Strategy: Stylish periph 4 your favorite periph.

bergzbergz
Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
One topic that has come up a lot in several forums, but, due to the fact that these forums' threads look less like threads than buckshot spreads, hasn't been discussed at length is Steve Jobs' deliberate and radical new branding strategy.



The iMac, until the ploy proves itself either cash-money successful or a strategic failure, will be peddled as a stylish accessory for everyone's favorite peripheral, the ipod.



The iPod was not branded primarily as an Apple product, but the iMac 3 was, without a doubt, physically designed and strategically planned from its very conception to be branded as the iPod for the rest of your iLife.



Is this strategy intelligent? Is the possibility of higher sales and/or product recognition/association worth the belittling of the very same iconic, revolutionary product that made this company?



Or, conversely, was the most poignant thing that SJ contributed to the future of Apple the glass with which the company swallowed its own hubris? ---Bergz

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 4
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,441member
    Apple should do whatever they can to sell sell sell. The iMac will get more attention if it shows up as the "default" computer in iMac adds. People will naturally want to inquire about what is the "monitor" that the iPod is hooked to and those in the know would retort, "that's no monitor that's a whole computer..it's the new iMac G5"



    Insert dazed look on the unsuspecting person followed by a deep lust. They now know in their heart that they must have the matching computer. The ultimate iPod accessory.
  • Reply 2 of 4
    voxappsvoxapps Posts: 236member
    I think the new iMac is a continuation of the "digital hub" strategy that's already in place at Apple. The iPod is a catchy product for the mobile music spoke of the hub, while the iMac is the creative center for music, digital images, video, and -oh, yeah- it's also a pretty good general purpose computer.



    The resemblance to the iPod is deliberate, an effort to make the Mac more approachable to Windows users who like the iPod but haven't felt too warm toward the Mac.

    Quote:

    Is the possibility of higher sales and/or product recognition/association worth the belittling of the very same iconic, revolutionary product that made this company?



    I don't think the strategy is "belittling" the iMac. Saying to consumers "Hey, you really like this product of ours (the iPod) so c'mon and take a look at what else we've got (the iMac) that is equally cool," isn't a bad idea at all. It makes the iMac more hip, more acceptable to potential switchers, and probably generates some curiosity among the public.
  • Reply 3 of 4
    bergzbergz Posts: 1,045member
    The question isn't that there's product recognition in the market--the iMac 2, the most recognizable product since the iMac 1 made the coolhunter rounds more than any other machine, and they didn't sell sell sell, the powerbooks since the G3s with their glowing white apples did the same rounds of movies, TV shows, ads, etc.



    The question is the association and emphasis of the recognition. People who buy Macs usually have an eye for design, quality, or something that's not Windows that everyone associates with quality (please, no GPU gamer responses) like they get when they see a Volvo and think "safety" without really knowing why.



    When you see a Mac you think quality so you buy it. Why will the next gen buy a Mac? Because it goes well with the iPod?



    High sales figures are good because we all benefit from a healthy company, but what if the focus on marketability makes more MacGeeks than a just few gamers angry at decisions made at Apple?



    What if this decision leads to the iMac 4 being truly little more than a peripheral for the ipod?



    iMac 4: a thin client not for .Mac, but for iTunes.



    --J
  • Reply 4 of 4
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,441member
    All that matters is the bottom line. Can Apple become a 10 billion dollar company? Once they do that how quickly can they get to 12 and then 15 and then 20 billion? What people don't realize is that most companies bread n butter product has plateaud and they are in seach of other areas to generate revenue. Apple just stumbled onto the digital music scene and hit gold. Now they must see just how much gold is there for the taking. In the meantime Macintosh is moving along nicely. We have a spiffy new OS coming and new hardware to run it on. It's pretty self propelled. The iPod will only add to the pie.



    Apple is merely utilizing skills that are American hallmarks. Consumer Electronics is a very lucrative field. I believe US companies have an advantage over the Asian companies. While they excel in designing and building the chipsets needed they do not show the ingenuity that the US doles out on a yearly basis. The greatest minds come to America because we value that breakneck forward motion and capitalism.



    Apple can blow away most companies with their design chops. They just need to see the area in which their talents can best be utilized and move. I like Macs but it's going to be a long and slow incline in sales. The inertia that PCs have is substantial. A healthy Apple means a healthy platform regardless of where the $$$ comes from.
Sign In or Register to comment.