News - iPad 2 supply not meeting boardroom demand

[Scott B]

What about Apple marketing?? Product placements??

It is not the best product which sells but the best marketed.

But surely the people who buy it think it is the best. Is their opinion less valid than yours?

[Gordy]

But surely the people who buy it think it is the best. Is their opinion less valid than yours?

And in terms of the iPad/iPad 2 it is by far the best as there is no real competition out there at present. Most would agree the same with apple computers and the iPhone. It's nothing to do with marketing.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

But surely the people who buy it think it is the best. Is their opinion less valid than yours?

You have missed the point entirely. As a person who has used G3 Macs running OS9 to dual processor Mac Pros running OS X and most of their laptop range of the last few years I do know their products quite well. However, I am not to cover for their weakness like any tech product. There are certain perceptions associated with them which are simply not true.

It is nothing to with whether a tech product is the best or not. It is about who markets their product the best.

Jobs has always been a good a marketer - look at famous 1984 advert! People remember that and yet how many computer adverts from the 1980s do people now remember??

Mac vs PC - again even people who don't own Macs know this. When is the last time you remember a PC advert?

Their were other smaller companies also producing similar tablets to the iPad at around the same time. Yet have most people heard of them??

This has been the case for decades with so much consumer technology. Too many tech companies focus just on the technology and Apple has realised for a very long time marketing is important.

[Gordy]

Their were other smaller companies also producing similar tablets to the iPad at around the same time. Yet have most people heard of them??

Even with a huge marketing budget would they have been real competition to the iPad. The JooJoo for example, barely worked. Samsung really pushed their tablet, but that failed to dent the iPad's sales.

Most of Apple's marketing is not done by apple, but by the press. Apple's new products make headlines in newspapers really easily. The same with the use Apple's in movies etc. Apple don't pay for this.

One of the simple things Apple do is to make it easy for the normal person buying the product to understand what it can do. Very few other companies do that. Spec's sell products to geeks not the masses.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

And in terms of the iPad/iPad 2 it is by far the best as there is no real competition out there at present. Most would agree the same with apple computers and the iPhone. It's nothing to do with marketing.

Even with a huge marketing budget would they have been real competition to the iPad. The JooJoo for example, barely worked. Samsung really pushed their tablet, but that failed to dent the iPad's sales.

Most of Apple's marketing is not done by apple, but by the press. Apple's new products make headlines in newspapers really easily. The same with the use Apple's in movies etc. Apple don't pay for this.

Apple spends around $500 million a year on advertising and product placements.

Also,the companies fortunes waned until Jobs returned and he is an excellent marketeer.

[Scott B]

You have missed the point entirely. As a person who has used G3 Macs running OS9 to dual processor Mac Pros running OS X and most of their laptop range of the last few years I do know their products quite well. However, I am not to cover for their weakness like any tech product. There are certain perceptions associated with them which are simply not true.

It is nothing to with whether a tech product is the best or not. It is about who markets their product the best.

Jobs has always been a good a marketer - look at famous 1984 advert! People remember that and yet how many computer adverts from the 1980s do people now remember??

Mac vs PC - again even people who don't own Macs know this. When is the last time you remember a PC advert?

Their were other smaller companies also producing similar tablets to the iPad at around the same time. Yet have most people heard of them??

This has been the case for decades with so much consumer technology. Too many tech companies focus just on the technology and Apple has realised for a very long time marketing is important.

Define 'best'

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Define 'best'

Cherry picking words is not going to work with me. Perhaps you need to start looking at the history of the most successful consumer technology.

[Gordy]

Apple spends around $500 million a year on advertising and product placements.

Also,the companies fortunes waned until Jobs returned and he is an excellent marketeer.

Apple don't pay for product placement

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...041401670.html

The 500million is a drop in the ocean to the amount of other coverage they get. From tech website or tradional news sources. I'm always amazed at how much normal people know about Apple product launches.

I don't know which period you are talking about, was this the time when he was off ill or when he was sacked? If it was the latter, you could argue they were doing badly when he was still there back then. 10m years in the wilderness did him wonders.

[hermano pequeño]

It is nothing to with whether a tech product is the best or not. It is about who markets their product the best.

Can it not be about more than one single thing?

Yes, Steve Jobs DID turn things around when he answered the board room SOS. He started by sacking the whole board, except the accountant, and then proceeded to get Apple back on the cutting edge of product design, where it has been ever since.

I'm sure that the marketing department had a similar overhaul but I think your comments suggest that you regard Apple's success to be entirely down to marketing and that therefore you believe Apple products to be rather inferior. Is that how you feel?

[crossy]

I think it wrong to condemn others personal preferences simply because we do not understand it. To call them stupid or "child-like" shows a laziness or refusal to understand their reasons. It is their money and they will be using it, so it's very much their business.

I think you are doing me a disservice here. There was no attempt at Apple-bashing (and I never accused anyone of "stupidity"). I'm sure that everyone's aware of circumstances where kids see something on TV on the approach to Christmas, it takes hold, and that becomes the "must have", (then gets consigned to a cupboard). This item becomes desireable not for any reason other than that everyone around is talking about it. Similar with the CEO's and the iPad2 - is there a good reason ("I want/need one to do X") or is it merely that "Jenkins from Consolidated Amalgamated has one, so I obviously need one to keep up". I was genuinely interested what the unique selling point was for CEO's, (apart from Motorola's, Samsung's, Sony's, HP's etc - obviously!). Gordy's posting did suggest a degree of "office jewellery" syndrome - I'd hesitate to comment either way.

And in terms of the iPad/iPad 2 it is by far the best as there is no real competition out there at present. Most would agree the same with apple computers and the iPhone. It's nothing to do with marketing.

Sorry, that's just fan-boy talk - unless you are going to say that you forgot to add a qualification that "it's the best for me". To take my own advice ( ) here's my eval of those three for my use (ymmv):

• ipad/ipad2 - too expensive and too restricted for the limited uses that are available. A combination of my current smartphone and netbook fulfil all requirements;
• mac desktop computers - too expensive, too restricted. The home-build hex-core Windows7Pro system I built at Christmas is superior in every way other than looks and ease-of-use. Oh, and it'll play the current crop of games whereas the Mac won't.
• mac laptops - okay, thin and easy to use, but very limited choice and my Ubuntu-running Dell is better for me;
• iphone - far too restricted, 3GS is being discontinued, 4 is badly compromised and plain (to my eyes). My rooted and xda'd Sony X10 is a better fit (and better looking than the iP4 to boot), mainly because I don't have to waste time working around iTunes.

As folks are fond of saying, Apple gear is great for the technically unsophisticated, but there's other folks in the market than that demographic.

What about Apple marketing?? Product placements?? It is not the best product which sells but the best marketed.

Apple are superb marketers. That, and their focus on usability-over-capability are their greatest strengths (imho). My old 5G iPod is still the easiest to use music player (superb usability) and their reinvention of video calling as "Face Time" was just classic Apple - dead simple to use, but only over WiFi - wtf?

Don't know whether there's anyone who watches this too - but the new series of "Hawaii Five-O" has the lead 'tec's using iPhone4's, but the female "assistant" gets an Android-running LG (Optimus?). Did they run out of iPhones?

Apologies for the digression there ...

[aidanjt]

Apple spends hundreds of millions on TV, internet, media, and on-the-ground/astroturf advertising and promos, most of the TV advertising ends up being banned in the UK because the hyperbole ends up being out-right dishonest and misleading. Anyone who thinks Apple don't rely on advertising are quite frankly, lacking awareness of their surroundings.

[Gordy]

Sorry, that's just fan-boy talk - unless you are going to say that you forgot to add a qualification that "it's the best for me".
[LIST][/i]

There is no real alternative to the iPad/iPad2 in the market right now. Therefore I'd argue that it is the best at present.

In terms of design/build quality, there is no real competition out there for apple in most of their product area's. Yes they are not for everyone, but for a lot of people they are very desirable. For example the ability to build your own is a very small portion of the population. That isn't a real competitor for me.

The thing that puts nearly everyone off apple is price. They aren't cheap, or more precisely in most areas they don't bother to make a cheap model. The iPad seems to be the exception as Samsung/Motorolo seem to be struggling to meet apple's price let alone beat it.

Apple spends hundreds of millions on TV, internet, media, and on-the-ground/astroturf advertising and promos, most of the TV advertising ends up being banned in the UK because the hyperbole ends up being out-right dishonest and misleading. Anyone who thinks Apple don't rely on advertising are quite frankly, lacking awareness of their surroundings.

That wasn't the point I was making. Yes they advertise and yes they advertise very well. They also get tons of free advertising, from press and media. It isn't the reason they are selling so much. It's far more than that.

The build everything around the product, that's the buying experience, the use of the product, the packaging, the support. No one else does that. Microsoft seem to be trying in the States to copy the apple store, but it's not the same.

[mrochester]

If Apples success is down to a massive advertising budget, why aren't the massive advertising budgets of other companies quite as successful? They're clearly lacking something else.

[crossy]

There is no real alternative to the iPad/iPad2 in the market right now. Therefore I'd argue that it is the best at present.

If the "market" is defined as "thin internet access devices that can access iTunes content", then I'll agree. If it's a bit wider (as in "portable, keyboard-less devices that can carry out a variety of tasks") then I'll disagree vehemently.

In terms of design/build quality, there is no real competition out there for apple in most of their product area's.

Oh, that's very subjective. I've had Thinkpad's and HP Envy's that have been just as well built as the Macbook's that I've tried. And my Sony Walkman is better built than the (plasticy?) Nano-equivalent. Then there's the oft-quoted screwups with the iPhone4 - probably getting the amount of negative press purely because it was such an uncharacteristic mistake?

The iPad seems to be the exception as Samsung/Motorolo seem to be struggling to meet apple's price let alone beat it.

Sorry, Samsung and Motorola have made it VERY clear that their tablets are regarded as "premium" products that have to attract a premium price. Therefore they could do 'em cheaper - but choose not to at the moment.

The build everything around the product, that's the buying experience, the use of the product, the packaging, the support. No one else does that.

Now that I would totally agree with. Jaunt down to the local PC World and compare the pile-em-high approach with the non-Apple kit to the altar area that's reserved for the fruity PC's and laptops. Heck, my local PCW even has special "Apple experts" that you have to collar if you want to buy. And as I said in my previous posting, the focus on ease of use is unarguable (so why the 'eck did they make the Touch a worse interface for music playing than the old iPods?)

The Apple Stores (at least the ones I've been in) are worse, they seem to be patterned on a high class (/price!) boutique - think Armani store. But then again, I'll admit to bias - tried to buy an iPod and was told to (politely but patronisingly) "go off to Curry's down the street". And it's this "aspirational" aura that I thought that the CEO's were maybe being attracted by.

Then again, I'm definitely price-aware and function-over-form kind of guy, so probably not a suitable candidate for joining the Apple "experience", (although I wouldn't part with my old iPod's - damn fine pieces of kit).

[Gordy]

If the "market" is defined as "thin internet access devices that can access iTunes content", then I'll agree. If it's a bit wider (as in "portable, keyboard-less devices that can carry out a variety of tasks") then I'll disagree vehemently.
Oh, that's very subjective. I've had Thinkpad's and HP Envy's that have been just as well built as the Macbook's that I've tried. And my Sony Walkman is better built than the (plasticy?) Nano-equivalent. Then there's the oft-quoted screwups with the iPhone4 - probably getting the amount of negative press purely because it was such an uncharacteristic mistake?

Sorry, Samsung and Motorola have made it VERY clear that their tablets are regarded as "premium" products that have to attract a premium price. Therefore they could do 'em cheaper - but choose not to at the moment.

Now that I would totally agree with. Jaunt down to the local PC World and compare the pile-em-high approach with the non-Apple kit to the altar area that's reserved for the fruity PC's and laptops. Heck, my local PCW even has special "Apple experts" that you have to collar if you want to buy. And as I said in my previous posting, the focus on ease of use is unarguable (so why the 'eck did they make the Touch a worse interface for music playing than the old iPods?)

The Apple Stores (at least the ones I've been in) are worse, they seem to be patterned on a high class (/price!) boutique - think Armani store. But then again, I'll admit to bias - tried to buy an iPod and was told to (politely but patronisingly) "go off to Curry's down the street". And it's this "aspirational" aura that I thought that the CEO's were maybe being attracted by.

Then again, I'm definitely price-aware and function-over-form kind of guy, so probably not a suitable candidate for joining the Apple "experience", (although I wouldn't part with my old iPod's - damn fine pieces of kit).

Plastic ipod nano? I thought it was aluminium? Has been for a couple of versions.

The portion of apple sales through non apple stores/website is a much smaller piece of the pie. In those stores they are getting more and more like the apple store too.

The HP envy is not in the same league as the macbook pro's. They are good, but not quite the complete picture for me. Certainly one of the best pc laptops I've seen though. Dell's xps range falls short as do other manufacturers attempts.

I think the lesson from the iPhone 4 antennagate is how trivial an issue it really was. The phone has not changed since and no one complains at all. It was a case of people want to see Apple fail. Also as proven at the time, every phone out there suffers from design compromises on the the antennae.

Samsung et all calling their products premium is just an excuse for not beating the iPad on price. Lets not be silly now. If they could sell them for less than the iPad they would. The fact they changed their plans after the iPad2 announcement shows this.

Name a real competitor to the iPad that has launched in serious numbers with full backing of a big company. The only thing close to this is the Galaxy tab, that I can think of. There were windows tablets in the past, but they've been a total sales disaster. The JooJoo was a close alternative, but an utter failure. You could say the kindle is a competitor that has been a success, but it fulfils a single role not a full tablet experience.

The Android tablets, web os and blackberry tables are possible competitors, but they aren't shipping in serious numbers yet.

[crossy]

Plastic ipod nano? I thought it was aluminium? Has been for a couple of versions.

Look back and you'll see I said plasticy - current Nano does look "cheap" compared to Sony A-series Walkman (and the Sony's OLED screen is pretty sweet)

I think the lesson from the iPhone 4 antennagate is how trivial an issue it really was. The phone has not changed since and no one complains at all. It was a case of people want to see Apple fail. Also as proven at the time, every phone out there suffers from design compromises on the the antennae.

Granted that trying to fit all that tech in one handset is tricky, but I'll argue that Apple's media have grossly exaggerated the level of the effect on other phones. Heck, I've got a relative who "downgraded" from 4 to 3GS because "I'm sick of having to hold this effing thing in a certain way or it doesn't effing well work". Don't also forget the three time related screwups (software) in the past year and the warnings that the glass front's and back's of the 4 are very "fragile" so scratch/break prone.
I'll freely admit that you could easily be generous and regard these as niggles or glitches, but when you're selling the "perfect" product these get blown out of proportion. Apple admitted to the failings, promised to sort them in the next product, and hopefully everyone's moved on. Remember to pity iPhone4 users when the '5 is launched!

Samsung et all calling their products premium is just an excuse for not beating the iPad on price. Lets not be silly now. If they could sell them for less than the iPad they would. The fact they changed their plans after the iPad2 announcement shows this.

Partially agree. Basic economics is that you (normally) sell the product for the maximum that the market will bear - so an iPad "competitor" needs to sell for around the same price. The flood of el cheapo barely-running-some-variant-of-Android tablets from China has done none of the Apple competition any favours.
Samsung redesigns of the Tab was maybe more to do with them being under ambitious - a common failing these days.

The Android tablets, web os and blackberry tables are possible competitors, but they aren't shipping in serious numbers yet.

Aye, good point. Major-league kudos to Apple for more-or-less generating a new niche - before tablets were a curiosity (limited industrial-only) usage - now they're regarded as an aspirational product for the domestic user. That's sheer genius - certainly on a par with Asus and the original EEE netbook - arguably better.
Better still, Apple's "incremental" development strategy has given the competition time to go back to the drawing boards and hurriedly come up with some interesting alternatives. Personally, if they can get the software support (and that's a big "if") then I suspect that the HP Touchpad has the potential to do well - certainly in a business environment, (it's the one that's impressed me most). Blackberry looks like a good SOHO product, Android for the techies (and Apple flamers), and iPadX for everyone else and their grannies (purely on ease of use and software support).