Now watch... trollers and iHaters had said that no one would be stupid-enough to mistaken a Samsung for an iPad. Well, here you go. How are you going to spin this one from your basement kids???
Samsung's lawyers can't tell the difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
NO THEY DIDN'T. NO ONE WOULD CONFUSE A SAMSUNG TABLET FOR AN IPAD. THIS IS A CROCK. APPLE IS SUING BECAUSE THEY WANT A MONOPOLY. INNOVATE, DON'T LITIGATE, APPLE.
Unfortunately, some of these "educated and affluent" Apple users you are so proud of apparently are "illiterates" and can not read the logo and the word "Samsung" plastered at the bottom and at the back of the Galaxy tab, It's kinda negating your point ain't it?
But, the people who bought Samsung tablets thinking they were iPads aren't Apple users--they are technically Samsung customers. Thus, your attempt to use this as an example of how "illiterate" Apple users are have failed, miserably. Turn in your troll permit to Tallest Skill and await further instructions.
So, if the return specifically says "customer thought they were buying an iPad" then it's legit. Any return reason that does not mention iPad is thrown out. This would say more about BB employees than Samsung. And we know BB employees never stretch the truth! Fanboys...
But, the people who bought Samsung tablets thinking they were iPads aren't Apple users--they are technically Samsung customers. Thus, your attempt to use this as an example of how "illiterate" Apple users are have failed, miserably. Turn in your troll permit to Tallest Skill and await further instructions.
They are only samsung owners by virtue of error. they want to be Apple owners, and indeed I guess that some of them fulfill that desire by going on to become apple owners Unfortunately the report doesn't mention how many customers actually make the exchange rather than just take the refund.
Your (counter) argument would only be valid if you could prove that owners who thought that they were buying a Samsung accidentally ended up with an ipad.
Sales: This is an Apple Ipad [With Samsung logo upfront] - Apparently the Sales is illiterate.
Customer: I'll buy one {Apparently can't read the word Samsung upfront, so he/she is illiterate as well]
Sales: OK, our return policy is to return merchandise within 30days after purchase if you're not satisfied..
Case 2:
Customer: I want to buy an Apple Ipad.
Sales: This is NOT an Apple Ipad, but It's Samsung Galaxy tab. It's as good as Ipad because its internal hardware is the same, but Apple will charge you much more for this because the material is made of a hand-picked First Rate Chinese materials, and you are being charged an Apple tax too for their superb service policy. And, in addition you will have the best apps ecosystem in the world, with over 200,000 Ipad's simpleton crapwares. BTW, you will probably install fifty or so of this crapwares on your Ipad at the most.
Customer: I'll buy one [apparently the customer is both illiterate and deaf].
Case 3:
And so forth...
The point is these two types of customers are Apple customers, illiterate [and deaf] but still Apple customers because they asked for Apple's Ipad but had no clues of what they're getting. And, after watching the new "genius" advertisements by Apple, and Apple product buyers being depicted as far from being geniuses, even borderline....[fill in the blank], It actually confirms the scenarios 1 and 2 above are very possible. Apple admits this fact about its buyers; otherwise, it won't create that commercial for the world to see.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
But, the people who bought Samsung tablets thinking they were iPads aren't Apple users--they are technically Samsung customers. Thus, your attempt to use this as an example of how "illiterate" Apple users are have failed, miserably. Turn in your troll permit to Tallest Skill and await further instructions.
It might well be the case that the owners didn't even know that tablets are made by other companies, assuming that tablet pc and ipads are the same thing. This would go someway to explaining why they didn't question the large Samsung logo at the time of purchase. In such a case the Samsung would have to be significantly different in design to enable the store customer to think "hang on, that's nothing like the thingy I wanted to buy", essentualy it would have to look like something other than a tablet
Sales: This is an Apple Ipad [With Samsung logo upfront] - Apparently the Sales is illiterate.
Customer: I'll buy one {Apparently can't read the word Samsung upfront, so he/she is illiterate as well]
Sales: OK, our return policy is to return merchandise within 30days after purchase if you're not satisfied..
Case 2:
Customer: I want to buy an Apple Ipad.
Sales: This is NOT an Apple Ipad, but It's Samsung Galaxy tab. It's as good as Ipad because its internal hardware is the same, but Apple will charge you much more for this because the material is made of a hand-picked First Rate Chinese materials, and you are being charged an Apple tax too for their superb service policy. And, in addition you will have the best apps ecosystem in the world, with over 200,000 Ipad's simpleton crapwares. BTW, you will probably install fifty or so of this crapwares on your Ipad at the most.
Customer: I'll buy one [apparently the customer is both illiterate and deaf].
Case 3:
And so forth...
The point is these two types of customers are Apple customers, illiterate [and deaf] but still Apple customers because they asked for Apple's Ipad but had no clues of what they're getting. And, after watching the new "genius" advertisements by Apple, and Apple product buyers being depicted as far from being geniuses, even borderline....[fill in the blank], It actually confirms the scenarios 1 and 2 above are very possible. Apple admits this fact about its buyers; otherwise, it won't create that commercial for the world to see.
You don't need to be a genius to buy a subsidised top of the range phone. Most people are dumb. Given that Samsung are out selling apple in the phone arena it is likely that they have even more of the dumb owners than apple (in absolute terms, relative terms are probably the same for both).
I just saw an ad for the Nexus 7, it looked just like a mini iPad in the commercial. And for a split second I thought Apple had announced something that I had missed.
Sales: This is an Apple Ipad [With Samsung logo upfront] - Apparently the Sales is illiterate.
Customer: I'll buy one {Apparently can't read the word Samsung upfront, so he/she is illiterate as well]
Sales: OK, our return policy is to return merchandise within 30days after purchase if you're not satisfied..
Case 2:
Customer: I want to buy an Apple Ipad.
Sales: This is NOT an Apple Ipad, but It's Samsung Galaxy tab. It's as good as Ipad because its internal hardware is the same, but Apple will charge you much more for this because the material is made of a hand-picked First Rate Chinese materials, and you are being charged an Apple tax too for their superb service policy. And, in addition you will have the best apps ecosystem in the world, with over 200,000 Ipad's simpleton crapwares. BTW, you will probably install fifty or so of this crapwares on your Ipad at the most.
Customer: I'll buy one [apparently the customer is both illiterate and deaf].
Case 3:
And so forth...
The point is these two types of customers are Apple customers, illiterate [and deaf] but still Apple customers because they asked for Apple's Ipad but had no clues of what they're getting. And, after watching the new "genius" advertisements by Apple, and Apple product buyers being depicted as far from being geniuses, even borderline....[fill in the blank], It actually confirms the scenarios 1 and 2 above are very possible. Apple admits this fact about its buyers; otherwise, it won't create that commercial for the world to see.
It may seem obvious to the "initiated" tech geeks amongus… but to others, they won't go into Best Buy looking for an APPLE iPad… just "iPad"… I was in there, I've heard it… Customer to salesperson: "Hi, I'm looking for the iPads?" Sales: "Over there in the computing section… here, I'll show you…" (Takes customer to a shelf display containing various and sundry "tablets", none of which are made by APPLE….. Customer: "thanks…." (and did ask a few questions about the differences and prices, and…). I finally pointed them to the IN STORE APPLE area…. and to a REAL iPad….
So, it isn't assumed anyone asks for APPLE iPad….. just saying…..
Mother tells the Grandmother that grand child wants an iPad as a gift for <fill in event>
Grandmother goes to Best Buy and says I need to purchase one of those new tablet computers I think they call it the iPad.
More like Mom tells Granny that child wants an iPad as a gift from whatever.
Granny goes to Best Buy and in her ignorance thinks that 'iPad' is the same as tablet. Any tablet. i.e. that it's just a generic term. Sees the newly released Tab and it's on sales. Tells sales person she wants one of those.
Child thanks Granny for gift because Mom taught him to just say thanks. Next day, Mom returns Tab for iPad that the kid really wants.
Or at least that's the version that Apple is trying to avoid by making it clear that not all tablets are iPads although they look basically the same. Maybe they should have done that 'basically' ad for the iPad and not the Mac.
I haven't heard anyone use iPad as a generic term. Such as, "Have you seen this? I'll iPad it to you...".
Not all generic terms are verbs. Some of them are nouns.
Aspirin was one the trademarked term for a particularly companies release of a now very proper OTC pain drug. Then every company started calling their release of the same chemical formula 'aspirin' and Bayer wasn't quick to stop them and they lost the trademark.
Xerox didn't make that mistake so not all copiers are Xerox and Xeroxing is not a proper term for the action (although some still use it).
Newspapers etc haven't yet jumped on the idea of calling all tablets 'iPads' although some people have. And are often quickly corrected that there's no such thing as a Windows iPad or a Samsung iPad. same with the iPod. But you'll still find folks putting out a Zune and calling it an iPod. And yes I saw it at an Apple Store. 80 year old guy says something like "my grand kids got me this iPod and I can't figure out how to use it" and pulled out a Zune. I had to keep from laughing as the poor hipster kid tried to explain that it's not an iPod and they can't help him with it.
C'mon I can understand mistaking it in the store but when one is handed a box that says Samsung on it instead of Apple should tip them that they bought the wrong device.
THe issue isn't so much that they went in to get an actual iPad but that they don't get that iPad isn't just a cute term for tablet. With that confusion they think they are getting a much cheaper Samsung iPad rather than the Apple iPad.
That info is in the court records and probably public info now. I could totally see, assuming Apple loses the appeal, them including that info in the required ads. Start off with a statement to the effective "The British Courts say Samsung didn't copy the iPad. You decide." With some photos, especially those 'before the release/after the release'. At the bottom something about these returns.
THAT would be an awesome stunt to not be advertising Samsung in the way that just posting "Samsung didn't copy the iPad" could be taken (and Apple wouldn't be the ones making the declaration but just reporting the court decision). Still getting the public vote in there etc. They could finish up with a tagline something to the effect of "If it's not from Apple it's not an iPad."
I could see Apple doing something like that. They could argue they did what they were ordered to do, but they avoid making the statement as if they are saying it. no apologizes etc and they still get in some advertising for themselves.
It may seem obvious to the "initiated" tech geeks amongus… but to others, they won't go into Best Buy looking for an APPLE iPad… just "iPad"… I was in there, I've heard it… Customer to salesperson: "Hi, I'm looking for the iPads?" Sales: "Over there in the computing section… here, I'll show you…" (Takes customer to a shelf display containing various and sundry "tablets", none of which are made by APPLE….. Customer: "thanks…." (and did ask a few questions about the differences and prices, and…). I finally pointed them to the IN STORE APPLE area…. and to a REAL iPad….
So, it isn't assumed anyone asks for APPLE iPad….. just saying…..
Exactly. Common folks can and do think 'iPad' is just a cute name for tablet. And rarely do they ask for the Apple iPad. Even in cases where they are taken the Apple ones if they see the others and see they are cheaper they will make the assumption for themselves that it's the same thing (because an iPad is any tablet regardless of who made it). and when they call over the sales person that person isn't going to assume they really wanted an Apple iPad when the person says 'what about this one? What can it do?'
Not all generic terms are verbs. Some of them are nouns.
Aspirin was one the trademarked term for a particularly companies release of a now very proper OTC pain drug. Then every company started calling their release of the same chemical formula 'aspirin' and Bayer wasn't quick to stop them and they lost the trademark.
???
Aspirin was developed by Bayer in 1897. As a german company they, by virtue of being German, lost the right to defend their trade mark after the First World War because the British, french and USA courts stuck two fingers up to them and allowed anyone to use the word aspirin. It was only this hostility that allowed the term to pass from a brand name to a generic name. Once it became generic there was no turning back Latterly, Bayer, after1994, were able to register "Bayer Aspirin" as a trademark in the USA (this is quite relevant given the "Amazon Appstore" debate).
It is frequently suggested on this site that Apple have to be aggressive with regard to IP or trademarks lest the courts remove those rights, I honestly don't know if that is true. Your Bayer example however is very flawed and contary to the point I suspect you were trying to make.If anything it shows that you can invent a product, lose all rights to exclusivity and still end up making a mint out of it
Mother tells the Grandmother that grand child wants an iPad as a gift for <fill in event>
Grandmother goes to Best Buy and says I need to purchase one of those new tablet computers I think they call it the iPad.
Best Buy sales rep tells her the tablet she really needs to buy is this brand new Galaxy Tab, it is the best one on the market.
On the day of the <event> grand child opens gift and bursts into tears. "I wanted the iPad".
Next day mom and child go to Best Buy to exchange it.
Yup, because either:
- Sales commission, bonus or service contract is worth more to the store and employee
- Seniors and "moms" are the most gullible targets in an electronics store.
I can't tell you how often sales people try to sell me something I don't want. When I go into these stores, I already know exactly what I want and ignore the sales people.
But mobile phones are a confusing mess. I went into the Samsung store and couldn't tell one model from another. At least with Apple, if you want an "iPhone" you get an "iPhone", or iPad when you ask for an iPad. They only make one model per year. Like cars, it's much easier to see the difference between various models if the branding only deals with a model year. But like cars, you can't sell someone a Honda Civic when they want a Lexus CT and go "oh they're the same, they're both hybrids"
Comments
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky
Watch the flood gates open...
And be swept under the rug. You'll have to make them take back and then publicly report weekly on the number taken back.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
And be swept under the rug. You'll have to make them take back and then publicly report weekly on the number taken back.
...and advertise it in UK newspapers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal
Now watch... trollers and iHaters had said that no one would be stupid-enough to mistaken a Samsung for an iPad. Well, here you go. How are you going to spin this one from your basement kids???
Samsung's lawyers can't tell the difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
NO THEY DIDN'T. NO ONE WOULD CONFUSE A SAMSUNG TABLET FOR AN IPAD. THIS IS A CROCK. APPLE IS SUING BECAUSE THEY WANT A MONOPOLY. INNOVATE, DON'T LITIGATE, APPLE.
Shhh. Not so loud. Tallest might hear you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrs
Unfortunately, some of these "educated and affluent" Apple users you are so proud of apparently are "illiterates" and can not read the logo and the word "Samsung" plastered at the bottom and at the back of the Galaxy tab, It's kinda negating your point ain't it?
But, the people who bought Samsung tablets thinking they were iPads aren't Apple users--they are technically Samsung customers. Thus, your attempt to use this as an example of how "illiterate" Apple users are have failed, miserably. Turn in your troll permit to Tallest Skill and await further instructions.
This would say more about BB employees than Samsung.
And we know BB employees never stretch the truth!
Fanboys...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
But, the people who bought Samsung tablets thinking they were iPads aren't Apple users--they are technically Samsung customers. Thus, your attempt to use this as an example of how "illiterate" Apple users are have failed, miserably. Turn in your troll permit to Tallest Skill and await further instructions.
They are only samsung owners by virtue of error. they want to be Apple owners, and indeed I guess that some of them fulfill that desire by going on to become apple owners Unfortunately the report doesn't mention how many customers actually make the exchange rather than just take the refund.
Your (counter) argument would only be valid if you could prove that owners who thought that they were buying a Samsung accidentally ended up with an ipad.
Case 1:
Customer: I want to buy an Apple Ipad.
Sales: This is an Apple Ipad [With Samsung logo upfront] - Apparently the Sales is illiterate.
Customer: I'll buy one {Apparently can't read the word Samsung upfront, so he/she is illiterate as well]
Sales: OK, our return policy is to return merchandise within 30days after purchase if you're not satisfied..
Case 2:
Customer: I want to buy an Apple Ipad.
Sales: This is NOT an Apple Ipad, but It's Samsung Galaxy tab. It's as good as Ipad because its internal hardware is the same, but Apple will charge you much more for this because the material is made of a hand-picked First Rate Chinese materials, and you are being charged an Apple tax too for their superb service policy. And, in addition you will have the best apps ecosystem in the world, with over 200,000 Ipad's simpleton crapwares. BTW, you will probably install fifty or so of this crapwares on your Ipad at the most.
Customer: I'll buy one [apparently the customer is both illiterate and deaf].
Case 3:
And so forth...
The point is these two types of customers are Apple customers, illiterate [and deaf] but still Apple customers because they asked for Apple's Ipad but had no clues of what they're getting. And, after watching the new "genius" advertisements by Apple, and Apple product buyers being depicted as far from being geniuses, even borderline....[fill in the blank], It actually confirms the scenarios 1 and 2 above are very possible. Apple admits this fact about its buyers; otherwise, it won't create that commercial for the world to see.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
But, the people who bought Samsung tablets thinking they were iPads aren't Apple users--they are technically Samsung customers. Thus, your attempt to use this as an example of how "illiterate" Apple users are have failed, miserably. Turn in your troll permit to Tallest Skill and await further instructions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
Samsung's lawyers can't tell the difference.
Shhh. Not so loud. Tallest might hear you.
It might well be the case that the owners didn't even know that tablets are made by other companies, assuming that tablet pc and ipads are the same thing. This would go someway to explaining why they didn't question the large Samsung logo at the time of purchase. In such a case the Samsung would have to be significantly different in design to enable the store customer to think "hang on, that's nothing like the thingy I wanted to buy", essentualy it would have to look like something other than a tablet
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrs
Case 1:
Customer: I want to buy an Apple Ipad.
Sales: This is an Apple Ipad [With Samsung logo upfront] - Apparently the Sales is illiterate.
Customer: I'll buy one {Apparently can't read the word Samsung upfront, so he/she is illiterate as well]
Sales: OK, our return policy is to return merchandise within 30days after purchase if you're not satisfied..
Case 2:
Customer: I want to buy an Apple Ipad.
Sales: This is NOT an Apple Ipad, but It's Samsung Galaxy tab. It's as good as Ipad because its internal hardware is the same, but Apple will charge you much more for this because the material is made of a hand-picked First Rate Chinese materials, and you are being charged an Apple tax too for their superb service policy. And, in addition you will have the best apps ecosystem in the world, with over 200,000 Ipad's simpleton crapwares. BTW, you will probably install fifty or so of this crapwares on your Ipad at the most.
Customer: I'll buy one [apparently the customer is both illiterate and deaf].
Case 3:
And so forth...
The point is these two types of customers are Apple customers, illiterate [and deaf] but still Apple customers because they asked for Apple's Ipad but had no clues of what they're getting. And, after watching the new "genius" advertisements by Apple, and Apple product buyers being depicted as far from being geniuses, even borderline....[fill in the blank], It actually confirms the scenarios 1 and 2 above are very possible. Apple admits this fact about its buyers; otherwise, it won't create that commercial for the world to see.
You don't need to be a genius to buy a subsidised top of the range phone. Most people are dumb. Given that Samsung are out selling apple in the phone arena it is likely that they have even more of the dumb owners than apple (in absolute terms, relative terms are probably the same for both).
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrs
Case 1:
Customer: I want to buy an Apple Ipad.
Sales: This is an Apple Ipad [With Samsung logo upfront] - Apparently the Sales is illiterate.
Customer: I'll buy one {Apparently can't read the word Samsung upfront, so he/she is illiterate as well]
Sales: OK, our return policy is to return merchandise within 30days after purchase if you're not satisfied..
Case 2:
Customer: I want to buy an Apple Ipad.
Sales: This is NOT an Apple Ipad, but It's Samsung Galaxy tab. It's as good as Ipad because its internal hardware is the same, but Apple will charge you much more for this because the material is made of a hand-picked First Rate Chinese materials, and you are being charged an Apple tax too for their superb service policy. And, in addition you will have the best apps ecosystem in the world, with over 200,000 Ipad's simpleton crapwares. BTW, you will probably install fifty or so of this crapwares on your Ipad at the most.
Customer: I'll buy one [apparently the customer is both illiterate and deaf].
Case 3:
And so forth...
The point is these two types of customers are Apple customers, illiterate [and deaf] but still Apple customers because they asked for Apple's Ipad but had no clues of what they're getting. And, after watching the new "genius" advertisements by Apple, and Apple product buyers being depicted as far from being geniuses, even borderline....[fill in the blank], It actually confirms the scenarios 1 and 2 above are very possible. Apple admits this fact about its buyers; otherwise, it won't create that commercial for the world to see.
It may seem obvious to the "initiated" tech geeks amongus… but to others, they won't go into Best Buy looking for an APPLE iPad… just "iPad"… I was in there, I've heard it… Customer to salesperson: "Hi, I'm looking for the iPads?" Sales: "Over there in the computing section… here, I'll show you…" (Takes customer to a shelf display containing various and sundry "tablets", none of which are made by APPLE….. Customer: "thanks…." (and did ask a few questions about the differences and prices, and…). I finally pointed them to the IN STORE APPLE area…. and to a REAL iPad….
So, it isn't assumed anyone asks for APPLE iPad….. just saying…..
Originally Posted by tribalogical
So, it isn't assumed anyone asks for APPLE iPad….. just saying…..
I don't get how that helps Samsung's case, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
Here is the scenario I am imagining:
Mother tells the Grandmother that grand child wants an iPad as a gift for <fill in event>
Grandmother goes to Best Buy and says I need to purchase one of those new tablet computers I think they call it the iPad.
More like Mom tells Granny that child wants an iPad as a gift from whatever.
Granny goes to Best Buy and in her ignorance thinks that 'iPad' is the same as tablet. Any tablet. i.e. that it's just a generic term. Sees the newly released Tab and it's on sales. Tells sales person she wants one of those.
Child thanks Granny for gift because Mom taught him to just say thanks. Next day, Mom returns Tab for iPad that the kid really wants.
Or at least that's the version that Apple is trying to avoid by making it clear that not all tablets are iPads although they look basically the same. Maybe they should have done that 'basically' ad for the iPad and not the Mac.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
I haven't heard anyone use iPad as a generic term. Such as, "Have you seen this? I'll iPad it to you...".
Not all generic terms are verbs. Some of them are nouns.
Aspirin was one the trademarked term for a particularly companies release of a now very proper OTC pain drug. Then every company started calling their release of the same chemical formula 'aspirin' and Bayer wasn't quick to stop them and they lost the trademark.
Xerox didn't make that mistake so not all copiers are Xerox and Xeroxing is not a proper term for the action (although some still use it).
Newspapers etc haven't yet jumped on the idea of calling all tablets 'iPads' although some people have. And are often quickly corrected that there's no such thing as a Windows iPad or a Samsung iPad. same with the iPod. But you'll still find folks putting out a Zune and calling it an iPod. And yes I saw it at an Apple Store. 80 year old guy says something like "my grand kids got me this iPod and I can't figure out how to use it" and pulled out a Zune. I had to keep from laughing as the poor hipster kid tried to explain that it's not an iPod and they can't help him with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
C'mon I can understand mistaking it in the store but when one is handed a box that says Samsung on it instead of Apple should tip them that they bought the wrong device.
THe issue isn't so much that they went in to get an actual iPad but that they don't get that iPad isn't just a cute term for tablet. With that confusion they think they are getting a much cheaper Samsung iPad rather than the Apple iPad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boredumb
Well...if they had a lick of sense, then yes!
(You didn't think they'd know how to buy them on-line, didja???)
Can't have the paper trail.
Go to best buy, in a disguise and pay cash.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
...and advertise it in UK newspapers.
That info is in the court records and probably public info now. I could totally see, assuming Apple loses the appeal, them including that info in the required ads. Start off with a statement to the effective "The British Courts say Samsung didn't copy the iPad. You decide." With some photos, especially those 'before the release/after the release'. At the bottom something about these returns.
THAT would be an awesome stunt to not be advertising Samsung in the way that just posting "Samsung didn't copy the iPad" could be taken (and Apple wouldn't be the ones making the declaration but just reporting the court decision). Still getting the public vote in there etc. They could finish up with a tagline something to the effect of "If it's not from Apple it's not an iPad."
I could see Apple doing something like that. They could argue they did what they were ordered to do, but they avoid making the statement as if they are saying it. no apologizes etc and they still get in some advertising for themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical
It may seem obvious to the "initiated" tech geeks amongus… but to others, they won't go into Best Buy looking for an APPLE iPad… just "iPad"… I was in there, I've heard it… Customer to salesperson: "Hi, I'm looking for the iPads?" Sales: "Over there in the computing section… here, I'll show you…" (Takes customer to a shelf display containing various and sundry "tablets", none of which are made by APPLE….. Customer: "thanks…." (and did ask a few questions about the differences and prices, and…). I finally pointed them to the IN STORE APPLE area…. and to a REAL iPad….
So, it isn't assumed anyone asks for APPLE iPad….. just saying…..
Exactly. Common folks can and do think 'iPad' is just a cute name for tablet. And rarely do they ask for the Apple iPad. Even in cases where they are taken the Apple ones if they see the others and see they are cheaper they will make the assumption for themselves that it's the same thing (because an iPad is any tablet regardless of who made it). and when they call over the sales person that person isn't going to assume they really wanted an Apple iPad when the person says 'what about this one? What can it do?'
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
Not all generic terms are verbs. Some of them are nouns.
Aspirin was one the trademarked term for a particularly companies release of a now very proper OTC pain drug. Then every company started calling their release of the same chemical formula 'aspirin' and Bayer wasn't quick to stop them and they lost the trademark.
???
Aspirin was developed by Bayer in 1897. As a german company they, by virtue of being German, lost the right to defend their trade mark after the First World War because the British, french and USA courts stuck two fingers up to them and allowed anyone to use the word aspirin. It was only this hostility that allowed the term to pass from a brand name to a generic name. Once it became generic there was no turning back Latterly, Bayer, after1994, were able to register "Bayer Aspirin" as a trademark in the USA (this is quite relevant given the "Amazon Appstore" debate).
It is frequently suggested on this site that Apple have to be aggressive with regard to IP or trademarks lest the courts remove those rights, I honestly don't know if that is true. Your Bayer example however is very flawed and contary to the point I suspect you were trying to make.If anything it shows that you can invent a product, lose all rights to exclusivity and still end up making a mint out of it
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
Here is the scenario I am imagining:
Mother tells the Grandmother that grand child wants an iPad as a gift for <fill in event>
Grandmother goes to Best Buy and says I need to purchase one of those new tablet computers I think they call it the iPad.
Best Buy sales rep tells her the tablet she really needs to buy is this brand new Galaxy Tab, it is the best one on the market.
On the day of the <event> grand child opens gift and bursts into tears. "I wanted the iPad".
Next day mom and child go to Best Buy to exchange it.
Yup, because either:
- Sales commission, bonus or service contract is worth more to the store and employee
- Seniors and "moms" are the most gullible targets in an electronics store.
I can't tell you how often sales people try to sell me something I don't want. When I go into these stores, I already know exactly what I want and ignore the sales people.
But mobile phones are a confusing mess. I went into the Samsung store and couldn't tell one model from another. At least with Apple, if you want an "iPhone" you get an "iPhone", or iPad when you ask for an iPad. They only make one model per year. Like cars, it's much easier to see the difference between various models if the branding only deals with a model year. But like cars, you can't sell someone a Honda Civic when they want a Lexus CT and go "oh they're the same, they're both hybrids"