or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Ad guru Lee Clow talks Steve Jobs and Apple at PTTOW media summit
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ad guru Lee Clow talks Steve Jobs and Apple at PTTOW media summit

post #1 of 43
Thread Starter 
Lee Clow, Chairman and Global Director of Apple's go-to ad agency TBWA/Media Arts, recently discussed the 30 years he spent working with Steve Jobs, as well as the history behind now iconic commercials like those from the "Think Different" campaign.


Lee Clow
Lee Clow | Source: Create Business


The ten-minute clip, spotted by Business Insider, comes from the PTTOW conference held recently in May and shows Clow giving a short rundown of his history with Jobs and Apple. More importantly, the legendary adman gives an inside look into how Jobs understood branding and used that knowledge to change the consumer electronics landscape.

One interesting tidbit from the speech is Clow's take on how Jobs decided on the name Apple. He notes the many legends surrounding the Cupertino company's name, including a story that claims Jobs settled on the name as he was eating an apple when working on the Apple I with Steve Wozniak in his parent's garage.

Clow believes, however, that the tech guru knew personal computing would be somewhat daunting to the masses, and wanted a company name that would seem non-threatening. Jobs was a student of brands, including Sony, which changed its name from the pedestrian "Tokyo Tsoshiu Kogyo KK" because "Sony" sounded inviting and "sunny."



Also touched upon was the famous "Here's to the Crazy Ones" TV spot which Clow said summed up Jobs' values of Apple, as well as his admiration for the people who had vision and tried to change the world. The story has been told before, but Clow offers his own take on the conversation leading up to the ad's airing.

"I tried to convince him to be the voice on that commercial," Clow said, "and he naturally called me the next morning ? after I argued with him way into the night ? and said 'Lee, we gotta go with Richard Dreyfuss,' who was the voice that was actually on it, 'because if people think this is about me and not about Apple, then we'll have blown everything.'"

Clapping slowly, Clow quipped, "Yeah, that's why you're the genius and I'm just the ad guy."
post #2 of 43

What a difference compared to most of these overpaid CEOs who think "ok, the products of my company suck, sure, but look how smart I am" ... which does not end up with very good results ...


Edited by umrk_lab - 6/8/13 at 2:47am
post #3 of 43
Shame we didn't get to see the first clip that ended with the Apple icon coinciding with that cool 8 bit sound. Was probably a cool video.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #4 of 43
I would rather hear what the real story was, not what some outsider 'believes' was the truth.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #5 of 43
Piece from the bio:


Advertising
Jobs was not happy with the original ads for the iPad. As usual, he threw himself into the marketing, working with James Vincent and Duncan Milner at the ad agency (now called TBWA/Media Arts Lab), with Lee Clow advising from a semiretired perch. The commercial they first produced was a gentle scene of a guy in faded jeans and sweatshirt reclining in a chair, looking at email, a photo album, the New York Times, books, and video on an iPad propped on his lap. There were no words, just the background beat of “There Goes My Love” by the Blue Van. “After he approved it, Steve decided he hated it,” Vincent recalled. “He thought it looked like a Pottery Barn commercial.” Jobs later told me:
It had been easy to explain what the iPod was—a thousand songs in your pocket—which allowed us to move quickly to the iconic silhouette ads. But it was hard to explain what an iPad was. We didn’t want to show it as a computer, and yet we didn’t want to make it so soft that it looked like a cute TV. The first set of ads showed we didn’t know what we were doing. They had a cashmere and Hush Puppies feel to them.
 
James Vincent had not taken a break in months. So when the iPad finally went on sale and the ads started airing, he drove with his family to the Coachella Music Festival in Palm Springs, which featured some of his favorite bands, including Muse, Faith No More, and Devo. Soon after he arrived, Jobs called. “Your commercials suck,” he said. “The iPad is revolutionizing the world, and we need something big. You’ve given me small shit.”
“Well, what do you want?” Vincent shot back. “You’ve not been able to tell me what you want.”
“I don’t know,” Jobs said. “You have to bring me something new. Nothing you’ve shown me is even close.”
Vincent argued back and suddenly Jobs went ballistic. “He just started screaming at me,” Vincent recalled. Vincent could be volatile himself, and the volleys escalated.
When Vincent shouted, “You’ve got to tell me what you want,” Jobs shot back, “You’ve got to show me some stuff, and I’ll know it when I see it.”
“Oh, great, let me write that on “my brief for my creative people: I’ll know it when I see it.”
Vincent got so frustrated that he slammed his fist into the wall of the house he was renting and put a large dent in it. When he finally went outside to his family, sitting by the pool, they looked at him nervously. “Are you okay?” his wife finally asked.”

“It took Vincent and his team two weeks to come up with an array of new options, and he asked to present them at Jobs’s house rather than the office, hoping that it would be a more relaxed environment. Laying storyboards on the coffee table, he and Milner offered twelve approaches. One was inspirational and stirring. Another tried humor, with Michael Cera, the comic actor, wandering through a fake house making funny comments about the way people could use iPads. Others featured the iPad with celebrities, or set starkly on a white background, or starring in a little sitcom, or in a straightforward product demonstration.
After mulling over the options, Jobs realized what he wanted. Not humor, nor a celebrity, nor a demo. “It’s got to make a statement,” he said. “It needs to be a manifesto. This is big.” He had announced that the iPad would change the world, and he wanted a campaign that reinforced that declaration. Other companies would come out with copycat tablets in a year or so, he said, and he wanted people to remember that the iPad was the real thing. “We need ads that stand up and declare what we have done.

“He abruptly got out of his chair, looking a bit weak but smiling. “I’ve got to go have a massage now,” he said. “Get to work.”
So Vincent and Milner, along with the copywriter Eric Grunbaum, began crafting what they dubbed “The Manifesto.” It would be fast-paced, with vibrant pictures and a thumping beat, and it would proclaim that the iPad was revolutionary. The music they chose was Karen O’s pounding refrain from the Yeah Yeah Yeahs’” Gold”“Lion.” As the iPad was shown doing magical things, a strong voice declared, “iPad is thin. iPad is beautiful. . . . It’s crazy powerful. It’s magical. . . . It’s video, photos. More books than you could read in a lifetime. It’s already a revolution, and it’s only just begun.”
Once the Manifesto ads had run their course, the team again tried something softer, shot as day-in-the-life documentaries by the young filmmaker Jessica Sanders. Jobs liked them—for a little while. Then he turned against them for the same reason he had reacted against the original Pottery Barn–style ads. “Dammit,” he shouted, “they look like a Visa commercial, typical ad agency stuff.”
He had been asking for ads that were different and new, but eventually he realized he did not want to stray from what he considered the Apple voice. For him, that voice had a distinctive set of qualities: simple, declarative, clean. “We went down that lifestyle path, and it seemed to be growing on Steve, and suddenly he said, ‘I hate that stuff, it’s not Apple,’” recalled Lee Clow. “He told us to get back to the Apple voice. It’s a very simple, honest voice.” And so they went back to a clean white background, with just a close-up showing off all the things that “iPad is . . .” and could do.”
post #6 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

I would rather hear what the real story was, not what some outsider 'believes' was the truth.

Lee Clow IS an insider. Holy dumb post, batman.
post #7 of 43
Originally Posted by woodycurmudgeon View Post
Lee Clow IS an insider. Holy dumb post, batman.
Clow believes

 

Call me when you know for a fact that he knows why Apple has its name. He doesn't.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #8 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by woodycurmudgeon View Post

Lee Clow IS an insider. Holy dumb post, batman.

I agree. The guy worked on the original Mac ads, the think different campaign and discussed the relative merits of those with Jobs. Sounds like an insider to me. His belief as to how Jobs decided on the name Apple tied in with the rest of the talk about branding and how any connection a company makes to a customer is an advertisement. Names, logos, packaging. I thought it was interesting.
post #9 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Call me when you know for a fact that he knows why Apple has its name. He doesn't.

What's the difference. Given how jobs thinks it's an obvious conclusion as to one of the reasons. I know Woz also said they felt it a good idea because alphabetically Appld would be very high up lists.

And all of that aside the reason is basically irrelevant. It's a good name, that's really all that matters in the long run.

But all of that aside, the real question is when did Mick Fleetwood get into the ad game?
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #10 of 43
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post
What's the difference.

 

What's the difference between the truth and a lie? 1eek.gif

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #11 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

What's the difference between the truth and a lie? 1eek.gif

That was rhetorical; hence the period. And it was specifically rhetorical, because I knew you would cherry pick that part from the comment.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #12 of 43
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post
That was rhetorical; hence the period. And it was specifically rhetorical, because I know you would cherry pick that part.

 

Then why waste your time doing something so pointless? His reason is 'a' potential reason, not the reason. It is a valid request to desire the truth rather than supposition. It is also nonsense to assume "it worked out in the end; don't worry about how". 

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #13 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

I would rather hear what the real story was, not what some outsider 'believes' was the truth.

 

As it pertains to this particular matter, could you please name who it is that would be more "inside" than this guy?

post #14 of 43
He's good at telling a credible story. Those sound like Steve Jobs' words and tactics. One of my favorite books on Jobs is The Journey is the Reward and is chock full of such stories of early Jobs and Apple.

If I remember correctly, Jobs figured everyone loves Apples. And it came before Atari in the phonebook. Mystically, Apple's grew on the tree of knowledge in the garden of eden.

I guess a lot of people would condemn Jobs' style, but I think he used it with great effect. It spurned people on to do their best work. To rethink things. To reach.

One thing I miss is hearing Jobs' answers to questions in interviews. A great example is Jobs explaining why TV is in a world of shit and why it's difficult to make a revolutionary product while dipshits are running the game (2010 D8 Conference: http://stratechery.com/2013/steve-jobs-on-television/)

Tim Cook is great, but he doesn't deliver impassioned, intelligent analyses like this...
post #15 of 43
Dissapointing the videos weren't shown.

AI: shouldn't the video come up and be able to watch in landscape? I'm using an iPhone 4s.

P.S. Hey philboogie, I enjoyed reading ur post! 1smile.gif

P.S.S. Ai: And after I read the article and hit the comments button, shouldn't it just go to the start of the comments? Instead I have to scroll thru the article again to get to the comments. This is just the sort of thing that drove Stevo nuts! ;1smile.gif
Edited by christopher126 - 6/8/13 at 11:44am
post #16 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Then why waste your time doing something so pointless? His reason is 'a' potential reason, not the reason. It is a valid request to desire the truth rather than supposition. It is also nonsense to assume "it worked out in the end; don't worry about how". 

Cherry picker.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #17 of 43
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post
Cherry picker.

 

Yep, I picked out each of your arguments, washed them, and then popped them into my mouth, spitting out the seeds in turn.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #18 of 43
Originally Posted by woodycurmudgeon View Post
I really love the way you think you're a lot smarter than you actually are. Keep up the good show, it's entertaining for the rest of us.

 

So personal attacks instead of proving me wrong. 

 

Guess I'm right, eh?

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #19 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

I would rather hear what the real story was, not what some outsider 'believes' was the truth.

Ellen is that you?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2-UuIEOcss

If you want to call me names, tell me to shut up and f off...you will be ignored. I WILL NOT BE BULLIED!!
Reply
If you want to call me names, tell me to shut up and f off...you will be ignored. I WILL NOT BE BULLIED!!
Reply
post #20 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Call me when you know for a fact that he knows why Apple has its name. He doesn't.

That's a straw man argument. No one is saying they know for a fact why Apple has its name. The person you were responding to said the guy was an insider. That appears to be true enough.
post #21 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Yep, I picked out each of your arguments, washed them, and then popped them into my mouth, spitting out the seeds in turn.

I'm sure.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #22 of 43
Originally Posted by Doctor David View Post
No one is saying they know for a fact why Apple has its name.

 

The people disagreeing with the guy who prefers the truth to conjecture are. And one of them happens to be the person with whom I'm arguing.


Originally Posted by Ireland View Post
I'm sure.
 

So you didn't bother to read the post I quoted. Why even reply to me, then?

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #23 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

The people disagreeing with the guy who prefers the truth to conjecture are. And one of them happens to be the person with whom I'm arguing.
So you didn't bother to read the post I quoted. Why even reply to me, then?
You fight to be seen as winning for the sake of being able to say "I won". Save that stuff for the trolls, it's very helpful when you employ it then. But it gives you this bitter I'm always right attitude that bleeds into what otherwise might be an interesting discussion. Like right now, I'm not really sure what youre point actually is but I do know you're right.
post #24 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Call me when you know for a fact that he knows why Apple has its name. He doesn't.

 

 

 

He doesn't?  Prove it. 

post #25 of 43
Originally Posted by Jessi View Post
He doesn't?  Prove it. 
Clow believes

 

Article already did.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #26 of 43

Different but related - An ad agency creative director working on the Tylenol account has been attached to the account longer than anyone at McNeil (the makers of Tylenol).

 

So just to add to the conversation: it is possible for an ad man to be more of an insider than someone who works for the company.

 

FWIW 

post #27 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Article already did.

 

 

So, if Apple Insider wrote that Steve Jobs didn't die and was living out his days as an Elvis Impersonator in Las Vegas, that would prove it was true?

 

Of course not.  You asserted that this guy doesn't know.  You need to prove it.  The word choice of someone else is irrelevant to the discussion.  You need to prove that Lee Chow doesn't know.  You need to prove that Steve Jobs didn't tell him. 

 

Frankly, you're being quite silly.  These statements by Chow are consistent with the stories about Apple's naming, told by others, including Wozniak and Steve Jobs himself to his biographer. 

 

So, prove it.  Or admit you're wrong. 

 

Last chance before I decide you're just trying to derail discussion here. 


Edited by Jessi - 6/8/13 at 2:43pm
post #28 of 43
Another (tl;dr) from the bio:

Now that they had decided to start a business, they needed a name. Jobs had gone for another visit to the All One Farm, where he had been pruning the Gravenstein apple trees, and Wozniak picked him up at the airport. On the ride down to Los Altos, they bandied around options. They considered some typical tech words, such as Matrix, and some neologisms, such as Executek, and some straightforward boring names, like Personal Computers Inc. The deadline for deciding was the next day, when Jobs wanted to start filing the papers. Finally Jobs proposed Apple Computer. “I was on one of my fruitarian diets,” he explained. “I had just come back from the apple farm. It sounded fun, spirited, and not intimidating. Apple took the edge off the word ‘computer.’ Plus, it would get us ahead of Atari in the phone book.” He told Wozniak that if a better name did not hit them by the next afternoon, they would just stick with Apple. And they did.
Apple. It was a smart choice. The word instantly signaled friendliness and simplicity. It managed to be both slightly off-beat and as normal as a slice of pie. There was a whiff of counterculture, back-to-nature earthiness to it, yet nothing could be more American. And the two words together—Apple Computer—provided an amusing disjuncture. “It doesn’t quite make sense,” said Mike Markkula, who soon thereafter became the first chairman of the new company. “So it forces your brain to dwell on it. Apple and computers, that doesn’t go together! So it helped us grow brand awareness.”

Wozniak was not yet ready to commit full-time. He was an HP company man at heart, or so he thought, and he wanted to keep his day job there. Jobs realized he needed an ally to help corral Wozniak and adjudicate if there was a disagreement. So he enlisted his friend Ron Wayne, the middle-aged engineer at Atari who had once started a slot machine company.
Wayne knew that it would not be easy to make Wozniak quit HP, nor was it necessary right away. Instead the key was to convince him that his computer designs would be owned by the Apple partnership. “Woz had a parental attitude toward the circuits he developed, and he wanted to be able to use them in other applications or let HP use them,” Wayne said. “Jobs and I realized that these circuits would be the core of Apple. We spent two hours in a roundtable discussion at my apartment, and I was able to get Woz to accept this.” His argument was that a great engineer would be remembered only if he teamed with a great marketer, and this required him to commit his designs to the partnership. Jobs was so impressed and grateful that he offered Wayne a 10% stake in the new partnership, turning him into a tie-breaker if Jobs and Wozniak disagreed over an issue.

“They were very different, but they made a powerful team,” said Wayne. Jobs at times seemed to be driven by demons, while Woz seemed a naïf who was toyed with by angels. Jobs had a bravado that helped him get things done, occasionally by manipulating people. He could be charismatic, even mesmerizing, but also cold and brutal. Wozniak, in contrast, was shy and socially awkward, which made him seem childishly sweet. “Woz is very bright in some areas, but he’s almost like a savant, since he was so stunted when it came to dealing with people he didn’t know,” said Jobs. “We were a good pair.” It helped that Jobs was awed by Wozniak’s engineering wizardry, and Wozniak was awed by Jobs’s business drive. “I never wanted to deal with people and step on toes, but Steve could call up people he didn’t know and make them do things,” Wozniak recalled. “He could be rough on people he didn’t think were smart, but he never treated me rudely, even in later years when maybe I couldn’t answer a question as well as he wanted.”

Even after Wozniak became convinced that his new computer design should become the property of the Apple partnership, he felt that he had to offer it first to HP, since he was working there. “I believed it was my duty to tell HP about what I had designed while working for them. That was the right thing and the ethical thing.” So he demonstrated it to his managers in the spring of 1976. The senior executive at the meeting was impressed, and seemed torn, but he finally said it was not something that HP could develop. It was a hobbyist product, at least for now, and didn’t fit into the company’s high-quality market segments. “I was disappointed,” Wozniak recalled, “but now I was free to enter into the Apple partnership.”

On April 1, 1976, Jobs and Wozniak went to Wayne’s apartment in Mountain View to draw up the partnership agreement. Wayne said he had some experience “writing in legalese,” so he composed the three-page document himself. His “legalese” got the better of him. Paragraphs began with various flourishes: “Be it noted herewith . . . Be it further noted herewith . . . Now the refore [sic], in consideration of the respective assignments of interests . . .” But the division of shares and profits was clear—45%-45%-10%—and it was stipulated that any expenditures of more than $100 would require agreement of at least two of the partners. Also, the responsibilities were spelled out. “Wozniak shall assume both general and major responsibility for the conduct of Electrical Engineering; Jobs shall assume general responsibility for Electrical Engineering and Marketing, and Wayne shall assume major responsibility for Mechanical Engineering and Documentation.” Jobs signed in lowercase script, Wozniak in careful cursive, and Wayne in an illegible squiggle.

Wayne then got cold feet. As Jobs started planning to borrow and spend more money, he recalled the failure of his own company. He didn’t want to go through that again. Jobs and Wozniak had no personal assets, but Wayne (who worried about a global financial Armageddon) kept gold coins hidden in his mattress. Because they had structured Apple as a simple partnership rather than a corporation, the partners would be personally liable for the debts, and Wayne was afraid potential creditors would go after him. So he returned to the Santa Clara County office just eleven days later with a “statement of withdrawal” and an amendment to the partnership agreement. “By virtue of a re-assessment of understandings by and between all parties,” it began, “Wayne shall hereinafter cease to function in the status of ‘Partner.’” It noted that in payment for his 10% of the company, he received $800, and shortly afterward $1,500 more.
Had he stayed on and kept his 10% stake, at the end of 2010 it would have been worth approximately $2.6 billion. Instead he was then living alone in a small home in Pahrump, Nevada, where he played the penny slot machines and lived off his social security check. He later claimed he had no regrets. “I made the best decision for me at the time. Both of them were real whirlwinds, and I knew my stomach and it wasn’t ready for such a ride.”

Jobs and Wozniak took the stage together for a presentation to the Homebrew Computer Club shortly after they signed Apple into existence. Wozniak held up one of their newly produced circuit boards and described the microprocessor, the eight kilobytes of memory, and the version of BASIC he had written. He also emphasized what he called the main thing: “a human-typable keyboard instead of a stupid, cryptic front panel with a bunch of lights and switches.” Then it was Jobs’s turn. He pointed out that the Apple, unlike the Altair, had all the essential components built in. Then he challenged them with a question: How much would people be willing to pay for such a wonderful machine? He was trying to get them to see the amazing value of the Apple. It was a rhetorical flourish he would use at product presentations over the ensuing decades.
The audience was not very impressed. The Apple had a cut-rate microprocessor, not the Intel 8080. But one important person stayed behind to hear more. His name was Paul Terrell, and in 1975 he had opened a computer store, which he dubbed the Byte Shop, on Camino Real in Menlo Park. Now, a year later, he had three stores and visions of building a national chain. Jobs was thrilled to give him a private demo. “Take a look at this,” he said. “You’re going to like what you see.” Terrell was impressed enough to hand Jobs and Woz his card. “Keep in touch,” he said.

“I’m keeping in touch,” Jobs announced the next day when he walked barefoot into the Byte Shop. He made the sale. Terrell agreed to order fifty computers. But there was a condition: He didn’t want just $50 printed circuit boards, for which customers would then have to buy all the chips and do the assembly. That might appeal to a few hard-core hobbyists, but not to most customers. Instead he wanted the boards to be fully assembled. For that he was willing to pay about $500 apiece, cash on delivery.

Jobs immediately called Wozniak at HP. “Are you sitting down?” he asked. Wozniak said he wasn’t. Jobs nevertheless proceeded to give him the news. “I was shocked, just completely shocked,” Wozniak recalled. “I will never forget that moment.”

To fill the order, they needed about $15,000 worth of parts. Allen Baum, the third prankster from Homestead High, and his father agreed to loan them $5,000. Jobs tried to borrow more from a bank in Los Altos, but the manager looked at him and, not surprisingly, declined. He went to Haltek Supply and offered an equity stake in Apple in return for the parts, but the owner decided they were “a couple of young, scruffy-looking guys,” and declined. Alcorn at Atari would sell them chips only if they paid cash up front. Finally, Jobs was able to convince the manager of Cramer Electronics to call Paul Terrell to confirm that he had really committed to a $25,000 order. Terrell was at a conference when he heard over a loudspeaker that he had an emergency call (Jobs had been persistent). The Cramer manager told him that two scruffy kids had just walked in waving an order from the Byte Shop. Was it real? Terrell confirmed that it was, and the store agreed to front Jobs the parts on thirty-day credit.
post #29 of 43
Originally Posted by Jessi View Post
So, if Apple Insider wrote that Steve Jobs didn't die and was living out his days as an Elvis Impersonator in Las Vegas, that would prove it was true?

 

Uh…


You asserted that this guy doesn't know.  You need to prove it.  The word choice of someone else is irrelevant to the discussion.  You need to prove that Lee Chow doesn't know.  You need to prove that Steve Jobs didn't tell him. 

 

Uh… he. himself. said. so. What's so difficult to comprehend about this?

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #30 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

Another (tl;dr) from the bio:

 “I was on one of my fruitarian diets,” he explained. “I had just come back from the apple farm. It sounded fun, spirited, and not intimidating. Apple took the edge off the word ‘computer.’ Plus, it would get us ahead of Atari in the phone book.” He told Wozniak that if a better name did not hit them by the next afternoon, they would just stick with Apple. And they did.

 

<sarcasm>

There's no possible way Steve Jobs could have told Lee Chow this story in their presumably numerous branding discussions over their 30 years of working together.   In fact, there's no proof they ever talked about branding, just what Lee Chows "believes" as related in this video.  Obviously, Lee Chow doesn't know what he's talking about and you should just take my word for it, despite offering no reason to believe otherwise, because, after all, I post on the internet!  In fact, Walter Isaacson made this story up, and then Lee Chow read it and he's just telling us what he "believes" from the book!  Lee Chow never even MET Steve Jobs!

</sarcasm>

 

Frankly, I'm just astounded.  I mean, what's the point of trying to refute Chow's story, anyway?  I could understand if someone else had said something that contradicted it, or if there were any sort of facts, logic, or reason to doubt it. 


Edited by Jessi - 6/8/13 at 3:02pm
post #31 of 43

Interesting that we had article on Bill Gates Interview talking about Jobs and he stated that his strongest quality (not the only quality) was marketing and many people thought, Gates was being insulting, but Clow states quite clearly that he though that Jobs was a genius in marketing and advertising..interesting!


Edited by souliisoul - 6/8/13 at 3:46pm
post #32 of 43
I think the key take away points of this video are Lee's obvious love of Steve and of Apple--and, implicitly, of Lee's ability to help Steve and Apple over those thirty years through his own creative contributions.

Daniel Swanson

Reply

Daniel Swanson

Reply
post #33 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by souliisoul View Post

Interesting that we had article on Bill Gates Interview talking about Jobs and he stated that his strongest quality (not the only quality) was marketing and many people thought, Gates was being insulting, but Clow states quite clearly that he though that Jobs was a genius in marketing and advertising..interesting!

I'd say its because Gates (and many people) use that term as a back handed compliment about Jobs. That's clearly not the case with Clow. I keep thinking about that Gates quote back when Jobs came back to Apple in the 90's, I believe it was "I can't figure out why he's trying". Now that Microsoft is in Apples rear view mirror I bet he can figure it out. Anyway, the exact same words coming from 2 different people can have 2 distinct meanings.
post #34 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doctor David View Post

I'd say its because Gates (and many people) use that term as a back handed compliment about Jobs. That's clearly not the case with Clow. I keep thinking about that Gates quote back when Jobs came back to Apple in the 90's, I believe it was "I can't figure out why he's trying". Now that Microsoft is in Apples rear view mirror I bet he can figure it out. Anyway, the exact same words coming from 2 different people can have 2 distinct meanings.

Yes, but the emotion Gates was trying to hide in that interview, tells me he was beng sincere. I think we so bend on disliking MS/Bill Gates, whatever we hear, we will take it as negative.
post #35 of 43
Everyone needs to take a chill pill. You all sound like you are closer to Jobs than people who worked with him for decades, or like you're part of his immediate family. You're not.
post #36 of 43
Everyone needs to take a chill pill. You all sound like you are closer to Jobs than people who worked with him for decades, or like you're part of his immediate family. You're not.
post #37 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

Another (tl;dr) from the bio:

Now that they had decided to start a business, they needed a name. Jobs had gone for another visit to the All One Farm, where he had been pruning the Gravenstein apple trees, and Wozniak picked him up at the airport. On the ride down to Los Altos, they bandied around options. They considered some typical tech words, such as Matrix, and some neologisms, such as Executek, and some straightforward boring names, like Personal Computers Inc. The deadline for deciding was the next day, when Jobs wanted to start filing the papers. Finally Jobs proposed Apple Computer. “I was on one of my fruitarian diets,” he explained. “I had just come back from the apple farm. It sounded fun, spirited, and not intimidating. Apple took the edge off the word ‘computer.’ Plus, it would get us ahead of Atari in the phone book.” He told Wozniak that if a better name did not hit them by the next afternoon, they would just stick with Apple. And they did.
 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

Piece from the bio:

Advertising
Jobs was not happy with the original ads for the iPad. As usual, he threw himself into the marketing, working with James Vincent and Duncan Milner at the ad agency (now called TBWA/Media Arts Lab), with Lee Clow advising from a semiretired perch. The commercial they first produced was a gentle scene of a guy in faded jeans and sweatshirt reclining in a chair, looking at email, a photo album, the New York Times, books, and video on an iPad propped on his lap. There were no words, just the background beat of “There Goes My Love” by the Blue Van. “After he approved it, Steve decided he hated it,” Vincent recalled. “He thought it looked like a Pottery Barn commercial.” Jobs later told me:
It had been easy to explain what the iPod was—a thousand songs in your pocket—which allowed us to move quickly to the iconic silhouette ads. But it was hard to explain what an iPad was. We didn’t want to show it as a computer, and yet we didn’t want to make it so soft that it looked like a cute TV. The first set of ads showed we didn’t know what we were doing. They had a cashmere and Hush Puppies feel to them.
 

 

I (and others, I am sure) appreciate that you're trying to bring a credible source into the discussion. But I have a problem with Isaacson's bio - It has some fundamental errors and inaccuracies that make it hard for me to accept it as an authoritative source. Furthermore, I believe Isaacson's motive was not to provide an accurate bio. Instead, he intended to paint his own portrait of the man, even if facts and details are sacrificed in the process. This has always been his modus operandi.

post #38 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater View Post

Everyone needs to take a chill pill. You all sound like you are closer to Jobs than people who worked with him for decades, or like you're part of his immediate family. You're not.

No different than other types of groupies. Let them be.

post #39 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

So personal attacks instead of proving me wrong.

Kind of a drag when Rule #1 is ignored, isn't it?

post #40 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Call me when you know for a fact that he knows why Apple has its name. He doesn't.

Clow was a personal friend of Jobs for 30 years.  Chances are he knows more about Apple than you know about him.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Ad guru Lee Clow talks Steve Jobs and Apple at PTTOW media summit