Here are some clues to look for in Apple’s advertising that will indicate that dull hands are grabbing at the wheel:
1. Creeping Brandism: The Apple brand was built bottom-up. That is, the products defined the brand. Virtually every Apple ad was about a product, not the brand (okay, there was “Think Different” but that didn’t last.) Keep an eye out for the erosion of this discipline.
2. Agency change: Vapid marketing people relegated to the background all these years by Jobs’ dominance may suddenly start flexing. They wouldn’t dare contradict Jobs’ legacy, but they could accomplish the same thing by undermining the agency.
3. The Tortured Logic of Account Planning: Look for ads about you the consumer instead of Apple products. Look for moronic online “engagement” gimmicks. Or look for social media pandering.
4. Complications: Part of the brilliance of Apple advertising has been its simplicity. Keep an eye out for complicated ideas or ads with more than one product.
5. Media: Apple has used online media sparingly. The preponderance of its advertising has been conducted in traditional media — TV, print, and outdoor. Watch to see if Apple suddenly starts going all trendy and new age in its media choices.
If you start seeing any of these signs coming out of Cupertino, sell your shares.
Advertising will be an early indicator of whether people without vision and taste are moving in at Apple. It will be interesting to watch.
Battle of the subversion clients for landing-page supremacy
(Side note: Very excited to see that the company responsible for Version, Sofa, was recently purchased by Facebook. I have high hopes for a better Facebook UI now that Google+ is running amuck.)
It’s no secret that change is uncomfortable and usually leads to some kind of backlash. As loss-averse creatures, we tend to dislike uncertainty. After recently posting about a new type of photography, one of my friends replied:
No. Nope. Never. Not gonna happen. In fact, stop calling this photography. This is merely image capturing. It’ll never look as good, nor will it fix your “oh shit” moments. It is simply a crutch for the less talented. Who shoots AF?
I’m not surprised. It’s a natural reaction for those who enjoy shooting with a regular camera—especially film as he does. But, digital is a crutch for people who can’t shoot film, like autofocus (AF) is a crutch for people who can’t focus fast enough, like photo centers are a crutch for those who can’t/won’t develop their own film, like photography is a crutch for those who can’t paint.
This is how progression works. Some fear it, some evolve with it. Autofocus (AF) was invented to help both novice photographers and professional action photographers alike, just like paddle shifting and clutchless transmissions were invented to help both race car drivers and hapless Ferrari owners shift faster. In fact, photography was invented to capture moments more efficiently than drawing or painting.
Are these advancements truly better? They accomplish these tasks in a more efficient way. Do they offer the same tactile experience? No.
Ultimately, better is in the eye of the beholder and will continue to be. There are no absolutes in this game, especially when it comes to art. I’m sure we’ll all be able to have fun regardless.
A lot of product managers for a single product. They keep huddling in meeting rooms and take important decisions like whether the new link on the homepage should be light blue or dark blue, and eventually (thanks to awesome teamwork) decide on purple instead.
Cortex brings baked-in mobile-esque sharing to your browser. Click and hold on any page or object to share on the service of your choosing. You can even make comments before sharing. I just downloaded it yesterday, and already love it. It’s by far the easiest way to share content quickly, and the LBGT crowd will love the way it highlights objects. Download it here.
Looking better already. Time for bed.