lot of sentences that begin with 'i'. And even though it's actually attacking what the maker thinks are Apple's iPhone's limitations, it remains very Apple like. I have little doubt that was the intention.
But it back-fires badly, because then it all goes sci-fi and techie. The sound is discordant. It jars and crashes like "KERRANG!" in your face. Now, this will appeal to all those guys that play games, eat lots of pizza, drink too much Red Bull, and tap their feet continuously. But play the add to most normal people and they'll like the first bit and hate the second.
There are reasons why techies, like accountants, should never be allowed to do two things in business: run businesses and approve ads. Why? Because they lack the capacity to empathise with the average user.
The graveyards of the business world are littered with egotistical techies who thought they knew how to advertise their products. Clive Sinclair and Bill Gates come to mind. As Clint Eastwood said: "A man's got to know his limitations."
And if this is a spoiler ad, it's just a waste of money imo. Spoiler ads don't work. Trying to preach your as yet unreleased product's benefits by pointing out what your main competition can't do, is like trying to sell Jehovah to a devout Muslim. It's immediately offensive... and utterly pointless.
The experience is that Apple's iPhone ads are performing a very simple task - very simply: only reenforcing popular perception that iPhones are great to use. That's not why iPhones are selling though. iPhones are selling because of that popular perception. And that popular perception is based on user experience. You can't create that artificially, anymore than you can successfully attack it and turn it into a negative that helps you sell your product in it's place.
Having said that, don't be fooled into thinking that Apple's iPhone ads are easy to make. They're definitely not. I can guarantee that Apple reject ten times as many themes as we eventually see.
By contrast, I suspect that Verizon's ads are forced through a much less critical or rigorous approval process, charaterised by a lot of back-slapping and utterly miss-placed and very over-optimistic "That'll kill Apple" jeering.
What am I basing this on? This current campaign comes just weeks after attacking AT&T's 3G network and indirectly the iPhone with a "There's a map for that" ad campaign. I would have personally killed anyone that allowed that to run. First of all, it does what I described earlier: it utilises a phrase that piggy-backs on Apple's popular phrase from their iPhone ads, whilst it's intended as an attack on AT&T's network coverage. Yet even though it's used in an informational manner, all it does is reinforce Apple's original message.
And finally, this thing [that isn't even ready yet] from Motorola is called "Droid"...
Guys, you're competing with a popular phone with universal appeal called iPhone. You really either need get creative or get out of the game. 30 years of Microsoft prediction-based premature announcements have apparently taught you nothing.
I've been involved in advertising and marketing in one way or another or more for 30 years. I've written and directed ads. So I was applying a pro eye and ear when I watched at that ad.
If you listen to the first bit - nice tune that's sort of Apple ad like, you feel relaxed. Even though the text is refreshing too quickly, there's an Apple ad feel to it. But because the text is refreshing too quickly, you can't really read the message. But you're left with an impression of a lot of sentences that begin with 'i'. And even though it's actually attacking what the maker thinks are Apple's iPhone's limitations, it remains very Apple like. I have little doubt that was the intention.
But it back-fires badly, because then it all goes sci-fi and techie. The sound is discordant. It jars and crashes like "KERRANG!" in your face. Now, this will appeal to all those guys that play games, eat lots of pizza, drink too much Red Bull, and tap their feet continuously. But play the add to most normal people and they'll like the first bit and hate the second.
There are reasons why techies, like accountants, should never be allowed to do two things in business: run businesses and approve ads. Why? Because they lack the capacity to empathise with the average user.
The graveyards of the business world are littered with egotistical techies who thought they knew how to advertise their products. Clive Sinclair and Bill Gates come to mind. As Clint Eastwood said: "A man's got to know his limitations."
And if this is a spoiler ad, it's just a waste of money imo. Spoiler ads don't work. Trying to preach your as yet unreleased product's benefits by pointing out what your main competition can't do, is like trying to sell Jehovah to a devout Muslim. It's immediately offensive... and utterly pointless.
The experience is that Apple's iPhone ads are performing a very simple task - very simply: only reenforcing popular perception that iPhones are great to use. That's not why iPhones are selling though. iPhones are selling because of that popular perception. And that popular perception is based on user experience. You can't create that artificially, anymore than you can successfully attack it and turn it into a negative that helps you sell your product in it's place.
Having said that, don't be fooled into thinking that Apple's iPhone ads are easy to make. They're definitely not. I can guarantee that Apple reject ten times as many themes as we eventually see.
By contrast, I suspect that Verizon's ads are forced through a much less critical or rigorous approval process, charaterised by a lot of back-slapping and utterly miss-placed and very over-optimistic "That'll kill Apple" jeering.
What am I basing this on? This current campaign comes just weeks after attacking AT&T's 3G network and indirectly the iPhone with a "There's a map for that" ad campaign. I would have personally killed anyone that allowed that to run. First of all, it does what I described earlier: it utilises a phrase that piggy-backs on Apple's popular phrase from their iPhone ads, whilst it's intended as an attack on AT&T's network coverage. Yet even though it's used in an informational manner, all it does is reinforce Apple's original message.
And finally, this thing [that isn't even ready yet] from Motorola is called "Droid"...
Guys, you're competing with a popular phone with universal appeal called iPhone. You really either need get creative or get out of the game. 30 years of Microsoft prediction-based premature announcements have apparently taught you nothing.
It's great to hear the perspective of a pro, G58.
Given your warning about letting the techies invent the ads, I'm curious how much involvement Steve Jobs has in Apple's print/billboard/TV/web ad campaigns. Does he have a talent for advertising? Does he fall victim to the danger you describe? Does he know how to stay out of the way? We know the rumors about his management style, but Apple's advertising successes (and some failures) speak for themselves.
confused
it's amazing when i step back and look, i own 3 macs, and 1 pc running os x, i own an apple tv, i've had every generation ipod that came out, i have an apple router, i've pretty much bought everything apple has made in the last 10 years, even the iphone, 2 of them. the iphone is such a terrible experience to me that its slowly making me hate apple. it's made me want to sell all of my computers and ipods off and buy a zune and run linux. i'm not even joking. the iphone is so horrifically portrayed as something it isn't. the best phone out there. there is nothing about the iphone, sans web browsing, that makes it better than anything else. it isn't better than a blackberry bold, again, sans web browsing, i'll give it that, but besides that, the app store is a JOKE its littered with lost opportunities and snobbery and developers don't like it. it's a graveyard of creativity gone awry, you have to jailbreak it to get functionality from it that exists on other platforms natively. in my humble opinion, apple maybe be making a lot of money, but nothing with this device is really even changing, RIM is not playing games here, i know all you iphone users THINK the iphone has something huge on rim, but it doesn't. RIM will soon have a webkit browser, like real soon, and when thats over, i can't fathom anything about the iphone being superior in anyway, i don't know a single person out of the group of my friends when we bought it that hasn't already switched, nobody, i can think of 11 of us that went iphone then jumped ship. people simply like to have control, iphone offers none, you can't even theme the damn thing. when i had one i couldn't even customize the SMS sound alert, and shallow as it may be, was the last straw in my decision to sell it off. this thing appears to be a razr, on a larger scale, 2 years tops, and it'll be a laughing stock.
it's amazing when i step back and look, i own 3 macs, and 1 pc running os x, i own an apple tv, i've had every generation ipod that came out, i have an apple router, i've pretty much bought everything apple has made in the last 10 years, even the iphone, 2 of them. the iphone is such a terrible experience to me that its slowly making me hate apple. it's made me want to sell all of my computers and ipods off and buy a zune and run linux. i'm not even joking. the iphone is so horrifically portrayed as something it isn't. the best phone out there. there is nothing about the iphone, sans web browsing, that makes it better than anything else. it isn't better than a blackberry bold, again, sans web browsing, i'll give it that, but besides that, the app store is a JOKE its littered with lost opportunities and snobbery and developers don't like it. it's a graveyard of creativity gone awry, you have to jailbreak it to get functionality from it that exists on other platforms natively. in my humble opinion, apple maybe be making a lot of money, but nothing with this device is really even changing, RIM is not playing games here, i know all you iphone users THINK the iphone has something huge on rim, but it doesn't. RIM will soon have a webkit browser, like real soon, and when thats over, i can't fathom anything about the iphone being superior in anyway, i don't know a single person out of the group of my friends when we bought it that hasn't already switched, nobody, i can think of 11 of us that went iphone then jumped ship. people simply like to have control, iphone offers none, you can't even theme the damn thing. when i had one i couldn't even customize the SMS sound alert, and shallow as it may be, was the last straw in my decision to sell it off. this thing appears to be a razr, on a larger scale, 2 years tops, and it'll be a laughing stock.
We don't know. Maybe?
What's the problem? When they get the iPhone contract, then they can just change the ads accordingly.
Apple told us for years that the PowerPC is the fastest option on the market. I'm sure they didn't lose any customers when they admitted that they were bullsh
All the way up to G4 (Desktop) and G5(Workstation) PowerPC was faster.
We cant directly compare now because the Cell is primarily used in the PS3. YOu could look at the Flops it does but thats not a direct indicator.