08
Feb 10

Ad Bowl 2010: lowering the bar

Man, being an optimist is getting depressing. Every year, I’m filled with hope that creativity is about to make its big Super Bowl comeback. And every year, I go away feeling thoroughly unfulfilled. Not that there weren’t a couple of highlights. Here are my reactions, and I’ll be curious to hear yours.

Best spot: Google. Some have seen these Search On things before, but this is the first mass exposure. I’ll tell you, it’s a thing of beauty when a spot you could produce in your bedroom outperforms the biggest Super Bowl productions. The spot is charmingly human without showing a single face, outlining a love story through multiple Google searches. How many advertisers can keep their logo on the screen for 90% of a spot without annoying the hell out of us?

Biggest fall from grace: Intel. Well, I gushed profusely when Intel finally did something great a few months ago. And what do I get in return? A two-course serving of disappointment. First, an unfunny commercial featuring cheesy acting and a silly forlorn robot. Then a horribly conceived online contest: What Is Your Core Moment?  Here, we’re invited to share a “pivotal Core Moment” in our life to celebrate the “life-changing speed and smart performance” of the 2010 Intel Core Processor family. Gag me. “Smart computing is here,” the site proclaims, in the total absence of a smart message. I should have known Intel’s marketing DNA would drag them down in the end.

Most appealing to the beer crowd: Bud Light. Varying degrees of success for these guys, though that’s to be expected when you buy up half the ad slots. Holy cow, there were a lot of these things. I’m just thankful that someone out there is teaching our children that valuable life lesson: beer = wildly fun times.

Least differentiated beer: Budweiser. Their Human Bridge spot was actually very entertaining. I’m a sucker for a well-done “cast of thousands” spot, like the Cliq ad I cited a while back. But I do have to ask: ad-wise, what’s the difference between Bud and Bud Light again? If they stuck a Bud Light logo at the end of this spot, it would have worked just as well.

Most Pant-less People: Career Builder & Dockers. It’s a tie. I didn’t have the patience to count. Not only did Casual Friday and Wear No Pants have a similar visual joke (a lowbrow joke, I should add), they ran in succession. Does CBS give refunds?

Best celebrity: Coca-Cola. Using a celebrity is always an iffy thing. Homer & friends have a different kind of celebrity. The Simpsons spot was a great way to suck us in without turning us off. Coke’s mission was to come across as a really fun brand, and they did. Another Coke spot, Sleepwalker, was interesting as well. Nice music, cool idea.

Most unexpected: Cars.com. What better way to empathize with us ordinary folk who can’t quite figure out the whole “car buying” thing than to tell the tale of Timothy Richmond. This is a great example of an intelligently crafted ad that captures a human truth. And for cars.com? Didn’t see that one coming.

Biggest embarrassment: GoDaddy. Aren’t we a little past the pre-pubescent humor yet? If you did as you were told and went to the website to see the “too hot for TV” version (I went for research purposes only), you were treated to an even more deeply embarrassing video. Lame, lame, lame.

Biggest dinosaur: Homeaway.com. The problem with bringing back people who were really big 20 years ago is that they’re 20 years older now. He may have been cheap, but Chevy Chase doesn’t exactly have his edge anymore. I’m pretty sure you could get him really cheap after this one.

Most done to death: E-Trade. The talking babies were back. If one baby is funny, four or five have to be even funnier, right? Personally, I’m sick to death of talking babies. After all the TV commercials that have used this trick (for different companies, no less), a couple of movies and a failed TV series, it’s time for these babies to retire. Please? At least do a better job with the effects and syncing.

Worst non-ad moment: The Who. Roger, Pete… I love you and all, but it might be time to consider, uh, you know…  Note to Super Bowl producers: it’s cool that some big names will happily perform for free to get the exposure, but you’d probably do better if you actually paid someone. Don’t tell me you don’t have the cash.

The drama of the Super Bowl is that there can only be one winner. The Ad Bowl has room for infinite winners. But year after year, we prove that creativity is something money can’t buy.

4 comments
05
Feb 10

iPad: a long time coming (or not)

What did Apple know, and when did it know it?

Ever wonder exactly how far ahead Apple sees into the future? Some have suggested that iPad was in development for years.

You may be tempted to file this under “Things We’ll Never Know.” But in the case of iPad, the answer may not be too hard to divine.

Stand back and let me interrogate the witness on this one:

Q. Good morning. Would you be so kind as to identify the name of iPhone’s operating system when it was launched in 2007.
 A. Yes, that would be OS X.

Q. And explain to the court why you chose that name.
 A. It was to distinguish iPhone from Mac. It was OS X vs. Mac OS X.

Q. I see. And where were you on the evening of March 27, 2008?
 A. I don’t remember.

Q. Allow me to refresh your memory. That was the date Apple released the iPhone Developer’s Kit — and changed the name of iPhone’s operating system from OS X to iPhone OS.
 A. Oh, right. I remember that now.

Q. Uh huh. And when you chose the name iPhone OS, were you aware that Apple was already working on a revolutionary new kind of computer, a tablet that would be based on the same operating system?
 A. I, uh, don’t recall.

Q. You’re under oath, sir.
A. Okay, okay. I remember now. Yes, I was aware of that.

Q. And did you not consider the absurdity of putting something called iPhone OS into a revolutionary product that was not a phone?
 A. Uh… yeah, that did kind of strike me, yes.

Q. Why on earth then, sir, would you not choose a name that would allow just a little flexibility in the future… OS X Mobile, perhaps?
 A.

Q. Hello?
A. Uh … I’ll take the Fifth.

Q. No further questions, Your Honor.

My point is, Apple has always demonstrated tremendous common sense. It’s just hard to believe they’d choose the name iPhone OS if iPad was already on the drawing board. My inner Sherlock tells me iPad wasn’t even a twinkle in Apple’s eye until well after March, 2008. That’s still plenty of time to make one hell of a device — but not nearly as much time as some have suggested.

41 comments
03
Feb 10

Apple says the magic word

Today’s topic is marketing, not technology. But it’s still about iPad, so you may credit me with dragging this topic out for yet another day.

One of the neat things about Apple is that they put as much thought into their words as they do into their inventions. They come up with key words, normally clear and clever, and use them consistently in all communications. If you’re a marketing afficionado, it is a thing of beauty to see Steve’s topline message played back almost verbatim by the world press.

However, this isn’t to say Apple always gets it right. In fact the copywriter in me winced more than once on iPad launch day.

It started when Steve introduced iPad by using the word magic. It was a little too self-admiring, the kind of word that works better when someone else says it about you, instead of you saying it yourself. And it turned out that the magic was just beginning. The M-word was again invoked by Jony Ive on the iPad video. It now appears front and center on apple.com. It also leads off the official iPad press release. Clearly, magic is high up on the official list of iPad words.

Problem is, magic loses its magic when the magicness is unrelenting. Even more important, you can’t expect the magic word to work if what you’re about to share is anything less than 100% certifiably magic. I do believe iPad will change the world, but the technology and the content revealed on launch day just felt too familiar to many.

The iPad video didn’t help create much magic either. Unfortunately, these videos are starting to feel more like an item on a checklist than a creative element. In videos past, we’ve seen interesting celebrities reacting to the product, or some departure from the ordinary. Here, it seemed to be a bit of video-by-numbers, just the usual suspects cultishly gushing over iPad, calling it beautiful, amazing, breakthrough, phenomenal, etc.

Speaking of superlatives, Neil Curtis has put together a hilarious video that reduces the iPad launch event to its essence. If you haven’t seen it, you must click below. Watching this reminds me of a critique I received long ago for an ad I’d just written. Clearly pained, my boss said “I wish I had a nickel for every adjective you crammed in here.” (I’ve gotten better, I swear.) Methinks Apple could use a visit from the Adjective Police.

This video was embedded using the YouTuber plugin by Roy Tanck. Adobe Flash Player is required to view the video.

7 comments
02
Feb 10

Suing Apple for fun and profit

Fujitsu iPad: no multitouch — just multibutton

Take that, Apple. Turns out Fujitsu makes an iPad too. And by my count, it has 24 more buttons than yours. Okay, so their touchscreen is a tad smaller (3.5 inches), but they did start selling this little eyesore long before iPad was a twinkle in your eye (2002). Their lawyers are currently huddling to consider a lawsuit.

Meanwhile, they’re talking tough in China too.

Hey Apple! You stole our design!

Shenzhen Great Loong Brother Industrial Co., Ltd. believes iPad is way too similar to their magical P88 Tablet PC — which itself looks way too similar to Apple’s iPhone. “We don’t understand,” says company executive Huang Xiaofang, “why did they make the same thing as us?” Some mysteries may never be solved. Yet they’re considering a lawsuit as well.

But wait, there’s more.

Sorry, it's just so confusing

Lingerie maker Coconut Grove Pads owns the right to market iPad-brand padded bras — so they’re a bit shaken by Apple’s new baby too. And they may have a case. One can only imagine the loss of income these guys would suffer as confused bra shoppers accidentally purchase an Apple iPad instead.

How times have changed. In days of old (AAPL @ $14), there just wasn’t much incentive to sue Apple. There’s only so much blood you can squeeze from a stone. But man, that $29 billion in cash reserves today looks pretty darn appetizing.

I do hope the courts find no merit in these cases. It would totally pop my bubble if I were to discover that Jony Ive found his inspiration on Shenzhen Great Loong Brother Industrial Co.’s website.

3 comments
01
Feb 10

iPad: joining the revolution-in-progress

We now return to the revolution — already in progress

Now that I’ve done the research, I’ve narrowed it down to two possibilities. Apple has either (a) created another technology masterpiece, or (b) suffered its most humiliating failure.

The sad fact is, months of over-hype force an instant response. Not enough “new” = disappointment. Attack on the mother ship = knee-jerk defense.

Now that we’ve had a chance to sleep it off, I think we should look at the forest, not the tree. iPad isn’t a revolution in itself — it’s actually Part III of a revolution that started seven years ago. Some of its most important features came well before the hype began.

Apple started down this path with iPod. That’s when the company demonstrated its ability to combine software genius and gorgeous design — and immediately grabbed a 70% market share. iPod was technology you could fall in love with, small enough to fit in your pocket. At the start, it was all about music. Then it matured with photos, movies, podcasts, radio and TV shows.

iPhone was Part II of the revolution. Adding phone and Internet to iPod’s capabilities, the pocket device was now a full-fledged computer. It just didn’t feel like one. The spectacular advance was the multitouch screen, which gave us a whole new way to interact. Competing against a legion of high-powered villains, iPhone was an instant success — because its technology matched up so well with human behavior. Then came the App Store, which gave iPhone and iPod an advantage of monolithic proportions.

At this point, all the pieces were in place: advanced OS, multitouch screen, intuitive interface, Internet, email, music, movies and 140,000 apps. No need to think about file systems, viruses, all those ancient concerns — you could just do what you want to do. For a great many people, iPod/iPhone had become all the computer they really need, except for one thing. It was all in miniature. Cue Part III of the revolution. iPad is the life-size version of the technology that the world’s already fallen in love with. And I suspect it’s a device whose potential may be seriously underestimated.

“Where are the new killer features?” iPod and iPhone have already laid the groundwork for iPad, so yes, parts of it feel familiar. This is both a strength and a weakness. The theory is that the features people already know and love are far more scintillating in the new iPad format. Hard to say until the product ships. One thing we do know: with a bigger screen, more powerful processor and even more responsive multitouch, iPad developers will be having the time of their lives.

“It’s just an oversized iPod touch.” Well, yeah. And that’s the reason iPad has the potential to change everything. iPod touch and iPhone offer a tiny window (literally) into a potentially world-changing way of computing. iPad is built on the same foundation — but blows away the limitations.

“No multitasking? What a joke.” Maybe yes, maybe no. Apple is creating a less complicated, more interactive world. They’re handing us a beautiful screen on which we can easily communicate, watch, listen, share, browse and create. Obviously iPad will continue to evolve. I expect multitasking will appear to some degree soon — and naturally we’ll see bigger screens and faster processors. There’s also that “little” matter of the global revolution in magazines and newspapers we were expecting.

Oh, and don’t go thinking that Part III is the revolution’s finale. By the time it’s over, we’ll be well conditioned for Part IV — at which time the whole idea of laptops and desktops may start to change.

If you’re interested, Andy Ihnatko had a good, level-headed review in the Chicago Sun-Times following his personal interaction with iPad at the launch event.

12 comments
29
Jan 10

iPad: critiquing the critics

Every time a new Apple product comes out, the experts share their opinions. But who reviews the reviewers? Well, that sounds like a fun job…

Erica Ogg (CNET): “… the quintessential Apple device …”
Nice, Erica. I buy that. If you look at everything Apple’s done in the last few years, you can easily say “it all led to this.”

Donald Bell (CNET) (Editor’s Take): “… a bit of a misfit… fortunately I like misfits… I’m a fan of disruptive technology… it is going to change the way we think about mobile technology beyond the smartphone.”
Disruptive is the key word. iPod and iPhone were disruptive. While some will be sniping over iPad’s missing features, disruption will be happening all around them.

David Pogue (NY Times): (paraphrased) Phase 1: Apple rolls out product. Phase 2: basher-bloggers scream about its many limitations. Phase 3: positive reviews, people line up to buy it, basher-bloggers disappear.
We like you, David. You don’t take yourself too seriously, and you see the folly all around us. You’re a smart guy, though not the best singer.

Walt Mossberg (Wall Street Journal): “It’s about the software, stupid. … public acceptance… depends heavily upon the software and services that flow through its handsome little body.”
A little creepy there at the end, Walt, but the sentiment is correct. Also, congratulations for scoring an invite to the event even after that tawdry little piece you wrote about Windows 7 being as good as Mac OS X.

Michael Hiltzik (LA Times): “After months of hype, the reality was underwhelming… Hard to see it as anything other than a threat to Kindle; depending on how it is exploited, eventually it could be more.”
Hmm, I’m a little underwhelmed by your ability to imagine. Somehow I think Apple may have a plan for “exploiting” this thing. Since you mentioned it, I’m also now wondering if iPad really is a threat to Kindle. Kindle might have a shot at life as your basic e-reader — if they cut the price to a fraction of what it is today.

Adam Frucci (Gizmodo): “My God, am I underwhelmed by it… absolutely backbreaking failures that will make buying one the last thing I would want to do.”
My goodness, Adam. You sound like a very confident man. By the way, what you would want to do — fascinating as that might be — really isn’t the story here. It’s what a few million other people want to do that has resulted in iPad.

Mark Wilson (Gizmodo): “Substantial but surprisingly light. Easy to grip. Beautiful. Rigid. Starkly designed … touch responds like a dream.”
Mark, would you mind having a word with Adam? You guys work in the same office?

Nicholas Deleon (special to CNN): “Will size matter? … We’ve adjusted [to iPhone's size] and there are no signs that people are tiring of it. … iPad… couldn’t possibly be considered portable… a 10-inch behemoth.”
Dear God, man. Do you carry your own coffee? In one hand?? It’s an eight-ounce monstrosity!

Claudine Beaumont (Telegraph UK): “…  had hoped to hear more about how iPad could be used to read magazines…  potential to be a game-changing device, but it will be the second- and third-generation versions that will really drive the agenda.”
I hear ya, Claudine. Had that same hope for the magazine thing myself. Revolution temporarily on hold.

Michael Miller (PC Magazine): “Given the hype… the most surprising thing is that Apple was still able to have some pretty big surprises… the pricing was much more aggressive than I thought it would be… felt faster and more responsive… applications aimed at creating content.”
The content-creation part of iPad hasn’t nearly gotten as much air play after the intro. But I agree, Michael. What people do with iPad — a computer with no visible OS — may surprise many.

Josh Topolsky (Engadget): “… was fairly underwhelming… unimaginative might be more accurate… will really come into its own when developers get their hands on it…”
Correct, Josh. And on the third Sunday of next January, the sun will rise in the west. Developers did have a wee bit to do with iPhone’s runaway success. And as we saw at intro, iPad gives developers a far richer place to let their imaginations run wild.

Hiawatha Bray (Boston Globe): “Not a world-changer, but not bad.”
I’m disappointed, Hiawatha. Have you gone soft? I was kind of hoping for something more definitive, like your first take on iMac in 1998: “The iMac will only sell to some of the true believers… doesn’t include a floppy disk drive drive… an astonishing lapse from Jobs, who should have learned better… the iMac is clean, elegant, floppy-free — and doomed.” Not that I hold a grudge…

23 comments
28
Jan 10

iPad: the day after

First the Jesus phone, now this?

Some stream-of-consciousness thoughts about yesterday’s launch of iPad:

Understatement of the day. CNN included this statement in their pre-event coverage: Apple CEO Steve Jobs is said to have taken an active role in the development of the company’s rumored tablet device.

The name iPad. It had been growing on me prior to launch. Back-rationalizing aside (or is that back-pedaling?), there’s a lot of logic to it. My idealized version of Apple just isn’t quite so logical. The good news is: the name is short, heavily branded and looks damn good on the device. Remember, names are only scrutinized at the beginning. After that, they’re just names. (Google? Get out.) And yes, this does give our little friend i a new lease on life.

Home-grown processor. A double big deal. Those who played with iPad after the show reported that it’s wicked fast. Even better, Apple makes the A4 processor themselves. That’s a ton cheaper than buying it from Intel, and clearly the main reason it’s as affordable as it is. Good name, too. I can just imagine the conversation. “It’s Apple’s first processor, so let’s call it A1.” “Nah, doesn’t sound very advanced. A4 is three generations faster.”

Leaks hurt. When product details leaked in advance of past Macworld shows, the event never seemed quite as exciting. Yesterday felt a bit like that — because so much about iPad had been rumored or predicted with fair accuracy. iPhone looked nothing like the rumors had it.

Professional jealousy. I know from experience that all this fanfare and anticipation often grates on other technology companies. “5% of the market share, 95% of the PR,” they moan. Hey, nothing’s stopping Dell from holding a major press event to announce their newest Inspiron.

User switching. iPad feels like the perfect device to keep on the coffee table for the whole family to use. So how does email work when you pass the device to another user? Log off/log on? Fast user switching? Just curious.

Category overload. Steve took special care to present iPad as a third category of product, positioned between iPhone and MacBook. He even concluded the show by asking “do we have what it takes to establish a third category of products?” I get that. Not to be a stickler, but Steve did introduce iPhone three years ago as Apple’s third category of products. Those are the product tabs currently on apple.com (Mac, iPod, iPhone). So how many categories of product does Apple now sell? Three or four? Will the tabs on the website change, or does iPad join forces with iPhone? (Even though it is actually more similar to iPod touch.)

Multitasking. Missing in action. Big problem. Especially when even Droid is out there multitasking its little heart out. iPad runs zillions of apps — but only one at a time. Fix, please.

No camera. Big problem #2. How can you have offer such a natural, trend-setting, socially-minded device without the ability to video chat? Probably some physical reason why, but Apple has bent the laws of physics before.

Where’s iLife ’10? Okay, so I was wrong about this prediction. But now that I am humbled, I do remember how Mac OS X was once delayed for six months because Apple’s software resources were focused on developing iPhone. We have to remember that Apple isn’t Microsoft. (Like that’s tough to remember.) They don’t have thousands of programmers. When they have a major challenge, it’s all-hands-on-deck time. Maybe we’ll get a new iLife by spring? I will continue to predict until I get it right.

Apple logo. Is that big Apple logo on the back facing the right way? It’s correct in portrait position, but it’s sideways in landscape position. The images on apple.com seem to be a 50-50 mix of vertical and horizontal orientation, so there is no right or wrong here. I think it’s time for the world’s first accelerometer-based swiveling logo.

Questionable icon. My eyes, my eyes. What’s with the iBooks icon? Click the right arrow on the iPad Gallery page to see the icon lineup. They’re all colorful and beautifully designed — until you get to iBooks. It’s Zune brown, and feels a few decades behind. Can we send that one back?

Overall: iPad has a lot to love, but nirvana is still up the road apiece. But that’s not necessarily a bad thing — Apple’s starting point is light years beyond the other guys’ ending point.

29 comments
27
Jan 10

Welcome, iPad

Hello, iPad — what took you so long?

Damn, I love the smell of new technology in the morning. Now the smoke has cleared, iPad is among us and the conversation can get even more intense — because we’re talking reality, not theory.

For some, the product can never live up to the hype. Personally, I love this thing. I want one now. I have no doubt it will play a huge role in defining how we interact with our technology well into the future. However, I do think Apple left vital parts of its body unshielded, and will suffer some hits for it.

I have one major disappointment.

I was really expecting Steve to be in his best revolutionary form today. Maybe a reference to the fact that the print industry hasn’t changed in principle all that much since Gutenberg; that every day we print millions of tons of paper only to see it thrown away at night; that Apple has now developed the technology to bring magazines and newspapers to vibrant life, in a way that will ignite a new era of publishing. I expected him to have the CEOs of the major publishing companies and booksellers on stage at the scene to talk about how iPad will create a revolution in print — just as iPod created a revolution in music.

Sports Illustrated has had a demo of their tablet-ized magazine on YouTube for quite a while now, and it gives us a glimpse of the new world.

We didn’t see this revolution today. The NY Times demo was almost off-handed in the scope of things. For all the rumors about Apple being in talks with the major publishing companies, we saw none of that.

So count me in for an iPad, because there’s an awful lot of fun built into it, ready to go. I’ll be here, with a full 10-hour charge, anxiously waiting for the real revolution to arrive.

42 comments
26
Jan 10

’Twas the night before tablet…

Almost showtime

Only a few hours till T-Day. I’ll be damned if I’m going to be left out when they count all the blogs that hyped the tablet today. Just a few miscellaneous observations:

Steve. Everyone is so focused on the tablet, nobody’s even mentioned Steve’s health lately. But the Steve-watch will be back in the news, for sure. Expect many reports to start with “A healthier-looking Steve Jobs took the stage today to announce…” At least I hope they do.

Ressurection. For those who think Apple might recycle the Newton or iBook names — forget it. Impossible to imagine Apple naming a thoroughly new device after a thoroughly dead device. Remember also, there are still lots of iBooks out there. How confusing would that be? I’m crossing my fingers for something more imaginative, but the Vegas oddsmakers are heavy on iSlate. iPad is making a late surge around the home stretch.

To i or not to i. Keep an eye on that pesky little letter — for the future starts here. Should the tablet escape without an i, it will be a good indication of where things are going. If the i sucks the tablet into its orbit, assume we’ll be living with it for the rest of our natural lives.

Collateral damage. Black-and-white e-readers, anyone? I’m sure you’ll see some great deals real soon.

The warm-up act. I believe we’ll see more than the tablet tomorrow. We’ll need a major iTunes Store update to present all the new media that will be available there. It’s time for the annual iLife update too. After Steve shows us how magazines will reinvent themselves on the tablet, imagine if he shows us a fantastic new way to share our lives. Use the new features in iLife to create your own “magazine” with words, pictures and videos. It may even call for a new iLife app. iMag? iPub? iNews?

Unfathomably moronic. Rob Enderle says the venue for the announcement indicates that Apple wants to “distance itself from this offering,” as if it’s “a product the company isn’t that sure of.” I had no idea human beings were even capable of such dribble.

Macworld who? Just a year ago we were sobbing over Apple’s rejection of Macworld. We’re better now. Way better. Didn’t exactly seem to hurt the buzz factor, did it?

That’s it. No more tablet talk till we see the whites of its eyes. Enjoy the show.

13 comments
25
Jan 10

Microsoft: needing a lesson from Disney

Attn: Microsoft — you have a message from Uncle Walt

As the Apple love-fest enters a new phase this week, I couldn’t help thinking about how some brands are so good at bonding with customers — while others excel at shooting themselves in the foot.

I flashed back to a moment I had in Disney World recently with my 12-year-old son. In an attempt to dazzle him with the depth of my Disney knowledge, I told him how, eons ago, you couldn’t just go on any ride you wanted. You had to buy this silly book of tickets (E-Tickets were the really cool rides), then hassle with buying extra tickets when you inevitably ran out.

“That’s stupid,” my son observed, “I bet nobody came here then.”

Pretty good logic, kid. But the truth, of course, is that tons of people came here then. It’s just that the Disney people were smart enough to look past the gaudy numbers and realize they could do it better. There was a way to make customers feel happier still, and pull them even closer to the Disney brand. The one-price, all-attraction pass was born.

I get the feeling Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer have never visited Disney. Or Universal, or Six Flags, or any of the major parks — since those businesses have all adopted the same winning system. The way they sell Windows is a hassle. It’s about Microsoft first, the customer second.

They’ve gotten a wee bit better with Windows 7, but still cling to the old model. There are now ”only” three versions at retail: Home Premium ($120), Professional ($200) and Ultimate ($220). The “good” version takes some serious investment.

Meanwhile, over at Apple, they’re selling the all-attraction pass. Only one version of Mac OS X exists. It’s got everything in it. It’s for students and moms, Hollywood film editors and scientists — and it’s priced at Microsoft’s low end. Like Disney, Apple realized (a) it’s easier to market one product, (b) it’s easier for customers to understand one product, and (c) it’s good business not to make people feel like they’re being gouged for every nickel.

Imagine how much happier Microsoft customers would be if there were only one version of Windows 7, all features included, reasonably priced. Just a fleeting knowledge of human behavior tells you that more people would buy the product — and more people would feel good about buying it.

Maybe then they’d actually have something to dance about in those Microsoft Stores.

10 comments
← Older Entries