“The Macintosh has a lot in common with the Star Wars franchise. Both feature a fantastically loyal fan base, both feature incredible name recognition and both garner massive media coverage. For the marketers of the Mac this seems to be enough, they are happy to let the positive media, web sites and satisfied customers extol their Mac experience in hopes of moving product. Apple should reconsider this strategy and take a lesson from LucasArts: If you can get people talking that’s great but it is even better when you bash them over the head time and time again until the message grabs hold like an overly stimulated pit bull,” Chris Seibold writes for Apple Matters.
“The natural question at this point is to ask ‘Why now?’ The media push for Revenge of the Sith was obvious, it coincided with the release of the movie. The reasons for a Mac push are not quite as obvious but still compelling. Tiger has been reviewed countless times with the vast majority of people agreeing that Tiger is head and shoulders (or insert appropriate feline anatomy) above Windows XP (though, seemingly, every reviewer alludes to Longhorn at some point). The introduction of the Mini has removed many of the hurdles people faced when moving to the Mac platform in the past and Apple has a ton of people talking right now. In short, this is the ripest moment in recent memory for a Mac campaign of Schwarzkopfian proportions,” Seibold writes.
“If Apple has the capacity to fulfill more orders (and given Apple’s history on meeting demand for popular products that is a very large ‘if’) then the lack of advertising is nearly unforgivable. Even if the campaign is an utter failure and features users flying into trees it is worth lightening the corporate coffers by a few dollars to give it a try,” Seibold writes.
Full article here.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Apple Computer debuts two-page Mac OS X Tiger print ad in Time Magazine (with image) – May 24, 2005
Mac fans line up for new operating system as passberby asks ‘what is a tiger?’ – April 29, 2005
Forrester analysts: Apple should advertise Mac OS X Tiger on television and in movie theaters – April 29, 2005
Apple posts QuickTime movies of Mac OS X Tiger features in action – April 13, 2005
Why doesn’t Apple advertise Mac OS X on TV? – April 12, 2005
Why doesn’t Apple show its patented Mac OS X ‘Genie Effect’ in TV ads? – October 07, 2004
Top Ten things Apple needs to show the world about Macintosh – July 30, 2003
Couldn’t Agree More
God, please don’t make any connections between Apple and Star Wars. The prequels (all three) were truly terrible to watch. My wife begged me to see “Sith”, and except for the last 30 minutes, it pretty much lived up to the garbage dump I expected it to be. Anyone defending the prequels is delusional.
Apple, on the other hand, is still doing great things 25+ years later.
The dumbest thing Apple has done in the last 5 years is never advertise the Macintosh. This is, once again, due to Steve Jobs’ arrogance
Would you really like it if Macs were common place? Mac folks seem to enjoy thinking they are elite, smarter, and generally the coolest.
I think demand is now so high (see Amazon top sellers: computers), it’s not interesting any advertising
I agree with Charlie… Advertising for MACs would actually make it look like common… I don’t understand why people always want more advertising, when you already own you own MAC… Why would you want to see things on TV or in the street that you already have? To tell your friends that you have it? Hum, actually, that sounds very American… Let’s do it… LOL
Charlie: that is a PCer’s misconception. Macintoshes are “elite, smarter, and generally the coolest.” Most Mac users recognize that we are wise to use the superior machine, but we’d be very happy to have lots more people using them. Whenever someone around here mentions they have switched over to Mac, they are received warmly…getting more Mac users makes us happy. So, starting spreading the truth, so that we can kill off one more Mac Myth.
Has an interviewer recently asked Jobs, why Apple doesn’t advertise more?
If so… what was his reply?
Job’s reply was (in my horrible english): Many people are switching to Apple because Microsoft is having many problems with viruses, spyware, ecc. We are happy this is happening. But we can’t advertise Apple telling the truth
One ad on Rush’s talk show would reach 20 million potential switchers….no….15 million, because the rest have already switched.
We may have the best computers, but if most people don’t even know that Tiger is not just an animal loping towards extinction, Macs may follow.
“Anyone defending the prequels is delusional.”
Maybe they’re just not so invested that they are insulted that the movies didn’t turn out the way they had them vaguely envisioned. I watched the first two again before seeing Sith and they really weren’t that bad. Pulp entertainment, for sure, but pretty good pulp. People who bash the prequels are just losers with too much time on their hands.
Apple HAS advertised the Mac during the past five years:
iMac – Sage, Ruby, Indigo, SE, Snow, (Blue Dalmation and Flower Power in conjunction with iTunes)
iMac G4 (in Window)
Power Mac G5
Power Mac G4 Cube
PowerBook G4 – Titanium and Aluminum
iBook – iBook Universe (iBook revolves in empty space with different devices – Camera, camcorder, MP3 player, Palm – orbiting around it (while mentioning the things you can do with an iBook)
iBook – Middle Seat (in an airplane – guy edits movie of his girlfriend and dog).
iTunes – Rip. Mix. Burn.
iDVD – ‘Elope’
iPhoto – ‘Baby Jack’
*iMovie ads were done before this timeframe
These are only counting TV ads. There have also been numerous print ads:
DVD Studio Pro
Final Cut Pro
Logic
iMac G5
PowerBook G4 (Aluminum – three people sitting in airport(?))
There have also been Jaguar, Panther and Tiger print ads.
I don’t recall seeing an iLife or iWork ad – but they may have also been shown.
To say that Apple doesn’t advertise the Mac is to show a lack of attention.
I still think Apple will do a major TV ad blitz, They may be waiting for the perfect time (Holiday 2005, maybe)?
Remember folks, this is Apple we’re talking about. They don’t do things until they want to, not because someone is whining about it.
“People who bash the prequels are just losers with too much time on their hands.”
Funny reply:) Of course, I usually don’t have any time on my hands because I’m busing running my million dollar plus baby at http://www.richterbrothers.com. But every once in awhile I do get a free moment, and looks what happens!
The prequels were truly terrible, though.
The prequels are an example of a man gone mad with power. George Lucas needs to stop drinking the kool-aid long enough to realize he is turning out absolute trash since he got hooked into the cgi smack. The original Star Wars and Empire WERE great movies…and then it all went to shit.
Apple NEEDS to adevertise. Anyone that thinks Apple should stay small has their heads in the clouds. Apple is out to MAKE MONEY…plain and simple, and as such they need to grow. What separates Apple from MS is that they beleive in art, they believe in quality, but that doesn’t mean they don’t beleive in making money.
And, accomplishing the feat of tying Apple back to the Star Wars motif started in the article….
“I find your lack of advertizing….disturbing.”
Apple’s marketing budget steadily increases.
Apple Stores!
Like to see Apple push the security in adverts.
Thought “Sith” was not too bad. There was and article in the Boston Globe by Henry Marchand drawing interesting parallels between some of the “Sith” dialog and present day politics.
<http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/05/30/art_imitating_politics>
Apple advertises plenty. They advertise using the media and markets that their desired customers frequent. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: Apple should NOT push more advertising on TV.
When a company advertises, they are promoting that particular media by giving large sums of money to the heartless corporations that own it… and TV is the worst of them all. TV is Apple’s competition, not its complement. Apple gave in a little bit when they released all those iPod ads, but they need to stop NOW.
Do you think Microsoft advertises to tell customers what’s so good about their software? If so, you’d be wrong. Microsoft advertises to get media corporations more sympathetic to Microsoft’s domination of the computer industry. They get better press when the advertising money is flowing. If Apple jumps on that bandwagon, they’ll be committing the same corporate palm-greasing that is plaguing this country. Apple needs to be part of the solution, not part of the problem.
Broadcast television in its current form needs to end. The only purpose for broadcast television is to show live events such as sports or particularly important breaking live news. (99.99% of “news” on TV does not fall under this category.) Everything else is previously recorded and should be viewed on-demand through the COMPUTER. (And commercial-free to boot.)
I cannot watch TV anymore because of the commercials. I like to watch The Simpsons and the 49ers and the Olympics, so I TRY to mute/ignore/walk-away as best I can when the commercials appear, but I can feel myself getting dumber every second the commercial has an ounce of my attention. Particularly since those two shows are on (GAG ME WITH A PITCHFORK!) FOX.
If I could pay for just the shows I want without commercials, I would. For other shows, I just wait for them to come out on DVD. God bless NetFlix!
Nuclear Kid,
Good answer, impressive site, legitimate reason to post it.
Oh, and the prequels do, for the most part, suck.
Couple of reason Apple may not want to advertise:
– Supply problems/Old Technology (Can Apple service a large influx of customers? Can ailing lines (iBook/PB) continue to sell with old tech? Can Apple make any speed claims when the other side has newer technologies already out in the market?)
– Games?
– Switch to Apple and have to repurchase all your software again… or maybe not find your favorite apps on the Mac! (how do you minimize this fact?)
– Apple are slower! Apple is more expensive! Although these are only partially true (c’mon it *is* somewhat true), perception is reality. Although Macs are faster/easier in certain regards (workflow, etc), new technologies hit the market in the Windows world much sooner than on Macs. Dual-Core. Video Cards.
– Okay, we’ve got an awesome OS, good software, some good hardware (in certain models), and some cool designs… but how do we compete with the likes of MS, Intel, etc when they spend the multiples of our operating budget on advertising alone, every year?
—
A sample consumer thought:
I’ve got $1500 to spend on a computer. What does it get me at Dell? My friend has a Apple iMac he bought for $1299… but all my software is Windows and that iMac seemed a little slow. I’ll check Dell’s site out; their ad on Sunday had a cool special going on and I hear Intel’s dual-core chips are coming out if they’re not already out. Wow! 1499, but for only $200 more I can upgrade to a kick-ass flat panel monitor!
—
I can already hear an Apple spokesman saying… But on the Mac you can do this… but on the Mac it works better because… but on the it comes with… but on the Mac…
Couple of reason Apple may not want to advertise:
– Supply problems/Old Technology (Can Apple service a large influx of customers? Can ailing lines (iBook/PB) continue to sell with old tech? Can Apple make any speed claims when the other side has newer technologies already out in the market?)
– Games?
– Switch to Apple and have to repurchase all your software again… or maybe not find your favorite apps on the Mac! (how do you minimize this fact?)
– Apple are slower! Apple is more expensive! Although these are only partially true (c’mon it *is* somewhat true), perception is reality. Although Macs are faster/easier in certain regards (workflow, etc), new technologies hit the market in the Windows world much sooner than on Macs. Dual-Core. Video Cards.
– Okay, we’ve got an awesome OS, good software, some good hardware (in certain models), and some cool designs… but how do we compete with the likes of MS, Intel, etc when they spend the multiples of our operating budget on advertising alone, every year?
—
A sample consumer thought:
I’ve got $1500 to spend on a computer. What does it get me at Dell? My friend has a Apple iMac he bought for $1299… but all my software is Windows and that iMac seemed a little slow. I’ll check Dell’s site out; their ad on Sunday had a cool special going on and I hear Intel’s dual-core chips are coming out if they’re not already out. Wow! 1499, but for only $200 more I can upgrade to a kick-ass flat panel monitor!
—
I can already hear an Apple spokesman saying… But on the Mac you can do this… but on the Mac it works better because… but on the it comes with… but on the Mac…
Couple of reason Apple may not want to advertise:
– Supply problems/Old Technology (Can Apple service a large influx of customers? Can ailing lines (iBook/PB) continue to sell with old tech? Can Apple make any speed claims when the other side has newer technologies already out in the market?)
– Games?
– Switch to Apple and have to repurchase all your software again… or maybe not find your favorite apps on the Mac! (how do you minimize this fact?)
– Apple are slower! Apple is more expensive! Although these are only partially true (c’mon it *is* somewhat true), perception is reality. Although Macs are faster/easier in certain regards (workflow, etc), new technologies hit the market in the Windows world much sooner than on Macs. Dual-Core. Video Cards.
– Okay, we’ve got an awesome OS, good software, some good hardware (in certain models), and some cool designs… but how do we compete with the likes of MS, Intel, etc when they spend the multiples of our operating budget on advertising alone, every year?
—
A sample consumer thought:
I’ve got $1500 to spend on a computer. What does it get me at Dell? My friend has a Apple iMac he bought for $1299… but all my software is Windows and that iMac seemed a little slow. I’ll check Dell’s site out; their ad on Sunday had a cool special going on and I hear Intel’s dual-core chips are coming out if they’re not already out. Wow! 1499, but for only $200 more I can upgrade to a kick-ass flat panel monitor!
—
I can already hear an Apple spokesman saying… But on the Mac you can do this… but on the Mac it works better because… but on the it comes with… but on the Mac…
PCers often wonder why Mac Users are so ardent about their computers. Well, at least in my case, it is because of the delight I feel at using a product that is so well made – starting at the OS and going right down to the hardware – Macs are just really fun to use. I have switched quite few people over the years and they always come back and thank me and are really glad they made the switch. It feels really good to help others enjoy life a little more.
And THAT is why we want Apple to advertise OS X more. Most people just have no idea and they should all at least be given the chance to make an informed choice.
On another note, I think the reason people get the impression that Mac Users are elitist because in describing how cool Macs are, you must perforce have a basis for comparison – and by default that comparison is usually with windoze. People don’t like to be told that they have made a mistake and that the product they chose is inferior; especially when they are choosing what the majority of the world chooses. They want to feel good about their purchase – or at least that everyone else is in the same boat. So when Mac Users tell them that the Mac is better, the knee jerk reaction is to get defensive and to start tossing elitist labels around.
Just a few comments for the Mac & PC guy. I’m not disagreeing, and you mention that perception is reality and maybe Apple needs to help help change the perception…
“- Switch to Apple and have to repurchase all your software again… or maybe not find your favorite apps on the Mac!
Remember that most Windows users–and Mac users for that matter–don’t “purchase software.” They use the stuff that came on the machine. Games, of course, are the exception.
In fact, most studies show that Mac users actually purchase more software than PC users, so I’d think that going from Mac to PC would be more of a problem.
Can you give me an example of the software that your average home PC user would have to buy? The “You have to repurchase your software” is mostly FUD.
“[…] new technologies hit the market in the Windows world much sooner than on Macs. Dual-Core. Video Cards.”
I’d point out that Dual-CPU hit the Mac market long before it hit the PC market. As an aside, when Apple shipped dual-CPUs, most PC users scoffed that this was just because Apple couldn’t make the megahertz numbers bigger. Of course, now that PC users have dual-core (essentially, dual-CPU on one chip), it’s best thing since sliced bread.
Video cards, I’d agree with. The main reason for this, though, is that most of the Macintoshes sold have video cards on the motherboard, so there isn’t a huge market for them.
Again, in regards to your “sample consumer”, I’d want to know what software he has that is Windows?
So… how should Apple advertise?
Apple has done a terrific job with the iPod. But it’s technology was easy to employ, supply, and distribut.
How should Apple advertise Tiger? If they sell the sizzle as they did with the iPod, they could do push a unified message on the experience. Comparing to Windows may make them seem like small chumps and also-rans, but then again… new customers means grabbing away Windows customers? So screw it, compare away to Windows (there are so many holes in it, poor interaction, and generally bad policies).
—
5..4..3..2….
You are ready for change.
You know where you’ve been,
and where it has gotten you.
You want something more.
You want something better.
You want something that works.
Tiger: The most advanced, secure, easy-to-use OS available today.
Advanced :: Easy-to-Use
Elegant :: Robust
Work :: Play
Tiger for Macintosh
Amazing Experiences, brought to you by Apple
—
Okay… so I’ve got to brush up on my advertising skills.
So… how should Apple advertise?
Apple has done a terrific job with the iPod. But it’s technology was easy to employ, supply, and distribut.
How should Apple advertise Tiger? If they sell the sizzle as they did with the iPod, they could do push a unified message on the experience. Comparing to Windows may make them seem like small chumps and also-rans, but then again… new customers means grabbing away Windows customers? So screw it, compare away to Windows (there are so many holes in it, poor interaction, and generally bad policies).
—
5..4..3..2….
You are ready for change.
You know where you’ve been,
and where it has gotten you.
You want something more.
You want something better.
You want something that works.
Tiger: The most advanced, secure, easy-to-use OS available today.
Advanced :: Easy-to-Use
Elegant :: Robust
Work :: Play
Tiger for Macintosh
Amazing Experiences, brought to you by Apple
—
Okay… so I’ve got to brush up on my advertising skills.
So… how should Apple advertise?
Apple has done a terrific job with the iPod. But it’s technology was easy to employ, supply, and distribut.
How should Apple advertise Tiger? If they sell the sizzle as they did with the iPod, they could do push a unified message on the experience. Comparing to Windows may make them seem like small chumps and also-rans, but then again… new customers means grabbing away Windows customers? So screw it, compare away to Windows (there are so many holes in it, poor interaction, and generally bad policies).
—
5..4..3..2….
You are ready for change.
You know where you’ve been,
and where it has gotten you.
You want something more.
You want something better.
You want something that works.
Tiger: The most advanced, secure, easy-to-use OS available today.
Advanced :: Easy-to-Use
Elegant :: Robust
Work :: Play
Tiger for Macintosh
Amazing Experiences, brought to you by Apple
—
Okay… so I’ve got to brush up on my advertising skills.
Peter…
That post was to lead in to my next post. I wanted to show what sort of hurdles Apple faces in its advertising. A case can be made for each of those little hurdles I mentioned (supply problems, software choices, video cards being on Mac Mobos… same as on Intel Mobos), but I wanted to focus on how to make the case for switching to Apple.
I definitely agree with you on this:
“maybe Apple needs to help help change the perception…”
— How to do this? What to say? Where/when to say it?
Peter…
That post was to lead in to my next post. I wanted to show what sort of hurdles Apple faces in its advertising. A case can be made for each of those little hurdles I mentioned (supply problems, software choices, video cards being on Mac Mobos… same as on Intel Mobos), but I wanted to focus on how to make the case for switching to Apple.
I definitely agree with you on this:
“maybe Apple needs to help help change the perception…”
— How to do this? What to say? Where/when to say it?
Peter…
That post was to lead in to my next post. I wanted to show what sort of hurdles Apple faces in its advertising. A case can be made for each of those little hurdles I mentioned (supply problems, software choices, video cards being on Mac Mobos… same as on Intel Mobos), but I wanted to focus on how to make the case for switching to Apple.
I definitely agree with you on this:
“maybe Apple needs to help help change the perception…”
— How to do this? What to say? Where/when to say it?
In entrenched markets like computers, phone services, and soft drinks the only reason for a company to advertise is the tax write-off.
Apple gets great tax write-offs each time it opens a new store.
National advertising in an entrenched market accomplishes absolutely NOTHING (Nothing that couldn’t be just as easily explained by the alignment of the stars, or the retrograde of venus).
For the last time: No one is going to buy one computer over another based on a 30-second television ad.
The prevasive product placement on all the popular television shows is a far better use of Apple money.
Nuclear Kid –
Great site! Are you hiring? I have experience with Final Cut Pro, live within 2 1/2 hours of Chicago, and used to work in Dusseldorf.
Can you give me an example of the software that your average home PC user would have to buy? The “You have to repurchase your software” is mostly FUD.
Peter, the elephant in the room is piracy. Many, many PC users’ complement of software is augmented from three sources: software from their office, software from friends, and software from their friendly computer guru. That’s the source of their Office, utilities, organiser, Photoshop, etc.
If they buy a PC, everything can be copied, re-“borrowed” and reinstalled. If they purchase a Mac, the software has a real cost. So to the price differential between the Mac and the PC, add the several hundred dollars that adding same-name software will cost. [No, they won’t consider using OOo and The Gimp.]
The areas where a Windows user is likely to step out and buy software will be games and tax preparation. And then they find out that the Mac is an inferior gaming platform…
Anyway, everyone having this discussion in “reputable” forums tends to ignore the friendly piracy epidemic. It is considered de facto fair use by a significant majority of Windows users. And it matters. And it solidly wieghs in favour of Windows because the listed prices of some same-name software is higher on the Mac (see MS Office).
Yeah yeah yea a million people in Apple Stores every week.. the sky is falling.. we already know the Switcher Ads are in the works right now.. millions and millions of people are using Apple stuff thanks to the iTMS..
Stop bitching. The same marketing department that figured out the Mac Mini and TIger.. knows what has worked in the past.. and will use that as a judge.
The switcher ads were thought to be a flop.. well now APple has a $500 PC that is DIRECTED AT WINDOWS USERS!
Apple as of then beginning of this quarter had about $7 billion in cash.
Apple appears to be accumulating cash at abour $500 million per quarter.
That cash is just sitting there gaining miniscule interest.
Apple is OBLIGATED to use some of that cash to try a massive, highly visible advertising campaign. They can afford to spend $100 million on print, TV, and radio. None of this BS about “the Switch ads didn’t work.” That is not a justifiable excuse to continue to not to advertise on TV.
You might as well argue Coke should stop advertising on TV because they’re never going to convince Pepsi users to switch, or vice versa. Advertising is about saying “buy this” as much as it is about implanting a suggestion.
You can’t consider buying something later if you don’t know about it (like duh!) and there are still PLENTY of people who have little idea what this gosh darned Mac thing is.
Apple does advertise.
That’s what we do when we talk publicly about our passion.
Which is more effective:
A. A 30 second Apple ad on Rush’s show
B. Rush talking about his Mac for 30 seconds
MDN is an Apple ad.
Yeah, that sounds great, make Apple as common to see on TV as those annoying Old Navy or Gap ads. What a brilliant idea, yes, apple should start treating people as meaningless sheep with dollar signs on there sides that they can brain wash like all other advertising. Apple has taken an approach to advertising that many other countries besides ourselves have taken; Minimalism, less is more. Granted I realize that most Americans are not used to this approach, Apple has chosen not to shove meaningless shit down our throats every commercial break. If they started down that road I now I’d be very disappointed indeed. Also, I think they played that U2 commercial an awful lot don’t you? It didn’t take long until I never wanted to hear that song again.
theres a different slant on the discussion here…
http://www.macosx.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1086848#post1086848
“make Apple as common to see on TV as those annoying Old Navy or Gap ads”
NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!! Especially Old Navy (trying not to lose my lunch…).
We all know Steve is a master marketer, so we’ll have to assume he knows exactly what he’s doing. “I’ve always heard Apple is better” is preferable to “Ugh not another stupid Apple commercial, go away!”. Mindset is everything.
Mac? Whats that? Tell me more
NewType:
I did argue exactly that. Coke advertising doesn’t increase marketshare. And it never will.
The only ways Coke can increase marketshare are through increased availablility and exclusivity. Coke makes restaurants, universities and sports venues sign exclusive deals. That’s why Pepsi bought restaurants.
Years ago, Apple discovered that being carried by major retailers (Sears, Best Buy, etc.) and offering them very generous cooperative advertising incentives wasn’t moving Apple Computers. So Apple put up their own stores in major retail locations.
Advertising doesn’t accomplish ANYTHING. If you were to analyze your own purchases, that would become immediately obvious to you.
You didn’t buy your Mac because of an ad, did you?
MDN and some of you guys need to learn something about customer loyalty and customer satisfaction, and how little that has to do with TV advertising and how much that has to do with Apple Stores and other policies.
Apple is gaining satisfied customers a few at a time. Getting millions of people to buy Macs because of a TV advertisement, and then not be satisfied will ruin Apple’s brand.
One way that Apple advertizes on TV is with “product placement”. Just saw a G4 iMac and a G4 Powerbook on a sitcom last night (can’t remember which one, but I remember the Macs). AbFab had Macs all over the place. Keep your eyes open…
It seems that many of the posts about Apple’s lack of advertising can be summed as:
1. They already advertise in newspapers/magazines
2. They advertise(d) individual preducts
3. It is difficult to sell the concept of an OS
4. What happens if they can’t meet any increased demand resulting
from an ad campaign.
Addressing these points individually:
1. My wife is a 25 year print journalist. She started in the States and is
now a Chief Sub Editor in Australia. I’m an ex-journo. We both agree
that print journalism is dying. More people watch TV, listen to the
radio and surf the net. If you want increased attention for your
product you must also focus on these areas. Apple outlets advertise
on the net but it’s not co-ordinated because each outlet is
competing with each other.
2. Now’s the time for Apple to extol the virtues of Apple as a brand not
as individual products. Talk up security, stability, ease of use and
fun. And compare it to Windows. That’s what people need.
3. Windows sells XP, and look at the splash over Windows 95. (That was
a case of false advertising.)
4. I agree with the article if you don’t advertise because of fear
production delays, then that is insane. And besides some of us had
to wait for our ipods. We still waited.
Advertising costs money but it’s an investment in brand recognition. If Apple waits until next year it will be too late. I expect Redmond to
begin advertising Longhorn about midway through 2006.
It takes time for ads to sink in. You have to keep plugging away until the concept sticks. It took me years to switch my sister. She was a hard case but in end she switched. It just takes time.
The Apple is in Cupertino’s court.
Apple is a strictly boutique computer maker. They just don’t have the vision to create a truly global name brand. Period.
“I usually don’t have any time on my hands because I’m busing running my million dollar plus baby at http://www.richterbrothers.com. “
Oh, great. It’s worse. You’re a jealous wannabe.
The purpose for most advertising is NOT to get new customers but to keep the ones they have.
Apple’s customers are extremely loyal and thus there is not the need to advertise.
In addition, Apple is a cult product. (There was an article on cult-marketing about 5 years ago in Forbes.) Remember when Krispy Kreme was being touted by everybody. Next thing we know it is everywhere and now nobody cares.
S.J. has done an amazing job of keeping a product that has maybe 5% of the market in front of everybody’s faces. The fact that the media markets even paid attention to the release of Tiger is a testament to Apple’s marketing.