Apple to highlight strengths of operating system in new ad campaign

Your comments Tobias as very close to the bullseye.

Apple has always shy'd away from attacking Microsoft directly regarding the OS, but it looks as if Apple finally unleashing it's Power Computing marketing kids (now mid-life adults), and letting them run.

Apple is building it's hedge, and then attack, against Vista. The sheer marketing/advertising push MS had with XP truly stifled an innovative, but immature OS X and Mac sales for roughly two years.

Apple plans to play differently this time out, not being passive to the Vista launch and no longer ducking for cover.

Apple has 155 of it's own retail stores - and growing. The iPod/iTunes combo is a huge influencer, and Leopard will be launched within the reach of Vista, allowing Apple to launch their own massive marketing campaign of it's own in the same timeframe...

Apple plans to throw down the gauntlet with Leopard, running many Windows applications (and some top-level games) natively in OS X. There is part of the "Top Secret"... Would anyone like some WINE with that?

If Apple plays their cards right, they will successfully use Vista to spring over Redmond and continue their market acceptance, and most importantly, growth.

AAPL has been VERY, VERY patiently awaiting a "perfect storm" opportunity to tout the OS. With OSX stronger than ever, increased mindshare because of the iPod, and with MSFT and Dell struggling, NOW is the time. The Intel switch affords the added advantage that there is now NO RISK to trying a Mac as your next computer. NONE.

Tom Barta is exactly correct. Apple has waited to advertise until all the pieces were in place. That time is now.

I feel that the Apple brand leaves a bad "after taste". It's an uphill battle to fight against the smugness and the old perception of its inability to do modern things. Consumers feel iMacs look the part, but do they feel it acts the part? Or are they saying "I don't think I can do this.. do that with iMac?"

I thought I was the only one sick and tired of the Apple ad campaigns? But I guess not.
http://www.cultureby.com/trilogy/2006/08/the_problem_of_.html

Linux and Apple still have not meaningfully cracked the world of desktop computing on the enterprise or consumer level. And that's where the majority of users live their days. Servers (linux) are workhorses that get no spolight while desktop systems represent the opportunity to create the user experience, AND DEPENDENCY. How many consumers out there do you think won't buy an iMac because their workplace doesn't use iMacs?

Like it or not, Microsoft has been out there promoting their version of user experience, good, bad or ugly. It's been too easy since they've been the only significant choice for the workplace for the longest time! The emotional after taste when you leave work is hard to shake. Good or bad is not the issue. All it matters is that it gets out there and creates that impression and dependency. Microsoft did it by focusing on software and partnering and relying on every PC hardware maker to infiltrate companies, bringing Microsoft along for the ride. While Apple focused on both hardware / software, closed off themselves and limited their brand exposure. I wonder why enterprises never took to Apple or linux for their desktops? Was it because PC had 2 mouse buttons to "increase" productivity?

BTW, that was just a stupid example to illustrate that it doesn't matter what stupid reason it was, result was that Microsoft won the brand wars there. It's theirs to lose while Apple and linux cannot climb out of the stigma of being "incompatible" to the mainstream. You don't see PC users rushing to find a solution to running Apple software on their PCs, do you? It finally took an mp3 player (not a desktop!) before Joe Public began to notice Apple again! So Apple now has a chance, but they are still not concerned with being the desktop of choice for your workplace.

No matter how stylish a car with only 3 wheels can look. Joe Public is only concerned that it doesn't look very adaptable to everyday life as a 4 wheel legacy car. Apple's brand has to change to gain market share on the desktop.

Checkout zeFrank's video on Brands:
http://www.zefrank.com/theshow/archives/2006/08/082906.html

Vince;

I find it odd that you would use the term "bad after taste" in regard to the general public. PC or Windows fans may feel that way, but the majority of the public doesn't have that gut identification with Microsoft that you guys do.

Now that people can run both Windows and Mac OS X on the same hardware, that makes it just that more likely that Apple can bring some of these folks over. Do you think its lost on folks at work that most large Enterprise copmpanies have equally large IT departments that spend all their working hours keeping their Windows machines up to date? Yeah, they notice, and a LOT of them are starting to note that as consumers, they don't have that luxery at home.

It takes time to develop a presence in the Enterprise. I used to think, "What can Apple be thinking? Why can't they compete in the Enterprise world?" But now that I've worked here for enough years, I can see what's happening.

Apple has a game plan. That is now plain to see. Do you think that Every time Apple comes out with a new version of a computer line that they sit down and say, "Ok, now what do we do next with these?"

No. Apple has a long term game plan. They've realized that to win over Microsoft, they first need to take over the consumer market. That gives them time to perfect their desktop machines and the technology that will make them top of the game in the consumer market and position themselves in the Enterprise.

Getting into the Enterprise will mean working differently and, more importantly, thinking different there, too. The Xserve is a good start, but that's all it is. People that buy Enterprise products think very differently from consumers. They want to see proven products. The Intel Macs are too new, and Apple knows it. A few years to get more traction in the consumer and the pro markets, and you'll see Apple moving more agressively towards the Enterprise.

When Apple is really ready for the Enterprise, you'll begin to see a lot more very different marketing, and more importantly, customer service outreach, to the Enterprise than you do now. But they want a better brand awareness which the consumer market will give them. (And believe me, something so simple as a two button mouse won't win over Enterprise buyers!)

Yes, Apple has a chance, but they're not quite ready for the Enterprise yet. But they have a game plan, so hide and watch it work!

I think you took the words right out of my mouth when you agreed that Apple is not ready for the Enterprise. And by that, the growth will currently meet a ceiling. My assertion is that good, or bad after-taste is not the issue.

In this world of American Idols, Joe Public goes with what's popular, what's visible. The working man will always wonder why Microsoft is everywhere while Apple is just getting started. The fallacy of the strategy was right at the beginning when Apple closed off itself. They are finally making up for it by opening up their hardware architecture, but are still choosing to maintain their own brand through manufacturing. You only have Apple pushing Apple while Microsoft has Dell, HP, Compaq, Sony, Toshiba, Gateway and a host of many other brands confirming Microsoft's existence.

In this day and age of blogging and social networks, Apple is often a contradiction to itself, seemingly hip and trendy yet stubbornly kept to itself and its loyal group. Superior products don't often get the nod from Joe Public, rather they will be admired from afar because they don't see examples of it around their neighbourhood (or work environment). Case in point, Ferrari, McLaren vs. Honda, Toyota

It'll still be quite a while before someone can say "I don't know about that software, I run an iMac", without getting a blank stare back. "Oh .... "

"You only have Apple pushing Apple while Microsoft has Dell, HP, Compaq, Sony, Toshiba, Gateway and a host of many other brands confirming Microsoft's existence."

Until now the host of many other brands was pretty useless vs. the iPod. Maybe because this is a new market.

When I'm using OS X, I think Apple.
When I use Windows, I think work.

Establishing an identity is a good thing for a corporation, but I believe ubiquity betters mankind :P

Where was Apple before the iPOD? A stagnant company with it's executives concentrating on back dating options in order to make a quick buck for themselves. Remember that before you give them too much praise. Apple was revived by the iPOD. I'll give them credit for being there first to take advantage of the crack down on illegal music downloading. But if the government didn't back-up the music industry and start threatening to fine 15 year old kids huge sums of money, where would Apple be now? Nowhere, I suspect.

You're right, Apple did close themselves off in the 90's; that was a big mistake. But in the long run, I like it better with the OS & equipment being from the same manufacturer. That's what makes Apple's user experience what it is. Having many manufacturers is the very issue that Microsoft has to contend with between the many different hardware manufacturers that run their OS. It causes many of their problems, issues that Apple does not have to worry about. Apple is "keeping to itself and its loyal group" as you put it because Steve Jobs insists on that complete user experience. So far, that's paying off, and with Apple's market share (and user base) expanding, it will continue to pay off in the future!

Yes, consumers run with what's popular. That's why Sony's Walkman was so big, and now it's not. For now, the iPod has given Apple that brand awareness they didn't have before, so they are moving to take advantage of that. Like I said, there's a plan that Apple is sticking to, and you'll see more of that - have you seen the new print ad insert? Those new print ads are part of that plan, and I for one am glad to see that Apple is finally spending some of that $6 B to get the word out! And as for those cases in point you were talking about - does anybody ever talk about them as "beleaguered" just because they aren't a monopoly in the auto business? Nobody ever talks about their market share as if they are failures, do they? No. Apple is a profitable company, and has been for some years now. And that's what counts.

Great comments so far! Let's keep talking about how brands affect businesses. Too often we talk about numbers without regard to how operations work. I want to know what businesses are doing, because i don't trust what they're reporting. =)

My question remains this... It's evident what is Apple's strategy. But that's why I'm questioning it! By distancing themselves away from the brand of "work", as they often do in those MAC vs. PC ads (just take a look at the latest ad that talks about photobooks). How are they going to bridge the enterprise gap? The creative industries like design etc. have always embraced Macs, but there's no place for it elsewhere. Apple is already doing very well with its brand in its niche. And they don't seem to want to expand anywhere else.

Meanwhile, Microsoft is trying to carve out a new brand! They're already in the work place, but pray tell where you think XBox 360 and Zune fits? Microsoft is looking to blaze new trails with its brand recognition. If anybody can spend time and resources on a failure, it's Microsoft. But often, their persistence rewards them in the end. Such as the case with XBox.

Tawky Tawny,

Your point about the many brands vs. iPod is interesting. But there's a difference, those many brands in the enterprise desktop had one commonality, which is Microsoft. And Microsoft was the winner, not those many brands. A comparable situation would be if Creative, Dell, Toshiba, Sony all promoted a Microsoft interface. Such is not the case. And all those other brands were not just competing with Apple, but competing amongst themselves. So the relationship is not exactly the same.

Noitall,

I know this is a tangent. But there hasn't been a significant crackdown (involving a company) for music and movies ever since the BitTorrent technology became popular. But it goes to show the power of branding. Napster branded itself as a "facilitator of illegal downloads" could not fight back to become a noticeable "legal alternative". While Apple stole that crown by being the "good guy" as soon as they started. The same logic applies as I'm wondering how Apple can fight back to be enterprise friendly after basically calling PC adopters "boring, no fun, no life, obssessed about productivity, and basically dumb for not liking iMacs". It's a classic branding failure.

Actually, I do think Apple wants to expand into the Enterprise market; the XServe shows they are. What counts in that market are three things: reliable equipment with redundancy and low price, good remote (or centralized) admin, and customer service (both in sales and service). Another item looked for that Microsoft excels in is providing a roadmap of future product servings.

By expanding into the market early with a good, cheap server such as the XServe, Apple is striving to provide a reliable history of inexpensive equipment. By slowly expanding the capabilities of that equipment over time in a well planned expansion, they can show a history of planned growth.

Apple server software already has the centralized management software, so that's largely a no brainer. Simply by improving that software as part of its regular upgrade into the Leopard version, they are also showing a planned, well thought out upgrade path.

The one area in which Apple falls far short of the ideal is in customer service. From all I've read about them in this market, they don't really try very hard. Their warranties are too short, their maintenance agreements don't meet industry standards, and they don't provide the kind of on site service major Enterprise departments demand.

In addition, as a company that thinks of themselves as a MEDIA company, they haven't realized yet that the major players in the Enterprise market want a clearly laid out upgrade path from which they can plan future procurements and system upgrades. This is information that many large companies demand at least three years in advance. We're lucky to get any information from Apple even as much as ONE DAY in advance! How many of us know what Apple is presenting in their special "Show Time" on Tuesday?

Granted, that's not Enterprise products they're going to spotlight, but if Apple wants to make progress in the Enterprise, they are going to need to get more chummy with their customers in that market.

As smart as Apple has been to date in pleasing their consumer customers, I'll bet that the other side is somewhere in that plan of theirs, but it'll show up on Apple's timetable, not anybody else's!

So many good stuff from your last comment!

Yes, Apple fails to break into the enterprise because they refuse to play their game. The ego that proliferates Apple's operations since those "Pirates of Silicon Valley" days still exist. They just can't play nice with any other companies, let alone road-mapping. God forbid anybody to derail apple from their schedule, even their customers!

I never heard of the Xserve, but I'm not sure if I'm a good indicator of apple trying to get the word out. Good to know, I'll check out more on it.

Customer service and narcissistic research and development seldom go hand in hand. For a company that has come out to say that a new iPod should be bought every year (or other year, not sure), I'm always wondering how long the "fad" may last. If iPods are meant to last only 18 months, then eventually, consumers will feel the alienation.

As for ShowTime, I believe a lot of people are getting use Steve's "one more thing" speech. I do believe ShowTime was well publicized for investors and interested consumers this go-around. The danger with one more thing is that all it takes is one bad thing to destroy the mystique. I see the iPhone as such a catalyst. It could work real well, or it could be a disasterous formulation.

Your last paragraph was priceless. Apple not able to road-map for the enterprise? Why, does it have something to do with Apple's timetable? They'll find the enterprise crowd are not easily influenced by advertising campaigns.

The "ego" that persists, as you put it, is Steve's. His personality does pervade Apple. I'm not trying to say that's necessarily a good thing. IT's not entirely a bad thing, either!

In the consumer market, it has worked wonders for them. I don't really understand where your criticism "a new iPod should be bought every year" comes from. Apple is developing their technology and providing new versions of the iPod on a regular basis. That is apparantly within their business plan for providing what the market has demanded: new and better iPods. If their customers want to upgrade every year (or less) Apple, like many other consumer electronics companies, will be happy to sell them. But I haven't seen any Apple ads urging their customers to upgrade every year - they don't have to!

"narcissistic research and development"??? Where the H*** did that come from? Apple is a technology company. Their stock in trade has been their HUGE R&D budget, resulting in cutting edge technology that's leading the computer market almost every time they release a really new product. What's so "narcissistic" about that? I don't hear you using that term in, say, the auto industry. Why here? Apple develops new technology and products to stay in business and ahead of the competition, just like everybody else.

YOUR last paragraph is priceless. Apple does NOT roadmap for the Enterprise, that's my point. And that's what the Enterprise customers want. You're right, they are not easily impressed by marketing, they want to see results. That is why Apple is running their XServes now, to provide a history of good, cheap, reliable products so that, when they ARE ready to start playing serious, thay have a history to point to.

Like I noted, the ShowTime event today is consumer oriented, and was not really on topic. I was using that as an illustration of how secretive Apple is about their future plans. I read an article recently, I can't remember where, about how the author said Apple is so secretive because they view themselves not as a Technology company (which type frquently publicizes future technology plans years in advance), but as a MEDIA company (which type usually is very secretive and holds future plans close to the vest). Look at their consumer products (not their pro computers) and you'll see that this view is pretty close to how they market their stuff. They are moving in the consumer space towards becoming a media provider, and that business model precludes advance notice of future plans.

In the Enterprise, they will need to move in the other direction. Enterprise customers need and want those future plans so they can plan for themselves.

You can spin it however you like; call them arrogant, self-centered, whatever. Call it simply clueless in that market, on the other end of the spectrum. The facts are that in order to make larger inroads into the Enterprise market, they will have to change their tume and play nice with the people they hope to sell to. Nobody will argue against that, even me. (and I am an Apple fan of long standing)

Will they manage that? I don't know. I believe that Apple has a long term plan for trying to continue to grow their presence in the Enterprise market. Whether that plan involves a sea change in their attitude towards their customers, only time will tell.