Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 23rd Mar 2012 15:09 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless I'm currently reading Jerry Kaplan's excellent book "Startup: a Silicon Valley adventure". In this book, Kaplan, founder and CEO of GO Corp., details the founding, financing and eventual demise of his highly innovative company, including the development and workings of their product. What's so surprising about this book is just how timeless it really is - the names and products may have changed, but the business practices and company attitudes surely haven't.
Thread beginning with comment 511640
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
kwan_e
Member since:
2007-02-18

It's already been answered: the reality distortion field. I personally don't find Apple products that appealing, but then I've never been particularly susceptible to advertising, whether it be TV campaigns or word-of-mouth campaigns.

eg, I've been a Cowon customer for a few years now. They're kind of top of middle range and their players are always more featured and more spacious than a similar priced iPod and they don't force you to use iTunes.

There really is nothing special about Apple, not even its ability to create myths around itself that gets its customers believing in it - exactly as the article and Kaplan discusses. More than a few people have noticed today's Apple could easily be the talking head on a screen that gets smashed by a woman hammer thrower that IBM was back in the day.

Apple is not the only company completely dominating its own market that seems exceptional. Google does it in search. Facebook does it in social media. IBM does it in mainframes. Microsoft does it in corporate desktops. They're all entrenched in their own market by their own myths. They won't be breaking into anyone else's market.

Reply Parent Score: 11

Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

It's already been answered: the reality distortion field. I personally don't find Apple products that appealing, but then I've never been particularly susceptible to advertising, whether it be TV campaigns or word-of-mouth campaigns.


Fail. Intellectual collapse. Explaining a phenomena like Apple's last ten years by waffling about the reality distortion field pathetic drivel.

Reply Parent Score: 0

kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

"It's already been answered: the reality distortion field. I personally don't find Apple products that appealing, but then I've never been particularly susceptible to advertising, whether it be TV campaigns or word-of-mouth campaigns.


Fail. Intellectual collapse. Explaining a phenomena like Apple's last ten years by waffling about the reality distortion field pathetic drivel.
"

The fact that you call it a Phenomena is proof of the reality distortion field...

You made the argument that Apple is somehow unique. Well, I gave my reasons why they're not actually unique, but follows in the footsteps of other companies who have similarly cornered a market of their own.

Using phrases like "Fail", "Intellectual collapse", "waffling" and "pathetic drivel" without having made counter-arguments is itself a fail.

Sorry, but Apple is not special. Don't feel sad. They're just not. People buy Apple for media devices out of reflex. In the same way people buy Coke out of reflex. In the same way people use Google search out of reflex. In the same way people expect others to have a Facebook account out of reflex.

Never underestimate the power of Pavlov.

Reply Parent Score: 5

kristoph Member since:
2006-01-01

Dude. Are you serious? Do you REALLY think the largest (by market cap) and most profitable tech company on earth can be created based on some advertising?

What about all that #1 in customer satisfaction and #1 in customer service stuff? You think that's also marketing?

Apple does not even do that much advertising and very few people ever bother watching an Apple keynote so unless you think there is a huge conspiracy your argument is pretty weak.

Reply Parent Score: 3

David Member since:
1997-10-01

So true. Compared to the amount of money spent by a company like Procter and Gamble or Unilever in order to convince people to use their toothpaste, the amount of money Apple spends on advertising is a rounding error.

You can say that Apple products or the semi-mandatory Apple ecosystem don't appeal to you for whatever reason (and there are myriad valid reasons), but people aren't drawn to Apple products for irrational reasons, or because of "advertising."

People buy Apple products because of their inherent qualities, and people become loyal to Apple products because of their consistent quality. And Apple fans get very angry when Apple produces something that doesn't make the grade.

Reply Parent Score: 1

kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

Dude. Are you serious? Do you REALLY think the largest (by market cap) and most profitable tech company on earth can be created based on some advertising?

What about all that #1 in customer satisfaction and #1 in customer service stuff? You think that's also marketing?

Apple does not even do that much advertising and very few people ever bother watching an Apple keynote so unless you think there is a huge conspiracy your argument is pretty weak.


Having read comments on this site and other sites and heard the opinions of many Apple buyers, it's easy to see that a lot of the "customer satisfaction" stuff is partly due to people being a lot more willing to forgive Apple products - hence the reality distortion field.

Your apologetics is exactly the kind of thing the distortion field does. That's why Apple, as you say, don't do that much advertising. Furthermore they know that people buying overpriced trendy gadgets will defend their choices more vehemently than those who are more careful with their money. It's a well known psychological phenomena.

Apple do more than marketing. They do psychology. Do people really think Apple would create the the iPad, for example, if they didn't know that people would buy it out of a reflex reaction?

Reply Parent Score: 2