Here's something rarely mentioned. It was Apple who first signaled an intent to compete directly with Google by bidding on AdMob. If Apple had no intention of eventually pushing Google off of their platform as the ad provider why would Apple have gone after AdMob in the middle of 2009? That was long before Steve Jobs showed his displeasure and threatened to go thermonuclear. If you were Google how would you have read it?
IMO it was obviously Apple throwing down the first gauntlet, not Google. You expected Google wouldn't react to an unexpected competitor they thought was a partner? While even DED will agree that Microsoft was the original target of Android, this little move from Apple no doubt got Google's attention and may have been the impetus behind today's cooler relationship.
Motorola Droid released october 17 2009 --> Link here
Google buys adMob on november 9 2009 --> Link here
Are you saying that Apple pulled the first punch and it only took Google and Motorola 4 months to come up with the Droid?
Or was it that Google had already shifted away from the BlackBerry clone business and went into the iPhone clone business way before the middle of 2009?
Motorola Droid released october 17 2009 --> Link here
Google buys adMob on november 9 2009 --> Link here
Are you saying that Apple pulled the first punch and it only took Google and Motorola 4 months to come up with the Droid?
Or was it that Google had already shifted away from the BlackBerry clone business and went into the iPhone clone business way before the middle of 2009?
Google developed the Droid? Suppose it could have been more Google and less Motorola but at that time Google had no economic association with Moto other than just another member of the Open Handset Alliance and I can't find anything saying it was a Google project.. Google wasn't building smartphones, they were creating an OS used on smartphones.
IIRC it was activating multi-touch in Android (it was already there but not used at Jobs request) that reportedly set Mr. Jobs off in early 2010. Palm had already rolled it out a year earlier so Android was hardly the first imitator of the iPhone feature.
Seems to me things took a tum for the worse after Apple's surprise AdMob interference, but perhaps there were several things going on all at the same time and it was both sharing some blame for the partnership beginning to fail. In any case Apple's plan to enter Google' core ad business was pretty obvious as far back as mid 2009 so whatever Apple does now with ads won't be a surprise.
Google developed the Droid? Suppose it could have been more Google and less Motorola but at that time Google had no economic association with Moto other than just another member of the Open Handset Alliance and I can't find anything saying it was a Google project.. Google wasn't building smartphones, they were creating an OS used on smartphones.
IIRC it was activating multi-touch in Android (it was already there but not used at Jobs request) that reportedly set Mr. Jobs off in early 2010. Palm had already rolled it out a year earlier so Android was hardly the first imitator of the iPhone feature.
Seems to me things took a tum for the worse after Apple's surprise AdMob interference, but perhaps there were several things going on all at the same time and it was both sharing some blame for the partnership beginning to fail. In any case Apple's plan to enter Google' core ad business was pretty obvious as far back as mid 2009 so whatever Apple does now with ads won't be a surprise.
I responded to your original post that said that Apple threw down the gauntlet or first punch if you prefer, somewhere in the middle of 2009.
My point is that 4 months is nowhere near enough time to switch Android OS development around and then along with hardware partner Motorola release an actual product.
So what was Steve Jobs' reasoning behind using an outside ad agency for so long? I'm guessing because he'd settle for nothing but the best. In-house advertising departments tend to become quite political (meaning, inter-office politics become far more important than the work). It'll be interesting to see if/how Apple intends to manage this. I want to believe they can keep their creativity and drive fully engaged and with their goals outward directed, not internal.
I responded to your original post that said that Apple threw down the gauntlet or first punch if you prefer, somewhere in the middle of 2009.
My point is that 4 months is nowhere near enough time to switch Android OS development around and then along with hardware partner Motorola release an actual product.
You might be confusing the Droid with the HTC Dream
IMO, huge mistake! Having worked in the advertising business for 25 years I have witnessed companies build in-house capabilities and thus make big mistakes. They are now employees - if the work goes stale, which it often does, all you can do is suck it up, or fire them. Instead, with an agency, you can simply use different creative teams that compete against each other, or just hire a new agency. It sounds like Apple is this building a huge bureaucratic mess.
There is an interesting tension in how they market iOS. I found the "Designed in California" direction is extremely classy, but to a non smartphone user it comes across as more of a product category advertisement. Do they acknowledge the competition by highlighting their weaknesses? Traditionally incumbents do not.
Samsung would be the only competition worth acknowledging if at all. But Attacking Samsung on features is unlikely to be fruitful. Samsung are nimble and can re-spec quickly. Unlike Apple, Samsung don't appear to care about ramping product features so steeply they alienate previous generation device users.
They would be better off attacking brand pride. If Samsung devices can be repositioned as boisterous, gaudy, clumsy and an inconvenience to others (all of which I personally find to be true) people will feel embarrassed about owning them.
That hideously annoying "wolf-whistle" ringtone would be a great place to start. Make Samsung users embarrassed every time their phone goes off in public. Inappropriately sized screens and clumsy software interfaces are also easy to lampoon. Perhaps someone losing an eBay auction because they are standing at a bus stop with a hand full of shopping and they can't reach the bid button with one hand. Or an person clocking an elevator full of people in the head with an oversized handset just to answer a phone call.
So we know there will be one new product SKU sort of - the 5C - which is just last year's iphone really, my point is, what makes Apple want to expand their s/m department so drastically? More new products to be released isn't it?! But, itunes radio, mac pro, mavericks, new ipads, new macbooks, more or less same old same old, just one new service there, so what's the fuss about? If the internal team sucks right now, they could "restructure" and fire people first but why take on almost double? There must be something new coming soon isn't it, they couldn't just hire 50 more people or something, 2 to 300, that's a building full of people ... what if they are only internalizing all the ad outsourcing they normally do? That's so not exciting though.
There is an interesting tension in how they market iOS. I found the "Designed in California" direction is extremely classy, but to a non smartphone user it comes across as more of a product category advertisement. Do they acknowledge the competition by highlighting their weaknesses? Traditionally incumbents do not.
Samsung would be the only competition worth acknowledging if at all. But Attacking Samsung on features is unlikely to be fruitful. Samsung are nimble and can re-spec quickly. Unlike Apple, Samsung don't appear to care about ramping product features so steeply they alienate previous generation device users.
They would be better off attacking brand pride. If Samsung devices can be repositioned as boisterous, gaudy, clumsy and an inconvenience to others (all of which I personally find to be true) people will feel embarrassed about owning them.
That hideously annoying "wolf-whistle" ringtone would be a great place to start. Make Samsung users embarrassed every time their phone goes off in public. Inappropriately sized screens and clumsy software interfaces are also easy to lampoon. Perhaps someone losing an eBay auction because they are standing at a bus stop with a hand full of shopping and they can't reach the bid button with one hand. Or an person clocking an elevator full of people in the head with an oversized handset just to answer a phone call.
I agree absolutely your comment about Samsung products and every time I hear that stupid and immensely irritating whistle I feel like wanting to ask the owner to turn it off! I've owned a Samsung TV that has the worse remote control I've seen on a TV, and a camera that just doesn't inspire any emotional attachment like my FujiFilm and Leica do. So I am not being prejudice but am speaking from real user experience. I am saddened that a lot of my friends have turned from iPhone to Samsung just because they needed something new to freshen up their boring life, not because their offerings are significantly better than iPhone. To me I will not buy another Samsung product, and will stick with iPhone as long as it stays what it is (I am not sure how things will be 3 years from now because Steve is no longer with us)
Apple used to have good ads. As of now, they are complete junk. Their annoying and don't sell/promote/describe any products. I sure hope they remove their heads and start good/productive/enjoyable ads.
Apple used to have good ads. As of now, they are complete junk. Their annoying and don't sell/promote/describe any products. I sure hope they remove their heads and start good/productive/enjoyable ads.
Sorry but based on the last series of iPhone and iPad ads, I can categorically state that you are ignorant and have no sense of what is great and what is junk. So, based on that, please shut up.
------------------------------
So Apple will double it, eh?
That means that samsung will just spend 5x more than Apple, instead of 10x. Bunch of brainwashers selling oversaturated screens to ignorant people.
Their annoying and don't sell/promote/describe any products.
Did you even watch the ad? I don't want to correlate your inability to spell with an intelligence incapable of comprehending the purpose of the most recent ads, particularly since Huddler doesn't let you right-click and correct spelling (though OS X has had it built in natively for a while), but…
Comments
Bringing the ad work in-house just helps to cut down on leaks.
Here's something rarely mentioned. It was Apple who first signaled an intent to compete directly with Google by bidding on AdMob. If Apple had no intention of eventually pushing Google off of their platform as the ad provider why would Apple have gone after AdMob in the middle of 2009? That was long before Steve Jobs showed his displeasure and threatened to go thermonuclear. If you were Google how would you have read it?
IMO it was obviously Apple throwing down the first gauntlet, not Google. You expected Google wouldn't react to an unexpected competitor they thought was a partner? While even DED will agree that Microsoft was the original target of Android, this little move from Apple no doubt got Google's attention and may have been the impetus behind today's cooler relationship.
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/104782/apple-met-with-admob-weeks-before-acquisition-by-google
Here's a bit of history
Motorola Droid released october 17 2009 --> Link here
Google buys adMob on november 9 2009 --> Link here
Are you saying that Apple pulled the first punch and it only took Google and Motorola 4 months to come up with the Droid?
Or was it that Google had already shifted away from the BlackBerry clone business and went into the iPhone clone business way before the middle of 2009?
Google developed the Droid? Suppose it could have been more Google and less Motorola but at that time Google had no economic association with Moto other than just another member of the Open Handset Alliance and I can't find anything saying it was a Google project.. Google wasn't building smartphones, they were creating an OS used on smartphones.
IIRC it was activating multi-touch in Android (it was already there but not used at Jobs request) that reportedly set Mr. Jobs off in early 2010. Palm had already rolled it out a year earlier so Android was hardly the first imitator of the iPhone feature.
Seems to me things took a tum for the worse after Apple's surprise AdMob interference, but perhaps there were several things going on all at the same time and it was both sharing some blame for the partnership beginning to fail. In any case Apple's plan to enter Google' core ad business was pretty obvious as far back as mid 2009 so whatever Apple does now with ads won't be a surprise.
Google developed the Droid? Suppose it could have been more Google and less Motorola but at that time Google had no economic association with Moto other than just another member of the Open Handset Alliance and I can't find anything saying it was a Google project.. Google wasn't building smartphones, they were creating an OS used on smartphones.
IIRC it was activating multi-touch in Android (it was already there but not used at Jobs request) that reportedly set Mr. Jobs off in early 2010. Palm had already rolled it out a year earlier so Android was hardly the first imitator of the iPhone feature.
Seems to me things took a tum for the worse after Apple's surprise AdMob interference, but perhaps there were several things going on all at the same time and it was both sharing some blame for the partnership beginning to fail. In any case Apple's plan to enter Google' core ad business was pretty obvious as far back as mid 2009 so whatever Apple does now with ads won't be a surprise.
I responded to your original post that said that Apple threw down the gauntlet or first punch if you prefer, somewhere in the middle of 2009.
My point is that 4 months is nowhere near enough time to switch Android OS development around and then along with hardware partner Motorola release an actual product.
So what was Steve Jobs' reasoning behind using an outside ad agency for so long? I'm guessing because he'd settle for nothing but the best. In-house advertising departments tend to become quite political (meaning, inter-office politics become far more important than the work). It'll be interesting to see if/how Apple intends to manage this. I want to believe they can keep their creativity and drive fully engaged and with their goals outward directed, not internal.
What's to become of the ad agency they've been using for years?
Who says they won't just prefer hires from Chiat\Day?
Let's say they do hire from the agency, what happens to the agency itself?
Keeps existing. It's larger than the number of people Apple would want to hire.
In what capacity? I'm sure Apple was it's biggest money maker.
Two divisions, LA and NY. Here's LA's client list.
I'm sure they'll do fine.
Samsung would be the only competition worth acknowledging if at all. But Attacking Samsung on features is unlikely to be fruitful. Samsung are nimble and can re-spec quickly. Unlike Apple, Samsung don't appear to care about ramping product features so steeply they alienate previous generation device users.
They would be better off attacking brand pride. If Samsung devices can be repositioned as boisterous, gaudy, clumsy and an inconvenience to others (all of which I personally find to be true) people will feel embarrassed about owning them.
That hideously annoying "wolf-whistle" ringtone would be a great place to start. Make Samsung users embarrassed every time their phone goes off in public. Inappropriately sized screens and clumsy software interfaces are also easy to lampoon. Perhaps someone losing an eBay auction because they are standing at a bus stop with a hand full of shopping and they can't reach the bid button with one hand. Or an person clocking an elevator full of people in the head with an oversized handset just to answer a phone call.
So we know there will be one new product SKU sort of - the 5C - which is just last year's iphone really, my point is, what makes Apple want to expand their s/m department so drastically? More new products to be released isn't it?! But, itunes radio, mac pro, mavericks, new ipads, new macbooks, more or less same old same old, just one new service there, so what's the fuss about? If the internal team sucks right now, they could "restructure" and fire people first but why take on almost double? There must be something new coming soon isn't it, they couldn't just hire 50 more people or something, 2 to 300, that's a building full of people ... what if they are only internalizing all the ad outsourcing they normally do? That's so not exciting though.
I agree absolutely your comment about Samsung products and every time I hear that stupid and immensely irritating whistle I feel like wanting to ask the owner to turn it off! I've owned a Samsung TV that has the worse remote control I've seen on a TV, and a camera that just doesn't inspire any emotional attachment like my FujiFilm and Leica do. So I am not being prejudice but am speaking from real user experience. I am saddened that a lot of my friends have turned from iPhone to Samsung just because they needed something new to freshen up their boring life, not because their offerings are significantly better than iPhone. To me I will not buy another Samsung product, and will stick with iPhone as long as it stays what it is (I am not sure how things will be 3 years from now because Steve is no longer with us)
Apple used to have good ads. As of now, they are complete junk. Their annoying and don't sell/promote/describe any products. I sure hope they remove their heads and start good/productive/enjoyable ads.
Sorry but based on the last series of iPhone and iPad ads, I can categorically state that you are ignorant and have no sense of what is great and what is junk. So, based on that, please shut up.
------------------------------
So Apple will double it, eh?
That means that samsung will just spend 5x more than Apple, instead of 10x. Bunch of brainwashers selling oversaturated screens to ignorant people.
Did you even watch the ad? I don't want to correlate your inability to spell with an intelligence incapable of comprehending the purpose of the most recent ads, particularly since Huddler doesn't let you right-click and correct spelling (though OS X has had it built in natively for a while), but…