I responded to a comment on Facebook on the Social Media (NZ) page… http://bit.ly/auRQxk
Ethan asked why Apple has accrued such a strong public perception of it’s brand, arguing that “it obviously pays”. Here’s my response:
Public perception has developed because Apple have built a number of high-quality products, and gained a lot of positive recognition since the first imac.
Personally, I didn’t like the way my Windows system used to crash/blue screen, require constant security patches and their browser was just a pain for web developers.
There are myriad other reasons for liking a brand or not – another of mine was that I don’t like having ugly-looking stuff around my house. But I realise for many, especially gamers and the like, a customised windows machine says something about the owner that they like.
Being a successful business when you have maneuvered into a monopoly position is one thing, but becoming a successful business in a highly competitive environment is something else again. Check out Telecom.
Apple have based their business around high-quality products (including their OS), and introduced an aesthetic that appeals to a world that increasingly finds that important in their purchase decisions. It’s about positioning, which is fundamental to marketing. Every business must employ some communication with their target market to have influence, whether that’s handing out leaflets for Greenpeace or publishing YouTube videos about BP oil and their good side.
Apple changed perceptions with their award-winning advertising campaigns where they made direct comparisons with Windows – the “I’m a PC” series. Advertising only works if the audience thinks it’s relevant to them, and the message resonates – or rings true – with their own experience.
Apple expertly backed that up with high-quality products that performed as promised, and delighted the purchasers.
- Image by Digitala Bönder via Flickr
As a company that has spent decades doing their utmost to challenge a monolithic Windows culture, it’s surprising that now that they are beginning to create a space for themselves there are an extraordinary number of under-informed critics (obviously I exclude you from this group of glib single-paragraph reactionaries) prepared to take a tilt at them.
As for “Do No Evil”, don’t we all need to agree on what “evil” is? Even the Vietnamese hacker was just trying to sell some of his apps, to him it was not evil, just business. Is business always evil?
Sure capitalism sucks sometimes, but until we all start using a better system – someone recently suggested “Optimism” – we have to at least recognise how it works and how our lives fit in. That does not mean we have to play by the rules, however:
Pirates and hackers are on a par with the free thinkers and revolutionaries that have constantly been responsible for rejuvenating society – for better or for worse.
Just look how they drive Windows to improve their OS.
Capitalism thrives on innovation – even our government has begun to try to address this, despite underfunding R&D in favour of incumbent businesses alliances. Hollywood was established by a guy named Fox who wanted to illegally avoid Edison’s patents on film=making equipment…
I’ll leave it for someone else to decide whether that is evil or not.
