| Thursday, March 24, 2011 |
14:43 - What's the frequency, Steve?
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/223204/why_tablets_are_just_a_fad.html
|
(top) |
Katherine Noyes at PCWorld, via Gruber:
Yet strong sales are backing up the hype — at least for now — suggesting something about the devices has caught on with consumers. What is that mysterious “something”? Purely marketing, I believe. Apple is nothing if not master of the glitzy sales pitch, and there’s never been better proof of that than the iPad’s current success.
Mark my words: The device — and all the others of its ilk that have sprung up for a piece of the action — are nothing more than a passing fad, at least in the mainstream.
Is it just me, or is it 2011? And people are still saying that Apple's success has mostly to do with "marketing"?
"Marketing" is one of those words that pundits like to deploy with a sneer and an eye-roll, the way Linux kids describe the commercial software they've pirated as "overpriced". It's an endlessly useful catch-all that has such cachet because it hints at great dark forces that we are powerless to control, and it explains everything. (Where have we heard this before?)
I remember people telling me that the reason why those new-fangled iPods were showing up in celebrities' gift baskets at gala awards ceremonies was because of "marketing". Why were people settling for a music player that didn't even have a replaceable battery? "Marketing". Why were people buying music from iTunes instead of downloading free MP3s? "Marketing". Why were college kids suddenly buying Macs in droves? "Marketing".
Yet it's an unbelievably insidious bit of mind control, this "marketing", because not one person knows it's happening. Nor does anyone shake off the spell once he's gotten used to the product he shelled out his hundreds or thousands of dollars for and learned to evaluate it on its own merits rather than the siren call of TV ads starring Justin Long. Instead, co-workers in a PC-centric environment invariably tell of their all-Mac households and how much easier it's made their lives, with a sidelong glance at anyone who might be put out at overhearing the, er, un-PC-ness of the statement. Even among tech geeks—maybe especially among tech geeks—it's an article of faith that the best way to shake off the pain of a day fighting with Windows is to go home to a MacBook Pro and an Apple TV and an iPad. Not one person says the reason they keep buying gear from the one-button-mouse company, over and over and over, is because of the slick advertising.
That's a hell of a trick for marketing to pull off. Marketing departments the world over should study Apple's example, because it's apparently been orders of magnitude more successful in reprogramming people's brains and then concealing its own existence, rootkit-style, than every other marketing organization in the history of everything ever, possibly combined.
It's not like other companies don't have good marketing too. It's not like Apple's the only company to produce good ads. Volkswagen and Jack in the Box bring in lots of customers with their pitches; but without solid products to back them up, they'd be nowhere—and with solid products, the marketing only helps raise their profile, it isn't necessary.
Microsoft and RIM and the Androidy phone makers put out some good ads. Apple's are pretty good too; probably better on balance. But no way are they so much better that you can convincingly pin their success at everything they've touched in the last ten years on something so glib and cynical and outwardly daft as "marketing".
...Of course, that's what I would say, if I'd been that well brainwashed, isn't it?
|
|
Brian Tiemann
