Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Steve Jobs explains branding

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 90 posts

Re: Steve Jobs explains branding

#61

Post by skalpelis »

Keyframe wrote: post #37
MikeCapone wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you say they make better products now or when this video was shot? I think that for such a product-centered company, that should be the benchmark.

I'd say they make far far better products now. That's not the issue here. It's just that back before Jobs was ousted and when he returned you'd hear about Apple, you'd hear about philosophy behind it etc. Now you hear sales stats and here and there how good the product is or will be. No more philosophy or visions in talks. Maybe it's just my perception of it though.

The message is still there, it's just that there are much more sales talks because, well, they're doing much better as a company now.

The message has matured now - perhaps it wasn't just enough to be different - now their message is that they aren't being just different, they are better. You can see it in those product videos they do in keynotes, you can see it in Ive, Schiller, Cook, Jobs interviews and they definitely are trying to be better. In their products they don't have much to excel with the common stuff everybody does because it's the same suppliers for everyone - Intel, NVidia, Foxconn, Samsung, etc. but look at where they are trying new approaches everyone else has tried and given up on or haven't tried at all - a touchscreen phone when everyone said touchscreens don't work or a tablet computer when everyone thought that had been tried and failed or just the spectacular attention to detail (ironically, the most similar company in that aspect would be the IBM/Lenovo with the Thinkpads).

Don't get me wrong, Apple isn't infallible, they have failed spectacularly on some fronts and have been unable to compete on others but they seem to be doing just fine as it is.

Re: Steve Jobs explains branding

#62

Post by anamax »

brlewis wrote: post #35
ynniv wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The success of the iPod made the Apple brand young and hip, but their core customer has been (and may again become with the iPhone and iPad) people who value their time and are not computer geeks per-se. That's a difficult thing to say in a crowd of computer geeks, but may contextualize the iOS/Android debate around here.

We shall see how well it works out for them to be the brand for people who aren't fond of rules...computer geeks excepted. Computer geeks who want to change the world seek platforms with fewer rules.

> We shall see how well it works out for them to be the brand for people who aren't fond of rules...computer geeks excepted. Computer geeks who want to change the world seek platforms with fewer rules.

Geeks are such a small fraction of the market that they only matter as a function of influence. The success of desktop linux shows the "power" of said influence.

In other words, Apple can do just fine by telling non-geeks that choosing Apple means that they're technically advanced.

FWIW, geeks do like Mac laptops more than the market as a whole. The "geek cred" ad can leverage that if need be.

Re: Steve Jobs explains branding

#63

Post by dieterrams »

tc wrote: post #9

Apple's "Think Different / Change the World" ad was a brilliant piece of marketing. But it doesn't seem that really stuck as the core value of their brand. If Nike's message is "we hang around great athletes," Apple's message today is "we hang around the young and hip," [1] which is different than "we hang around people who change the world." You could argue that these are somehow related, that the young and hip woul…

> You could argue that these are somehow related, that the young and hip would be attracted by the Think Different ad. I don't dispute that. But the later ads of kids jamming with their iPod ear buds communicate a message that is much closer to the general perception of Apple as a brand today.

The Think Different ad was about Apple, the company. Kids jamming with their iPod earbuds was about the iPod. The Think Different ad was about revitalizing the Apple brand, and Jobs points out how the Nike ads aren't even about the product to explain the logic behind that ad, not to suggest that Apple was going to take that approach forever like Nike does. It makes sense that after they'd established the values they wanted associated with Apple, they'd return to product-centric advertising.

In 2008, ten years after the Think Different campaign debuted, six years after the slogan was mostly retired, and well after the earbud ads hit their peak, there was a study on whether flashing Apple or IBM logos faster than could be percieved could prime people to be more creative. The results suggest it's not really necessary for them to keep playing up that angle.

http://www.physorg.com/news125073871.html

I won't say the restrictive policies governing iOS hasn't dampened the message somewhat for people like us, but you have to remember that a lot of it is about empowering people who aren't super great with computers and don't feel they have the freedom to use them the way anybody here does, because of their complexity and vulnerability. Remember that thread a little while back, where HNers were sharing stories about how some family member would write long lists of instructions just to do something like check their email?

Re: Steve Jobs explains branding

#64

Post by willheim »

It's Apple returning to the Big Why. It worked. Apple at the time was in deep trouble having been the "other PC" for too long. They moved away from their "why" to a "what" and they had copied the "what" of every windows PC at the time to abysmal failure.

This speech could have been part of a film "How Apple got its Groove Back".

The iPod ads have nothing to do with this "Think Different" campaign. The iPod ads maintained the "why" as in "Why do we produce these things?" Answer: For fun! For expression! For freeing you from the shackles of a 60 minute CD. For choice.

They didn't go on about what the iPod was (and the iRiver H100 series at the time was a far better machine and the one I chose). They instead went for why it was. That resonated with their audience. They then took that theme and ran with it with every product since.

And yet, just being fun and frivolous doesn't work for everything. Take a look at the iPhone ads; all about function through the app store... and yet withthat function they declare "Fun!". Take a look at the words they use; magical this and magical that. Meanwhile their competition tries to tout function this and function that... and price. Even HP now recognizes what Apple did right and they tried to rip it off with designer notebooks. Too bad that while they have the product the ads still suck (does HP advertise?)

Apple has nailed down what works in marketing for now. They control the mobile space. They control the music space. They have far greater impact on web development than their products have reach. If Adobe/Microsoft/Google ever "get it", watch out. But maybe that is Steve Jobs greatest asset. He knows that they don't "get it".

Re: Steve Jobs explains branding

#65

Post by 10ren »

tc wrote: post #9

Apple's "Think Different / Change the World" ad was a brilliant piece of marketing. But it doesn't seem that really stuck as the core value of their brand. If Nike's message is "we hang around great athletes," Apple's message today is "we hang around the young and hip," [1] which is different than "we hang around people who change the world." You could argue that these are somehow related, that the young and hip woul…

If you're nearing or over 30, ask yourself: have you made any fundamental scientific discoveries, conquered any world-wide empires, or founded any major religions? Many are called but few are chosen. And many of the young think they can. But as Steve covers himself, o cynical one, those are the ones who do.

An appeal to youth's vanity, yes; yet also the absolute true.

And let's not forget that there are people at Apple who actually are changing the world, with the "lame" ipod, the doubted ipad, and (the associated) pixar. That adds credibility; and the branding is also of Apple's identity to itself, for passionate workers, and to attract talent.

Re: Steve Jobs explains branding

#66

Post by CamperBob »

bfung wrote: post #38
tc wrote: post #9

Apple's "Think Different / Change the World" ad was a brilliant piece of marketing. But it doesn't seem that really stuck as the core value of their brand. If Nike's message is "we hang around great athletes," Apple's message today is "we hang around the young and hip," [1] which is different than "we hang around people who change the world." You could argue that these are somehow related, that the young and hip woul…

While watching the video, it was simple to agree on the analysis of Nike's brand/message. Then Jobs went to give Apple's message, and it struck me like as if he actually didn't know at the time. Compared with "honor great athletes" and "honor great athletics", the "we believe people with great passion can change the world for the better" seemed far too broad and general to be the actual message that people relate to…

Agreed. He really did sound like he was ad-libbing that line.

Re: Steve Jobs explains branding

#67

Post by glhaynes »

erikstarck wrote: post #53
refulgentis wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This begs the question: why isn't an iPad a computer?

No floppy drive? ;) Just kidding. Good question! I think it has to do with the fact that the natural home for a computer is the desk while the natural home for the iPad is the sofa or the bed.

It's interesting that Apple never uses the word "computer" in their iPad marketing. Nor do they use the word "tablet" much.

"iPad" is friendly. "Tablet computer" is "beep boop, processing..."

Re: Steve Jobs explains branding

#68

Post by SnydenBitchy »

erikstarck wrote: post #39
loire280 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DJs at night clubs, the knob-twiddler guys in indie rock bands, and the film students at the local university are all using Macs to make their art. In fact, I'd say Apple's devices and the tools they create to publish to those devices have done a lot to make these creators' lives easier. Think about how much more music people listen to thanks to the ubiquity of iPods. Would the indie rock movement have had as muc…

Apple just released new versions of the iMacs. This used to be a major event and they made a lot of fuzz about each new update. Now go to apple.com. What's taking up 90% of the front page? Apple is a consumer device company. Sure, they still make great computers, but that's more and more just a side business.

Computers are consumer devices.

Remember, Jef Raskin conceptualized the Mac as an appliance. Steve wanted to make it as easy to use as a toaster.

Re: Steve Jobs explains branding

#69

Post by brlewis »

andreyf wrote: post #58
brlewis wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I can change the way the world tells its story with photos, and it bothers me that Camera+ and other 3rd-party iPhone apps can't write EXIF data; only the native app can. Yes, it sounds like a geeky objection, but it makes a difference to people's stories whether the photos can say when and where they were taken.

It's been awhile since I've done iPhone development, but it seems this is available starting in iOS4: http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/Grap... It's hard to find engineers who can work on products like iOS, so I think it's understandable if they can't get every nook and cranny of the API into v1.

It was recently that I heard somewhere that you couldn't write metadata to photos in the photoroll. I think the Camera+ authors have seen iOS4. So I wouldn't read too much into the existence of EXIF data structures in the documentation; it doesn't say what you can do with it.

Re: Steve Jobs explains branding

#70

Post by lispm »

There is a big difference between those brands, Nike and Apple. There is a reason I use a Mac and I don't wear any Nike.

I bought early one of the most expensive Nike Air running shoes. The quality was total shit and running with them was a pain. I never bought a single pair of Nike shoes again, and I bought a lot of running shoes. There was nothing that Nike could fix, it was just the whole construction of the shoe that was a big fail. Plus it was their most expensive shoe at that time. It was way too soft, the Air sole lost its function early, the rubber was also soft and there was not much left after just a bit of running, it provided no stability at all, and the whole 'Air' was just hot air. The shoe could be used for walking around, but not for running. From running with them one would get all kinds of injuries because of its various construction failures. So the core function and the core value of that shoe, the essence of Nike, was zero. All the marketing money with fancy ads showing athletes was zeroed out.

I then kept running Adidas and currently I'm very happy with Brooks shoes.

I bought early an Apple IIc, then a Mac SE30, a PowerBook, and then a multitude of other Macs - typing this on a MacBook Pro. The quality was good (not always) and Apple tries to improve things (though not always). All in all it was and is fun to use their products.

In the end the 'brand' stuff for me is bullshit of the quality of the product is bad. Apple had some bad products, but it was never such a total failure at its core architecture as that Nike shoe.

Post reply on HN