News Corp.’s The Daily, the first original news publication created every day exclusively for iPad, introduced itself via a 30-second Super Bowl ad yesterday:
MacDailyNews Take: Apple must bar News Corp. from using the words “Apple” or “iPad” in their ads. That’s the only thing we can imagine, even though it makes no sense at all, unless Apple is intent on making what is now a major iPad-only publication seem like it works on any “tablet” when it does not. On which iPad knockoffs The Daily will eventually run is meaningless today: The Daily is currently iPad-only.
Apple participated officially in the launch of The Daily, so we have no idea why this ad says “tablet” where it should say “iPad.” It’s certainly not in Apple’s best interest for “Apple” and/or “iPad” to have not been uttered during that Super Bowl ad and, if Apple is responsible for the omission, then Apple blew it.
If News Corp. did it on their own, we expect that Rupert Murdoch fielded quite the phone call from Steve Jobs the second the ad faded to black.
Bottom line: Whichever company is responsible for replacing “Apple iPad” with “tablet,” they blew it.
Apropos nothing at all.
GO PACKERS!!!!
GO PACKERS!!!!
GO PACKERS!!!!
Boy did you demolish that big mouth Roethlisberger!!!
Murdoch wanted to give the ipression (pretend) that The Daily works on all “tablets”, problem is: there are no other tablets that work like the iPad and there won’t be any in the forseeable future either, despite the hype.
First thought I had too. “Tablet” instead of “iPad”??
I couldn’t remember if it was exclusive or not.
First off let me say that I hope all the fudge “packers” get herpes. There was no way they should have won (I guess if you pay the officials enough…)
Secondly, MDN obviously the daily will be released on the android and Microsoft tabs hence using the generic term “tablet”
Why the hell would apple NOT take free publicity during the superbowl????
That would be most retarded.
It cost newsvorp too much to develop for them to limit it only to iPad plus apple has a to get a piece of every subscriber so they probably can cut better deals with other companies.
I’ll second that…Go Pack!
Anyway, saying it’s on an iPad is kind of redundant. I mean…you can see it’s an iPad. It’s got that distinctive rounded square on the button. And the guy on the park bench is holding an iPad 3G.
I’m pretty sure it’s Apple who has the policy about third parties not being able to mention their name in advertisements…
I’m with MikeK here: I think Apple has to approve any ad which uses their name–though obviously it was an iPad that was shown in all the shots, so I guess they had to approve that…. It was a mystery to me as well that it just said “tablet.” Someone definitely blew it.
Easy, News Corp asked Apple to pay part of the add to say iPad, Apple didn’t see the need for that, so they said tablet instead !
just an idea
“Bottom line: Whichever company is responsible for replacing “Apple iPad” with “tablet,” they blew it.”
Unless they have every intention of releasing a version for Android, which sounds crazy
“‘m pretty sure it’s Apple who has the policy about third parties not being able to mention their name in advertisements…”
Except this is one of Steve Jobs’ side projects.. It’s his baby.
The Daily will be on android tablets also.
“”Bottom line: Whichever company is responsible for replacing “Apple iPad” with “tablet,” they blew it.”
“Unless they have every intention of releasing a version for Android, which sounds crazy.”
Murdoch has already said that they are going to have ‘The Daily’ on other tablets.
to normal people, “tablet” is equivalent of saying “ipad”.
my wife didn’t even recognize the motorola xoom as being something different than the ipad, she just thought it was another app (m.s. from harvard, she’s not an idiot, just an otherwise normal person when it comes to tech).
every other tablet maker has so (too?) much ground to gain in terms of mindshare of the normal person.
I’m with MikeK, John and mike here. Given that the iPad is really the only Tablet currently generally available, the software has to be available for it. When another becomes available, the maker will be obliged to admit, when asked, that The Daily is NOT available for it. And … Apple didn’t have to pay the extra freight for the mention.
Jim, you are an insult to sentient beings everywhere. But, that’s just this Christian’s opinion.
Of more significance, is the fact that for all the potential for The Daily, there are just to many design and technical flaws to make it worthwhile. While 14 cents an issue (after the free period ends) may be cheap, it just isn’t very polished. I’d gladly pay twice the cost (or more) for something better…
I deleted “The Daily” off my iPad, it is clunky and gimmicky.
Maybe Apple was not willing to pay the license rights to appear on the superbowl… um, I mean big game commercial, or they simply didn’t see the need to pay with all the views of the iPad already in the commercial.
One, the Daily is EXCLUSIVELY on the iPad. Everyone who sees the ad, either knows it’s an iPad or thinks it’s an iPad. It doesn’t need to be said. It’s like the Moto Xoom ad, where most people think it’s an iPad, even more since they had people wearing white earbuds in it. Noone got the 1984 lemming reference.
Wait a second, lads!…
…
Just… Take a look at the first comment.
I say maybe there is a method in this madness???
Maybe Apple and Newscorp are trying to say that if you bought something looking like a tablet, ok, and you cannot get The Daily from the appropriate application store, than you probably don’t have a real tablet – iPad. Maybe it’s an “Android tablet” – which is for now more or less pretty messy piece of crap. Or maybe “Windows tablet” which isn’t even the “a tablet” – real or unreal – but maybe “a joke”, “a prank” or “Balmer’s broken wet dream about how to catch a two years of research on the technology of tablets”…
…Isn’t that make sense?
At 27 seconds, look at the right edge of the iPad shown. That’s not a current iPad. There’s no black (or dark grey) edge on my 1.0 model.
Since the eXoom debuts later this month and the Daily is expected to sort-of work on it, then “tablet” instead of “iPad” makes sense. Although, it makes no sense for anyone to pay $800 for a make-believe iPad. I personally don’t think it helps either NewsCorpse or Apple to be closely tied to each other, nor do I think anybody “blew it” by not saying iPad during the SuperBowl. The perceived value of SuperBowl advertising is way overblown. Since 1984, Apple has no need to be mentioned there, and those who get sold on The Daily will find themselves getting an iPad anyway.
EVERYBODY … im not trying to piss anyone off but look at what U are all saying… you are saying that between one of the companies they dropped the ball by not saying “Apple” or “iPad” … two things:first you can clearly see that it is an iPad and secondly: All of you recognized it with no problem so obviously its not an issue.
Maybe The Daily didn’t pass the quality test Apple expects before allowing their brand on a superbowl ad.
Apple must bar News Corp. from using the words “Apple” or “iPad” in their ads. That’s the only thing we can imagine
How about the fact they are going platform agnostic, and an Andriod version is imminent (and RIM Playbook etc.)
News Corp do not give a second thought to Apple.
Just having the iPad as a visual image says “iPad”.
The fun part about “The Daily”… flaming liberal news groups (NYTimes, Chicago Tribune, LA Times, Huffington Post, MacDaily News and others) are so disgusted that, again, they are asleep at the wheel.
I bet these liberals are wondering how a conservative leaning group can be so creative? These out of touch news groups should see Obama to give them stimulus money so they can “Innovate, Educate, Create Jobs” and to beat out free-market (fox) ideas.