Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by McGyver, Sep 16, 2012.
You're ignoring my only two pieces of evidence.
I have no reading comprehension skills and can't locate the evidence.
But still, people pay for the brand. Buy Lee Wrangler jeans for 4x the price of no-name jeans whose only difference is lack of a brand sticker. Or buy Call of Duty because you know, Call of Duty.
You know, the only two examples that I supplied also happened to be debut products on new brand names.
The entire Razor laptop brand didn't exist before the Blade, yet Razor claims that the first version sold well, despite being "overpriced" compared to its internal computing hardware.
And what about the Lumia 800? It has the exact same internal computing hardware as the 710, yet it costs twice as much. Those two debut Lumias were Nokia's first Windows Phones, so they had only the Nokia name for consumers to recognize. Admittedly, both sold poorly, but the 610's sales did not dwarf those of the 800.
Brand. I feel like those prove my point.
What the fuck are you talking about?
I honestly don't understand how you think the first Razor laptop and the first Nokia Windows Phone had any meaningful brand recognition. They are both firsts. There is no chance for the public to own a Lumia or a Blade branded product and form a brand impression if they are the first of their brand.
razor, those guys that produce overpriced mice?
and nokia and ms windows aint unknown brands either. virtually everyone once had a nokia phone (at least over here)
For the longest time Nokia only had like one model for cellphones here.
But mice are not laptops. Do you guys seriously think that a mice manufacturer can instantly gain laptop clout? Actual laptop manufacturers can't always sell their premium machines. How did a mice maker manage it?
Nokia did make phones before its Lumia phones, but they were outdated and I think the public knew that. But even if they did have a positive view of Nokia, why did the Lumia 800 sell significantly better than its cheaper yet equaled spec'ed Lumia 710 cousin? They both have the same brand, but one has a different chassis and camera along with its larger price tag.
I'm really not convinced that the brand recognition makes the products of Apple, Razor or Nokia sell in unusual ways. I think they have simply made some decent products (in addition to some not-decent ones in Nokia's case).
You've already answered why Razor and Nokia sold their products as they did, the same reason Apple does. People value form far more than function.
If you take my keyboard, it has all the function I'd ever need. It's also big, loud and beige. Most people wouldn't buy the kind of keyboard I have because of its form, even though investing in a keyboard that's lasted me for so long is so effective and it has great function.
A strong marketing campaign and design doesn't sell a product, it sells an image. If you can stick a shiny case on something and sell it as being more than it is, then you can make hella' bank. For example, the "I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC" commercials? The ones with the young, hip Mac and the middle-aged, drull PC? The goal of that wasn't to say that Mac is better as a product. It didn't say, "You should buy a Macintosh because it's better than a PC," it said, "You should buy a Macintosh because smart, young people buy them."
The Lumia 800, despite the similarities to the 710, was billed as being a phone for professionals with a unique design, selling the idea that buying the phone would give someone a professional image, because it was a professional phone for professional people.
And finally, the Blade, I've seen them myself. I tried out a friend's one. It was sold as being a laptop made and designed for gamers. And yes, it looks great in every way, it looks like a laptop for mobile gamer market, a market that lacked really unique designs until the Blade came around. Playing on it is a different story, I'd much rather have a USB mouse. But they sold the image that came with it. A gaming laptop for people who want to enjoy their games, regardless of whether it actually is better or not.
Apple doesn't have to sell their product, that's the last thing they'd want to do in fact because there's nothing inherently better about their product. They sell the image of their products being more reliable, more durable, more secure, better in general. Most of all they sell the image that buying their product will make the customer a better person.
I don't think it's unfair to expect a company to sell a product that its consumers want. If there's a problem, it would have lie with consumers. Are companies expected to turn consumers into engineers before they agree to sell them a product?
A Model M or its contemporaries provide enormous geek cred. You can't wag around a vintage mechanical keyboard and expect people not to get jealous. You can't tell me that a nerd status symbol doesn't have the form to match its function.
I'm tired of this. It's bullshit. Apple has a ~20% BoM markup on its laptops (which make up most of Mac sales). They offer the perfect chiclet keyboard, an unmatched trackpad, the best TN panels (16:10!) all wrapped up in a clean & sturdy chassis. That shit is not free. Almost all premium laptops offer those kind of things for similar prices and similar BoM markups. This is just a bullshit myth.
Billed as a phone for professionals? Don't make me laugh. A nicer camera and a snazzy chassis turned the $350 low-end Lumia 710 into the $600+ high-end leader of all Windows Phones. This is a perfect example of what you blame Apple for, but Nokia gets away with it because you say their high-end phones are for "professionals." I call shenanigans. Either Apple has no problem or Nokia and Apple are equally to blame.
It doesn't have to be better than a mouse, that's basically impossible. All it has to do is be better than the traditional under-keyboard trackpad. I think it does that job.
That's pure conjecture.Every consumer tech company markets to a 'hip' crowd. Microsoft spends more marketing dollars for Windows Phone than Apple spends for its phone.
If marketing sold an 'image' and that 'image' sold phones, then Windows Phone would be a success. But it's fighting for 3rd place right now. I have actual numbers, you're just spewing bullshit.
People here seriously debate how modern companies sell their products? Let me recite something from my marketing readings: Emotionalising of products is necessary, in our modern world each product is equal their is no other selling point beyond image and emotion.
But when Apple does it, it's unfair.
I've stayed out of this discussion for the most part, but there's some serious bullshit here that needs addressing.
How often do you use your keyboard publicly? You don't. The Model M is what it is, it's one of the greatest keyboards created because it was built to last, and was one of the first, easily usable mechanical keyboards. Anyone who has used a mechanical keyboard knows what a difference it makes in FUNCTION. I'm sorry but "geek cred" has nothing to do with it. Most "geeks" won't leave the house anyway.
Whilst I'm fairly sure that Apple have a considerably larger markup on their laptops than 20%, and that their markups are, generally speaking, much higher than other companies, that's not the issue. The trackpad on a Macbook isn't really anything special, and the idea of a "perfect chiclet keyboard" is like having the highest IQ of the downs syndrome kids. Chiclet keyboards are fucking terrible, the ones on the Macbooks included. The chassis on Apple Laptops, whilst pretty, is hardly what you could call "sturdy". They're infamous for fucking MELTING. I won't dispute the monitor quality, though, having had many 16:10 monitors, and just getting a 16:9 Laptop, I prefer losing those extra pixels on the vertical to not have the black bars on my TV/Films. But I accept that's preference. The main reason other manufacturers won't upgrade their resolution is because Windows 7 won't scale for it. Even on my Dad's laptop (15.4" 1920x1080) I had to ram the DPI through the roof so he could actually use it. It's ok for me, but for the majority of people, it isn't. OSX is built for scaling with resolution, and it's about fucking time that Microsoft stopped being so fucking useless and got their shit together to fix that, because I'm sick of being capped at 2560x1600 at home. So yeah, without a doubt, when it comes to resolution (and OS support), Apple trumps there. But that's not because of some fantastic innovation from Apple, it's because MS have been dragging their feet for years, too lazy to fix the issue. That's the main reason Windows 7 was also never remotely usable as a touch-screen OS. Apple have come up with innovations, but "Retina Display" was not one of them. Making a number bigger is not inventing.
I have a newer IBM Model-M keyboard for work. I get a tiny orgasm every time I type.
Seriously though, I thought macfags died with Steve Jobs and the shitty iPhone 5. Why do they still exist?
And it does lie with the customers. My whole argument from the beginning was that Apple's products aren't as good as people think they are and people are stupid for believing it. I can understand them wanting to sell their products, they're a business and that's what businesses do. But that business is directly responsible for making stupid people think they're the best god damn person in the world for buying their shit and then insisting on telling damn near everyone why Apple is great and Microsoft is the devil incarnate.
I damn well can, and I just did. Plus, the only people who see the keyboard are the ones who pop into my room on occasion, the majority of who are not nerds.
Trickster already beat me to this one. Emphasis on the letterboxing, 16:10 is a shitty resolution anyway. Also, some of the laptops like the MacBook Air go up to almost 40%.
They are equally to blame. Bro, I love how you put words in my mouth, can I try that too? I never said that Nokia's phones are for professionals. I said they're billed as a phone for professionals. They're advertised and sold for professionals. The reason I don't go around hating on Nokia? I don't see Nokia fanboys going around saying how Nokia makes the best products ever and thinking they're superior to everyone else for it.
And yet, it's still shit for gaming. It's annoying as fuck either way to use a laptop for gaming. It most definitely isn't worth the extra cash. It's all kinds of more functional to crank a USB mouse's sensitivity through the roof and use a wooden board for a pad.
Marketing is supposed to sell an image. Doesn't mean that every marketing team is going to be successful at it.
Frankly, I believe this argument consisted of spewing bullshit from both sides the moment it started.
"Laziness and cowardice are the reasons why such a large part of mankind gladly remain minors all their lives, long after nature has freed them from external guidance. They are the reasons why it is so easy for others to set themselves up as guardians. It is so comfortable to be a minor. If I have a book that thinks for me, a pastor who acts as my conscience, a physician who prescribes my diet, and so on--then I have no need to exert myself. I have no need to think, if only I can pay; others will take care of that disagreeable business for me. Those guardians who have kindly taken supervision upon themselves see to it that the overwhelming majority of mankind--among them the entire fair sex--should consider the step to maturity, not only as hard, but as extremely dangerous. First, these guardians make their domestic cattle stupid and carefully prevent the docile creatures from taking a single step without the leading-strings to which they have fastened them. Then they show them the danger that would threaten them if they should try to walk by themselves. Now this danger is really not very great; after stumbling a few times they would, at last, learn to walk. However, examples of such failures intimidate and generally discourage all further attempts."
-- Immanuel Kant, What Is Enlightenment?
he was a bit overly optimistic though. :p
also kant reads a lot more stylish in german ...
Since you approved of pointing this stuff out, you should have used passive, aka "is read".
believe it or not, i do. as long as it not used instead of an argument. a lot of my english skill is credited to empiresmod and #cw-clan in special.
i only refuse to use uppercase letters in "casual texts"
Same for periods aka full stops but I see your point
Like heroin addicts dying together with their current drug lord and due to a bad batch of heroin. Well, they could, but that's not the point ... they have an apple carved into the brain, it would take years for apple to loose its cult status.
Separate names with a comma.