Why did the switch campaign fail?
Why did Apple's switch campaign fail?
While the switch ads were not stellar, I feel Apple gave it their best shot to attrack new users to the Mac platform. However, I think there is only one reason why the switch campaign failed. It is because Apple computers are simply too expensive. Plain and simple.
Comments?
While the switch ads were not stellar, I feel Apple gave it their best shot to attrack new users to the Mac platform. However, I think there is only one reason why the switch campaign failed. It is because Apple computers are simply too expensive. Plain and simple.
Comments?
Comments
1) Use ONLY celebrities.
2a) Ditch the white background...what a waste of ad space.
2b) Use real environments.
3) Ditch the cheesy music.
The ad downloads seem to have disappeared from the Apple.com.
The only Apple ads I like are the original Think Different, the Burn Baby Burn, the Steamroller, the G4/tank, and the Verne Troyer/Yao Ming ads.
Did you see the celeb iPod commercials?
Yeah...ummm...I got this....ummm...Mp3 player....iPod thing...and....its great.
Well you convinced me mr. Celeb.
1. Half of their consumer sales are to new Macintosh Users.
Then they haven't failed. What they've failed to do is get the Vet Mac users to buy new computers. They've been waiting for the G5 and now that it's here they're convincing themselves to wait for the G5+
If Apple maintains it's marketshare today then that bodes well for the future as they have a processor that has some legs and will allows for much better consumer offerings. Plus a willingness of Apple to look for revenue potential elsewhere is a good sign. We're doing just fine.
Personally, I think people worry about this kind of stuff too much.
Originally posted by Dave K.
Why did Apple's switch campaign fail?
While the switch ads were not stellar, I feel Apple gave it their best shot to attrack new users to the Mac platform. However, I think there is only one reason why the switch campaign failed. It is because Apple computers are simply too expensive. Plain and simple.
Comments?
It takes time. People first have to be in the market for a new computer. Wait a few years for people to upgrade and check again. The switch campaign was successful to me, yet I still own a PC until I deem it a necessity to upgrade. At that time I'm getting a MAC.
And in response to the celeb iPod commercials, how is that any different than watching some stoned 13 year old go, "Like I went to do my homework and like it was like not there or something." At least with the celeb, they have some clout.
Originally posted by Baron von Smiley
and as far as the white backgrounds go... I don't know. Apple has been obsessed with those for years. from the original iMac to now. Maybe it helps to cut costs in production.
No - it actually makes production harder not easier...
The point is: the white background is kinda like Apple's trademark look. See white background, think Apple. I like it - it's nice and distinctive.
Amorya
Originally posted by Amorya
No - it actually makes production harder not easier...
The point is: the white background is kinda like Apple's trademark look. See white background, think Apple. I like it - it's nice and distinctive.
Amorya
That's ok, i like distinction, but the best ad of late has been the Yao Ming/Verne Troyer ad - everybody knows there's a big/small powerbook.
I think the plan is to expose the product to the public and get them to check the goods at an Apple store.
Though, the new G5 ad is boring and stale.
Like someone mentioned early on;
1) white background
2) simple music
3) just talks in normal tone.
I think Apple did a better job on printed ads.
The one with the fries and the guy with the broken leg, with the dominant wife and kid threatening him with bodily harm if he tries to leave the house. Like in Misery, with Kathy Bates' character breaking James Caan's ankles.
The other ad for their fries, where the woman is talking to her mom, I suppose, telling her that her husband enjoys eating the fries with nothing on. When the husband comes out of the shower, the mom-in-law bolts for the door in fear, leaving her daughter with that obvious wife-beater! "I think she really likes me." "Of course she does." "You wish," you know he's gonna slap her around a bit afterward.
Then there's the couple alone on that island, where the guy is convinced his pizza's delivery. Possibly because he is insane, or suspicious that his girlfriend's cheating on him, he could lose it and kill her soon, you just know! Shady characters like these, that's what Apple's commercials need. It has somehow worked for McCain's.
The white background allowed you to focus solely on this real, intelligent, former PC user who had made the decision to use Mac OS instead of Windows, and in many cases, at least one of the people had had the same frustrations as you had with a Windows machine, had made the switch, and were now happier.
Why did it fail? It didn't appeal to the younger market. It appealed to 30-, 40-, or 50-somethings who didn't know a lot about computers who instead of referencing advertizements for their purchase referenced their kids who are now learning everything about these newfangled machines. Of course, since kids usually want games when they want a computer, they are going to pick the PC when shopping for their parents.
One thing in particular stood out about the Apple Switch Ads, in which Sarah Whistler was talking, "I used the machine for years , but I never used it well (she steps as though stepping from PC to Mac). And now that I have the Mac I'm--I'm happier."
While certainly a pretty intelligent statement, and Sarah Whistler an intelligent seeming person, she was a writer, and a 45-looking one too. She didn't need her Mac for gaming, and neither did many (if any) of the advertized switchers. She was a rather dumpy, librarian type woman. She didn't appeal to the average American under 25. All the switchers had this kind of problem with their image.
Convince the teenagers, convince the kids, Macs are better. You can have almost as many games and you won't have to restart your computer 3 times to get them to work. You can download songs from iTunes on your parents' buck without having to deal with popups or spyware. It's more secure against viruses, it's got an ultra-classy iPod, the hottest MP3 player on the market. You can have one for your family and one in your room without any wires or complicated LAN setup/maintanence. And all of this just clicks.
These are the ones going to school and college and getting new computers. Apple has to find a way to appeal them like Dell and other PC companies have if they want that kind of fanbase.
Originally posted by iSushi
I thought the Switch commercials were nigh brilliant.
The white background allowed you to focus solely on this real, intelligent, former PC user who had made the decision to use Mac OS instead of Windows, and in many cases, at least one of the people had had the same frustrations as you had with a Windows machine, had made the switch, and were now happier.
Why did it fail? It didn't appeal to the younger market. It appealed to 30-, 40-, or 50-somethings who didn't know a lot about computers who instead of referencing advertizements for their purchase referenced their kids who are now learning everything about these newfangled machines. Of course, since kids usually want games when they want a computer, they are going to pick the PC when shopping for their parents.
One thing in particular stood out about the Apple Switch Ads, in which Sarah Whistler was talking, "I used the machine for years , but I never used it well (she steps as though stepping from PC to Mac). And now that I have the Mac I'm--I'm happier."
While certainly a pretty intelligent statement, and Sarah Whistler an intelligent seeming person, she was a writer, and a 45-looking one too. She didn't need her Mac for gaming, and neither did many (if any) of the advertized switchers. She was a rather dumpy, librarian type woman. She didn't appeal to the average American under 25. All the switchers had this kind of problem with their image.
Convince the teenagers, convince the kids, Macs are better. You can have almost as many games and you won't have to restart your computer 3 times to get them to work. You can download songs from iTunes on your parents' buck without having to deal with popups or spyware. It's more secure against viruses, it's got an ultra-classy iPod, the hottest MP3 player on the market. You can have one for your family and one in your room without any wires or complicated LAN setup/maintanence. And all of this just clicks.
These are the ones going to school and college and getting new computers. Apple has to find a way to appeal them like Dell and other PC companies have if they want that kind of fanbase.
While it may not be true, I have always thought the people in the switcher ads were kinda full of themselves and not too believable.
Originally posted by Anders
Did it fail?
Yes they did. If they were at all working, Apple would continue the ad compaign.
Originally posted by Eugene
Fail is a harsh word. They just need to do the following...
1) Use ONLY celebrities.
2a) Ditch the white background...what a waste of ad space.
2b) Use real environments.
3) Ditch the cheesy music.
The ad downloads seem to have disappeared from the Apple.com.
The only Apple ads I like are the original Think Different, the Burn Baby Burn, the Steamroller, the G4/tank, and the Verne Troyer/Yao Ming ads.
In response,
1. Everytime I think of a celebrity trying to sell me something, I think of infomerical.
2a. I liked the white backgrounds. They were unique in a world of metoos.
2b. Use real environments. Yeah right. Never thought of that. Hell, no computer maker ever shows a computer in a productive environment. Freak'in everyone does that. What is the point.
BTW: The recent Microsoft commerical with the kids in school were some of the best computer ads I have seen a while.
3. Agree. Cheesy music just plan sucks.
Apple needs to get people's attention in there ads.
Do you guys remember the Honda Accord commericals a while back that went something like this:
Commerical Intro: A large number of people in lab coats running like mad me.
Richard Drefus voice saying something like the competition is going to have to play catch up.
Introducing the new Accord from Honda.
This was a great commerical. Imagine replacing the Honda Accord with the PowerMac G5. Now that would be a commerical that would bring more people to the Apple stores.
Not me.
You know (I spoke of this once before, a while back) the Switch ads would've been okay had they perhaps showed some of the hardware and people doing something, you know?
I just found it so incredibly odd (and maddening) that a company known and respected for their amazing hardware design didn't show ONE piece of it during the entire Switch campaign.
Would it have detracted THAT much to show the person talking cradling their PowerBook or iBook, or standing next to a platform with the iMac or whatever? Instead of zooming in for the sixth time on somebody's forehead (oooh! exciting), they could've replaced those shots with some nice quick-cut close-ups of the gear itself.
Perhaps Miss Janie, in relating her cute little Christmas story, could've actually stood there with a PowerBook on a table beside her and plugged her camera in, and while she's talking, show iPhoto importing the photos in.
Still 30 seconds. Still a Switch ad. Still the same people, telling the same stories.
Just a little more "meat" to it and some visual interest. Particularly from a company known for their eye-popping hardware.
I NEVER understood that one. It should be a law that EVERY Apple commercial gives ample face time to the gear, whatever model(s) may be appropriate.
Just seems like a total "no brainer" to me.
"You know, let's just keep the schlumpy people only, okay? Nix that footage of the PowerBook and the Cinema Displays...people want to see this policeman's adam's apple more, I'm sure...".
Originally posted by iSushi
Why did it fail? It didn't appeal to the younger market. It appealed to 30-, 40-, or 50-somethings who didn't know a lot about computers who instead of referencing advertizements for their purchase referenced their kids who are now learning everything about these newfangled machines. Of course, since kids usually want games when they want a computer, they are going to pick the PC when shopping for their parents.
Buy an xbox, clueless kid. 30,40,50 yr olds are just as obsessive about computers as <30 crowd. They just don't have to say "please" before getting one.
This means that Budweiser's "Whassup?", "How You Doin?" and "What Are You Doing?" ad campaigns were a complete and total bust. Their talking frogs? Absolute failure. Everybody hated those ad campaigns and Budweiser was very unhappy with them.
Wait, what's that? Those were successful ad campaigns? No, they couldn't have been...Budweiser stopped running them. That proves that they failed....right?
There is NO large company in the world which continues to rely on one ad campaign. The reason that they use the word "campaign" in the first place is that, as in battle, advertising is a series of sorties out into the public mindspace. You can never corral and contain that adspace forever. Advertisements are like an elite armed force striking deep into strongly-held enemy territory. They cannot remain there forever, but they want to leave a lasting impression.
To say that Apple's Switcher's campaign failed paints you as unschooled in advertising.
EDIT: added a few extra Bud commercial names to the list of commercials that would qualify for "failure"
.
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
Buy an xbox, clueless kid. 30,40,50 yr olds are just as obsessive about computers as <30 crowd. They just don't have to say "please" before getting one.
My statement was not that Apple commercials appealed to those in the age group in general, just those who were not very familiar with computers.