Well given that Samsung is currently spending more on advertising than Apple, HP, Dell, Microsoft and Coca Cola combined, you'd expect advertising agencies would be talking them up, in the hope of getting their hooks into some of that sweet, sweet $4.38 Billion.
Samsung, taking hype to the next level and then some.
Personally I think the ads are pretty good, and I like them a lot. They remind me a little bit of the 'think different' days. They focus on the qualities that make Apple different as a company, and that drive the creation of these products that people love so much. And I so admire those ideas, and those qualities; It almost hurts me to see these because frankly I don't think the company actually reflects these values right now.
What kills me about these ads is that they seem to be paying lip service to an ethic that isn't really in place anymore; kind of like the company is putting together and codifying their understanding of what it is they aspire to be... but have somehow forgotten how to actually be.
If it is really all about the experience of a product, then I just can't reconcile that notion with the direction Apple is taking with IOS7... Because frankly, IOS7 is boring, uninspiring, and generally just a crappy experience to use. Does it work? Yeah. Is it fun, and engaging? No. It is just plain vanilla utilitarian and there isn't much about it that makes it seem much more than just barely interesting. It is so bare and so lean that it's like a tree in the winter; you get the idea that there is something beautiful in there somewhere... but right now, it's just not able to get through. It's sleeping. And someone will argue that the tree is actually starkly beautiful in that state, and there may be some truth to that; some photographer might capture the essence of that in some brilliant moment and we would all wow and clap. But in reality, our daily experience of that tree would be dull, and dreary, and maybe even a little bit depressing. And without the brilliance of that photographer, we would all walk right past that stark, empty tree and barely even pay it notice.
I was at a state park a while back, and they have these restrooms that are just bare utilitarian. Stainless steel commode. Concrete floor. Block walls. Almost no adornment at all; pure function. And they work - they get the job done. Some could argue that there is some sort of elegance in their utilitarianism; that their design is honest and without pretention. But the thing is, using one is just yucky - it justsucks. That's how IOS7 feels. It gets the job done, but honestly the experience just stinks; it is unpleasant, and has no flourish.
What alarms me about Apple is that they seem to have concluded that in UI design, the user experience is equivalent to the function, and that anything that is not brutally and directly related to the pure function is awful and adds nothing to the experience... and that's just not true. Form and function intersect and inform each other, but in no way are they equivalent. And contrary to what Apple says, I think many users will find IOS7 to be a gigantic step backward in their enjoyment of the device. And if I don't really want to use my Apple device, what's to keep me plugged in to all those Apple services everyone talks about? And if I don't really like the experience of an Apple device any more than some other device... what exactly is there to get me to buy one, or to keep me buying new ones?
John Gruber on his Daring Fireball blog posted about a Business Week article that mentioned this Ace Metrix company. His comment was "Guess who their latest client is?" Yes Ace is bought and paid for my Samsung. Nothing to see here, move along. Their analysis is skewed and suspect.
It's also worth bearing in mind that the Ace Metrix survey rated the Microsoft 'Click' advert as more effective.
Personally I think the ads are pretty good, and I like them a lot. They remind me a little bit of the 'think different' days. They focus on the qualities that make Apple different as a company, and that drive the creation of these products that people love so much. And I so admire those ideas, and those qualities; It almost hurts me to see these because frankly I don't think the company actually reflects these values right now.
What kills me about these ads is that they seem to be paying lip service to an ethic that isn't really in place anymore; kind of like the company is putting together and codifying their understanding of what it is they aspire to be... but have somehow forgotten how to actually be.
If it is really all about the experience of a product, then I just can't reconcile that notion with the direction Apple is taking with IOS7... Because frankly, IOS7 is boring, uninspiring, and generally just a crappy experience to use. Does it work? Yeah. Is it fun, and engaging? No. It is just plain vanilla utilitarian and there isn't much about it that makes it seem much more than just barely interesting. It is so bare and so lean that it's like a tree in the winter; you get the idea that there is something beautiful in there somewhere... but right now, it's just not able to get through. It's sleeping. And someone will argue that the tree is actually starkly beautiful in that state, and there may be some truth to that; some photographer might capture the essence of that in some brilliant moment and we would all wow and clap. But in reality, our daily experience of that tree would be dull, and dreary, and maybe even a little bit depressing. And without the brilliance of that photographer, we would all walk right past that stark, empty tree and barely even pay it notice.
I was at a state park a while back, and they have these restrooms that are just bare utilitarian. Stainless steel commode. Concrete floor. Block walls. Almost no adornment at all; pure function. And they work - they get the job done. Some could argue that there is some sort of elegance in their utilitarianism; that their design is honest and without pretention. But the thing is, using one is just yucky - it justsucks. That's how IOS7 feels. It gets the job done, but honestly the experience just stinks; it is unpleasant, and has no flourish.
What alarms me about Apple is that they seem to have concluded that in UI design, the user experience is equivalent to the function, and that anything that is not brutally and directly related to the pure function is awful and adds nothing to the experience... and that's just not true. Form and function intersect and inform each other, but in no way are they equivalent. And contrary to what Apple says, I think many users will find IOS7 to be a gigantic step backward in their enjoyment of the device. And if I don't really want to use my Apple device, what's to keep me plugged in to all those Apple services everyone talks about? And if I don't really like the experience of an Apple device any more than some other device... what exactly is there to get me to buy one, or to keep me buying new ones?
Not a heck of a lot.
And that's just sad.
This kind of assumes that you are right and Apple is wrong. Unfortunately, you haven't really presented any evidence for your expertise in design. On the other hand, Apple is sitting on a hundred billion quid whereas you, I suspect, are sitting on considerably less.
Personally, I like the direction they're going in: the UI that gets out of your way. This is not the phone for folk who just like staring at pretty things on screens all day long. The icons are a work in progress, obviously.
I'm pretty indifferent about the ad, but then it's not aimed at me. It looks like it's an answer to the whiners who think that Apple should build them this, or build them that, or have a phone with a 20inch screen that can still fit in a jacket pocket. All it says is, "Look, it'll take as long as it takes."
Love the armchair technologists who think that Apple came up with the iPad overnight. It was in development for the better part of a decade, before the iPhone was released. I imagine most of that time was spent examining every single crappy tablet that came before it so they could understand why no one bought them.
Personally I think the ads are pretty good, and I like them a lot. They remind me a little bit of the 'think different' days. They focus on the qualities that make Apple different as a company, and that drive the creation of these products that people love so much. And I so admire those ideas, and those qualities; It almost hurts me to see these because frankly I don't think the company actually reflects these values right now.
What kills me about these ads is that they seem to be paying lip service to an ethic that isn't really in place anymore; kind of like the company is putting together and codifying their understanding of what it is they aspire to be... but have somehow forgotten how to actually be.
If it is really all about the experience of a product, then I just can't reconcile that notion with the direction Apple is taking with IOS7... Because frankly, IOS7 is boring, uninspiring, and generally just a crappy experience to use. Does it work? Yeah. Is it fun, and engaging? No. It is just plain vanilla utilitarian and there isn't much about it that makes it seem much more than just barely interesting. It is so bare and so lean that it's like a tree in the winter; you get the idea that there is something beautiful in there somewhere... but right now, it's just not able to get through. It's sleeping. And someone will argue that the tree is actually starkly beautiful in that state, and there may be some truth to that; some photographer might capture the essence of that in some brilliant moment and we would all wow and clap. But in reality, our daily experience of that tree would be dull, and dreary, and maybe even a little bit depressing. And without the brilliance of that photographer, we would all walk right past that stark, empty tree and barely even pay it notice.
I was at a state park a while back, and they have these restrooms that are just bare utilitarian. Stainless steel commode. Concrete floor. Block walls. Almost no adornment at all; pure function. And they work - they get the job done. Some could argue that there is some sort of elegance in their utilitarianism; that their design is honest and without pretention. But the thing is, using one is just yucky - it justsucks. That's how IOS7 feels. It gets the job done, but honestly the experience just stinks; it is unpleasant, and has no flourish.
What alarms me about Apple is that they seem to have concluded that in UI design, the user experience is equivalent to the function, and that anything that is not brutally and directly related to the pure function is awful and adds nothing to the experience... and that's just not true. Form and function intersect and inform each other, but in no way are they equivalent. And contrary to what Apple says, I think many users will find IOS7 to be a gigantic step backward in their enjoyment of the device. And if I don't really want to use my Apple device, what's to keep me plugged in to all those Apple services everyone talks about? And if I don't really like the experience of an Apple device any more than some other device... what exactly is there to get me to buy one, or to keep me buying new ones?
Not a heck of a lot.
And that's just sad.
The future of iOS will be engaging in other ways. I can't believe that faux leathe, green felt and gloss were what got people buying Apple devices. Plus the iOS experience isn't just via Apple's stock apps. Lets's wait and see what developers do with the new API's they have.
This kind of assumes that you are right and Apple is wrong. Unfortunately, you haven't really presented any evidence for your expertise in design. On the other hand, Apple is sitting on a hundred billion quid whereas you, I suspect, are sitting on considerably less.
Personally, I like the direction they're going in: the UI that gets out of your way. This is not the phone for folk who just like staring at pretty things on screens all day long. The icons are a work in progress, obviously.
I'm pretty indifferent about the ad, but then it's not aimed at me. It looks like it's an answer to the whiners who think that Apple should build them this, or build them that, or have a phone with a 20inch screen that can still fit in a jacket pocket. All it says is, "Look, it'll take as long as it takes."
Love the armchair technologists who think that Apple came up with the iPad overnight. It was in development for the better part of a decade, before the iPhone was released. I imagine most of that time was spent examining every single crappy tablet that came before it so they could understand why no one bought them.
Obviously there are people who like skeuomorphic type design. That's fine, except when they tell us other designs aren't useable. Last time I checked millions of people are using Android and Windows products without any issues. This idea that you have to have a richly textured 3D like button to know something is clickable is absurd. I don't need a digital compass to look like some artists rendering of a compass you'd find on a boat. Or a contacts app that looks like a physical book, yet you don't swipe left & right to flip through your contacts like you would pages of a book. It's pure visual ornamentation that serves no purpose and in some cases is confusing. Maybe some of this made sense when people were just learning how to use multi touch devices or when screens weren't retina. But I don't think they're needed now. Apple is finally taking off the training wheels. It will take them awhile to perfect the new iOS. Just like it took time with OSX.
One intersting thing he wrote: [QUOTE]Despite my initial fears, I actually really enjoy using iOS 7 on a daily basis. I still have some complaints about several visual design choices but you have to remember, Apple has only been working on this for a matter of months. That’s pretty insane. I mean, it takes us at least a year to put out a single app, let alone an entire operating system!
So give them a break. [B]I talked to a number of folks at Apple. They understand that this thing isn’t finished yet and they want our feedback (feel free to email me and I’ll pass it along). It’s only going to get better.[/b][/QUOTE]
Well given that Samsung is currently spending more on advertising than Apple, HP, Dell, Microsoft and Coca Cola combined, you'd expect advertising agencies would be talking them up, in the hope of getting their hooks into some of that sweet, sweet $4.38 Billion.
Why would any ad agency say nice things about a competitor's ads?
It's not ad agencies who are talking them up. It's the ad analysts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmsquires
John Gruber on his Daring Fireball blog posted about a Business Week article that mentioned this Ace Metrix company. His comment was "Guess who their latest client is?" Yes Ace is bought and paid for my Samsung. Nothing to see here, move along. Their analysis is skewed and suspect.
Ace Metrix doesn't make ads. They analyze ads. The mass consumer has no idea what they think, but companies want to.
Samsung signed up with Ace Metrix, as did other companies, to have them look at their current and future ads and predict how well they'll do with consumers, so the ads can be fine tuned.
Considering that Apple's ads over the last year or two have been a bit hit or miss, perhaps Apple should sign up with them (or someone like them) as well. In fact, if you think about it, that's pretty much what Ace is trying to get them to do, by saying "We can tell you why your ad is good or bad".
I don't know what's more surprising, that we made it through almost 4 pages before someone pointed out that the "survey" was conducted by a company working for Samsung, or that the discussion even continued past that point.
What's not surprising is that KDarling is trying to explain that away.
So the fact that very poor people from rural areas China stand in line to work in factories in urban China mean that they have true economic and political freedom? It's like poor southern slaves standing in line at the neighboring plantation because that plantation will beat them slightly less or give them a little extra food at the end of the day. The poor chinese worker cant freely leave china and regardless where they work they are kept poor and powerless under a corrupt government/corporate infrastructure. The fact is that their working conditions are indeed slave-like and regardless of where these poor people work in china they still are far from being free. Where and how a product is made (and by who) is probably more important than where it was designed.
When it comes to Mcluhan, his focus that it was the 'method' in which people communicate and entertain themselves was more influential on the masses in general than the actual 'content' of the communication or entertainment. So that the actual act of reading (long form books) changes a person's neurology more than the actual content on the printed page. A 'reading brain' is a more contemplative one and more capable of complex thoughts which eventually led to the rise of Western Culture and modern-day science. On the other hand, Mcluhan clearly pointed out that TV and mass-media were going to re-tribalize human society and make them less individualistic, less intelligent and more prone to group-think.
So, where did the clothes you are wearing come from?
I wonder if things closely allied with California produce positive vibes anymore? Apple can't say "Made in America" anymore, so they opted for second best by aligning themselves with California.
So I understand why they did this. Unfortunately California may be a poor representative of the US in many people's minds (I was raised in San Diego!).
I don't know what's more surprising, that we made it through almost 4 pages before someone pointed out that the "survey" was conducted by a company working for Samsung, or that the discussion even continued past that point.
What's not surprising is that KDarling is trying to explain that away.
I noticed that as well. Samsung is guilty of hiring people to post fake reviews, why in the hell wouldn't you take ANYTHING they're involved in with a grain of salt, unless you're just another paid shill? Honestly, people seem to make up almost anything these days, especially when it comes to Apple, why would this be any different? I'd be willing to bet that along with the payment for services, Samsung also supplied a list of 500 consumers for the "sample group". LOL
I don't know what's more surprising, that we made it through almost 4 pages before someone pointed out that the "survey" was conducted by a company working for Samsung, or that the discussion even continued past that point.
What's not surprising is that KDarling is trying to explain that away.
How much do we know about Ace Metrix anyway? All of a sudden they're the arbiter of what makes a good ad or not?
Name calling really drives your attempted point home. Not.
Calling someone "ignorant" is not name calling.
Ignorance means being misinformed without the willingness to learn the truth.
I didn't call him a stupid Xsshole. That would've been name calling.
This is the problem with people today... we've become numb to violence in the world, but using a word that properly defines someone's attitude towards a subject is horrible. I don't get it?
Furthermore, comparing slavery - where people can be caged, beating, tortured, killed, raped without repercussions or guilt - to Chinese labor issues at Apple's suppliers is IGNORANT and WRONG! You're belittling what true slavery actually was.
I guess you've never sat at a Genius Bar and listened to people whose lives aren't enhanced because of shoddy quality control or because they decided to make devices that are as breakable as Baccarat Crystal.
Your complete inability to comprehend the ad ? "the ad sucks"
Apple used to be great.
So shut up and go away, then, since you don't seem to understand what you're talking about.
Calling someone "ignorant" is not name calling. Ignorance means being misinformed without the willingness to learn the truth. I didn't call him a stupid Xsshole. That would've been name calling.
Plus twelve million. Oh, except it's idiocy. Ignorance is the lack of knowledge and should be corrected, idiocy is the WILLFUL lack of knowledge and should be mocked.
I noticed that as well. Samsung is guilty of hiring people to post fake reviews, why in the hell wouldn't you take ANYTHING they're involved in with a grain of salt, unless you're just another paid shill?
We can all legitimately wear a tin foil hat at times. But it helps for a conspiracy claim to at least make sense.
You're claiming that Samsung is bribing an ad survey firm to say that this Apple ad is not perfect, right?
First off, there are other sources saying the same thing, so such bribery seems like wasted money. And it's a poor bribe that only lowers the ad score a bit, instead of really dropping it. But more importantly --
What would be the point? To encourage Apple to come up with a better ad?
In another thread about this ad I was chastised because I said the ad was really bad and pointless. Now a testing agency finds that it tests far below average. So to those of you who claimed you knew better than me, it seems you really don't know about writing advertising copy or creating effective video advertisements. Your clients must not come back for repeat business or perhaps they don't know that you aren't making effective ads for them.
I'm in the internet advertising business. My job is ad copy and video production. I'm familiar with a lot of split testing. I've seen what gets results. Those results are quantified by clicks and sales. The "Signature" ad did nothing to cause the viewer to take action. It was just bad on numerous levels. It was pretty though.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
...top marks to Samsung ads...
Well given that Samsung is currently spending more on advertising than Apple, HP, Dell, Microsoft and Coca Cola combined, you'd expect advertising agencies would be talking them up, in the hope of getting their hooks into some of that sweet, sweet $4.38 Billion.
Samsung, taking hype to the next level and then some.
Personally I think the ads are pretty good, and I like them a lot. They remind me a little bit of the 'think different' days. They focus on the qualities that make Apple different as a company, and that drive the creation of these products that people love so much. And I so admire those ideas, and those qualities; It almost hurts me to see these because frankly I don't think the company actually reflects these values right now.
What kills me about these ads is that they seem to be paying lip service to an ethic that isn't really in place anymore; kind of like the company is putting together and codifying their understanding of what it is they aspire to be... but have somehow forgotten how to actually be.
If it is really all about the experience of a product, then I just can't reconcile that notion with the direction Apple is taking with IOS7... Because frankly, IOS7 is boring, uninspiring, and generally just a crappy experience to use. Does it work? Yeah. Is it fun, and engaging? No. It is just plain vanilla utilitarian and there isn't much about it that makes it seem much more than just barely interesting. It is so bare and so lean that it's like a tree in the winter; you get the idea that there is something beautiful in there somewhere... but right now, it's just not able to get through. It's sleeping. And someone will argue that the tree is actually starkly beautiful in that state, and there may be some truth to that; some photographer might capture the essence of that in some brilliant moment and we would all wow and clap. But in reality, our daily experience of that tree would be dull, and dreary, and maybe even a little bit depressing. And without the brilliance of that photographer, we would all walk right past that stark, empty tree and barely even pay it notice.
I was at a state park a while back, and they have these restrooms that are just bare utilitarian. Stainless steel commode. Concrete floor. Block walls. Almost no adornment at all; pure function. And they work - they get the job done. Some could argue that there is some sort of elegance in their utilitarianism; that their design is honest and without pretention. But the thing is, using one is just yucky - it just sucks. That's how IOS7 feels. It gets the job done, but honestly the experience just stinks; it is unpleasant, and has no flourish.
What alarms me about Apple is that they seem to have concluded that in UI design, the user experience is equivalent to the function, and that anything that is not brutally and directly related to the pure function is awful and adds nothing to the experience... and that's just not true. Form and function intersect and inform each other, but in no way are they equivalent. And contrary to what Apple says, I think many users will find IOS7 to be a gigantic step backward in their enjoyment of the device. And if I don't really want to use my Apple device, what's to keep me plugged in to all those Apple services everyone talks about? And if I don't really like the experience of an Apple device any more than some other device... what exactly is there to get me to buy one, or to keep me buying new ones?
Not a heck of a lot.
And that's just sad.
It's also worth bearing in mind that the Ace Metrix survey rated the Microsoft 'Click' advert as more effective.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-57591257-71/apples-ads-failing-says-firm-that-called-surface-ads-effective/
Even after MS was forced to dump thousands of Surface machines into the education system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by h3nrch
Or just keep it simple, beautiful, and human:
I think these ads are beautiful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tt92618
Personally I think the ads are pretty good, and I like them a lot. They remind me a little bit of the 'think different' days. They focus on the qualities that make Apple different as a company, and that drive the creation of these products that people love so much. And I so admire those ideas, and those qualities; It almost hurts me to see these because frankly I don't think the company actually reflects these values right now.
What kills me about these ads is that they seem to be paying lip service to an ethic that isn't really in place anymore; kind of like the company is putting together and codifying their understanding of what it is they aspire to be... but have somehow forgotten how to actually be.
If it is really all about the experience of a product, then I just can't reconcile that notion with the direction Apple is taking with IOS7... Because frankly, IOS7 is boring, uninspiring, and generally just a crappy experience to use. Does it work? Yeah. Is it fun, and engaging? No. It is just plain vanilla utilitarian and there isn't much about it that makes it seem much more than just barely interesting. It is so bare and so lean that it's like a tree in the winter; you get the idea that there is something beautiful in there somewhere... but right now, it's just not able to get through. It's sleeping. And someone will argue that the tree is actually starkly beautiful in that state, and there may be some truth to that; some photographer might capture the essence of that in some brilliant moment and we would all wow and clap. But in reality, our daily experience of that tree would be dull, and dreary, and maybe even a little bit depressing. And without the brilliance of that photographer, we would all walk right past that stark, empty tree and barely even pay it notice.
I was at a state park a while back, and they have these restrooms that are just bare utilitarian. Stainless steel commode. Concrete floor. Block walls. Almost no adornment at all; pure function. And they work - they get the job done. Some could argue that there is some sort of elegance in their utilitarianism; that their design is honest and without pretention. But the thing is, using one is just yucky - it just sucks. That's how IOS7 feels. It gets the job done, but honestly the experience just stinks; it is unpleasant, and has no flourish.
What alarms me about Apple is that they seem to have concluded that in UI design, the user experience is equivalent to the function, and that anything that is not brutally and directly related to the pure function is awful and adds nothing to the experience... and that's just not true. Form and function intersect and inform each other, but in no way are they equivalent. And contrary to what Apple says, I think many users will find IOS7 to be a gigantic step backward in their enjoyment of the device. And if I don't really want to use my Apple device, what's to keep me plugged in to all those Apple services everyone talks about? And if I don't really like the experience of an Apple device any more than some other device... what exactly is there to get me to buy one, or to keep me buying new ones?
Not a heck of a lot.
And that's just sad.
This kind of assumes that you are right and Apple is wrong. Unfortunately, you haven't really presented any evidence for your expertise in design. On the other hand, Apple is sitting on a hundred billion quid whereas you, I suspect, are sitting on considerably less.
Personally, I like the direction they're going in: the UI that gets out of your way. This is not the phone for folk who just like staring at pretty things on screens all day long. The icons are a work in progress, obviously.
I'm pretty indifferent about the ad, but then it's not aimed at me. It looks like it's an answer to the whiners who think that Apple should build them this, or build them that, or have a phone with a 20inch screen that can still fit in a jacket pocket. All it says is, "Look, it'll take as long as it takes."
Love the armchair technologists who think that Apple came up with the iPad overnight. It was in development for the better part of a decade, before the iPhone was released. I imagine most of that time was spent examining every single crappy tablet that came before it so they could understand why no one bought them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tt92618
Personally I think the ads are pretty good, and I like them a lot. They remind me a little bit of the 'think different' days. They focus on the qualities that make Apple different as a company, and that drive the creation of these products that people love so much. And I so admire those ideas, and those qualities; It almost hurts me to see these because frankly I don't think the company actually reflects these values right now.
What kills me about these ads is that they seem to be paying lip service to an ethic that isn't really in place anymore; kind of like the company is putting together and codifying their understanding of what it is they aspire to be... but have somehow forgotten how to actually be.
If it is really all about the experience of a product, then I just can't reconcile that notion with the direction Apple is taking with IOS7... Because frankly, IOS7 is boring, uninspiring, and generally just a crappy experience to use. Does it work? Yeah. Is it fun, and engaging? No. It is just plain vanilla utilitarian and there isn't much about it that makes it seem much more than just barely interesting. It is so bare and so lean that it's like a tree in the winter; you get the idea that there is something beautiful in there somewhere... but right now, it's just not able to get through. It's sleeping. And someone will argue that the tree is actually starkly beautiful in that state, and there may be some truth to that; some photographer might capture the essence of that in some brilliant moment and we would all wow and clap. But in reality, our daily experience of that tree would be dull, and dreary, and maybe even a little bit depressing. And without the brilliance of that photographer, we would all walk right past that stark, empty tree and barely even pay it notice.
I was at a state park a while back, and they have these restrooms that are just bare utilitarian. Stainless steel commode. Concrete floor. Block walls. Almost no adornment at all; pure function. And they work - they get the job done. Some could argue that there is some sort of elegance in their utilitarianism; that their design is honest and without pretention. But the thing is, using one is just yucky - it just sucks. That's how IOS7 feels. It gets the job done, but honestly the experience just stinks; it is unpleasant, and has no flourish.
What alarms me about Apple is that they seem to have concluded that in UI design, the user experience is equivalent to the function, and that anything that is not brutally and directly related to the pure function is awful and adds nothing to the experience... and that's just not true. Form and function intersect and inform each other, but in no way are they equivalent. And contrary to what Apple says, I think many users will find IOS7 to be a gigantic step backward in their enjoyment of the device. And if I don't really want to use my Apple device, what's to keep me plugged in to all those Apple services everyone talks about? And if I don't really like the experience of an Apple device any more than some other device... what exactly is there to get me to buy one, or to keep me buying new ones?
Not a heck of a lot.
And that's just sad.
The future of iOS will be engaging in other ways. I can't believe that faux leathe, green felt and gloss were what got people buying Apple devices. Plus the iOS experience isn't just via Apple's stock apps. Lets's wait and see what developers do with the new API's they have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rayz
This kind of assumes that you are right and Apple is wrong. Unfortunately, you haven't really presented any evidence for your expertise in design. On the other hand, Apple is sitting on a hundred billion quid whereas you, I suspect, are sitting on considerably less.
Personally, I like the direction they're going in: the UI that gets out of your way. This is not the phone for folk who just like staring at pretty things on screens all day long. The icons are a work in progress, obviously.
I'm pretty indifferent about the ad, but then it's not aimed at me. It looks like it's an answer to the whiners who think that Apple should build them this, or build them that, or have a phone with a 20inch screen that can still fit in a jacket pocket. All it says is, "Look, it'll take as long as it takes."
Love the armchair technologists who think that Apple came up with the iPad overnight. It was in development for the better part of a decade, before the iPhone was released. I imagine most of that time was spent examining every single crappy tablet that came before it so they could understand why no one bought them.
Obviously there are people who like skeuomorphic type design. That's fine, except when they tell us other designs aren't useable. Last time I checked millions of people are using Android and Windows products without any issues. This idea that you have to have a richly textured 3D like button to know something is clickable is absurd. I don't need a digital compass to look like some artists rendering of a compass you'd find on a boat. Or a contacts app that looks like a physical book, yet you don't swipe left & right to flip through your contacts like you would pages of a book. It's pure visual ornamentation that serves no purpose and in some cases is confusing. Maybe some of this made sense when people were just learning how to use multi touch devices or when screens weren't retina. But I don't think they're needed now. Apple is finally taking off the training wheels. It will take them awhile to perfect the new iOS. Just like it took time with OSX.
http://tapity.com/iphone-app-design/responding-to-ios-7/
One intersting thing he wrote:
[QUOTE]Despite my initial fears, I actually really enjoy using iOS 7 on a daily basis. I still have some complaints about several visual design choices but you have to remember, Apple has only been working on this for a matter of months. That’s pretty insane. I mean, it takes us at least a year to put out a single app, let alone an entire operating system!
So give them a break. [B]I talked to a number of folks at Apple. They understand that this thing isn’t finished yet and they want our feedback (feel free to email me and I’ll pass it along). It’s only going to get better.[/b][/QUOTE]
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Well given that Samsung is currently spending more on advertising than Apple, HP, Dell, Microsoft and Coca Cola combined, you'd expect advertising agencies would be talking them up, in the hope of getting their hooks into some of that sweet, sweet $4.38 Billion.
Why would any ad agency say nice things about a competitor's ads?
It's not ad agencies who are talking them up. It's the ad analysts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmsquires
John Gruber on his Daring Fireball blog posted about a Business Week article that mentioned this Ace Metrix company. His comment was "Guess who their latest client is?" Yes Ace is bought and paid for my Samsung. Nothing to see here, move along. Their analysis is skewed and suspect.
Ace Metrix doesn't make ads. They analyze ads. The mass consumer has no idea what they think, but companies want to.
Samsung signed up with Ace Metrix, as did other companies, to have them look at their current and future ads and predict how well they'll do with consumers, so the ads can be fine tuned.
Considering that Apple's ads over the last year or two have been a bit hit or miss, perhaps Apple should sign up with them (or someone like them) as well. In fact, if you think about it, that's pretty much what Ace is trying to get them to do, by saying "We can tell you why your ad is good or bad".
I don't know what's more surprising, that we made it through almost 4 pages before someone pointed out that the "survey" was conducted by a company working for Samsung, or that the discussion even continued past that point.
What's not surprising is that KDarling is trying to explain that away.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Commodification
So the fact that very poor people from rural areas China stand in line to work in factories in urban China mean that they have true economic and political freedom? It's like poor southern slaves standing in line at the neighboring plantation because that plantation will beat them slightly less or give them a little extra food at the end of the day. The poor chinese worker cant freely leave china and regardless where they work they are kept poor and powerless under a corrupt government/corporate infrastructure. The fact is that their working conditions are indeed slave-like and regardless of where these poor people work in china they still are far from being free. Where and how a product is made (and by who) is probably more important than where it was designed.
When it comes to Mcluhan, his focus that it was the 'method' in which people communicate and entertain themselves was more influential on the masses in general than the actual 'content' of the communication or entertainment. So that the actual act of reading (long form books) changes a person's neurology more than the actual content on the printed page. A 'reading brain' is a more contemplative one and more capable of complex thoughts which eventually led to the rise of Western Culture and modern-day science. On the other hand, Mcluhan clearly pointed out that TV and mass-media were going to re-tribalize human society and make them less individualistic, less intelligent and more prone to group-think.
So, where did the clothes you are wearing come from?
So I understand why they did this. Unfortunately California may be a poor representative of the US in many people's minds (I was raised in San Diego!).
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
I don't know what's more surprising, that we made it through almost 4 pages before someone pointed out that the "survey" was conducted by a company working for Samsung, or that the discussion even continued past that point.
What's not surprising is that KDarling is trying to explain that away.
I noticed that as well. Samsung is guilty of hiring people to post fake reviews, why in the hell wouldn't you take ANYTHING they're involved in with a grain of salt, unless you're just another paid shill? Honestly, people seem to make up almost anything these days, especially when it comes to Apple, why would this be any different? I'd be willing to bet that along with the payment for services, Samsung also supplied a list of 500 consumers for the "sample group". LOL
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell
Name calling really drives your attempted point home. Not.
Calling someone "ignorant" is not name calling.
Ignorance means being misinformed without the willingness to learn the truth.
I didn't call him a stupid Xsshole. That would've been name calling.
This is the problem with people today... we've become numb to violence in the world, but using a word that properly defines someone's attitude towards a subject is horrible. I don't get it?
Furthermore, comparing slavery - where people can be caged, beating, tortured, killed, raped without repercussions or guilt - to Chinese labor issues at Apple's suppliers is IGNORANT and WRONG! You're belittling what true slavery actually was.
Guess what? Apple is in California. So are its employees. And its designers.
WHAT A FLIPPING CONCEPT. :no:
Your complete inability to comprehend the ad ? "the ad sucks"
So shut up and go away, then, since you don't seem to understand what you're talking about.
Maybe if you posted even ONE fact, you'd get one more person to agree with you. :no:
Plus twelve million. Oh, except it's idiocy. Ignorance is the lack of knowledge and should be corrected, idiocy is the WILLFUL lack of knowledge and should be mocked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin
I noticed that as well. Samsung is guilty of hiring people to post fake reviews, why in the hell wouldn't you take ANYTHING they're involved in with a grain of salt, unless you're just another paid shill?
We can all legitimately wear a tin foil hat at times. But it helps for a conspiracy claim to at least make sense.
You're claiming that Samsung is bribing an ad survey firm to say that this Apple ad is not perfect, right?
First off, there are other sources saying the same thing, so such bribery seems like wasted money. And it's a poor bribe that only lowers the ad score a bit, instead of really dropping it. But more importantly --
What would be the point? To encourage Apple to come up with a better ad?
I'm in the internet advertising business. My job is ad copy and video production. I'm familiar with a lot of split testing. I've seen what gets results. Those results are quantified by clicks and sales. The "Signature" ad did nothing to cause the viewer to take action. It was just bad on numerous levels. It was pretty though.