Mark, What are you talking about, chiwawa(huahua)? I do not watch TV, and so never see any TV ads. I refer to a print ad I saw. With a pentium Ii on the back of a snail. It failed to impress as I know that the pentium II as fast as a G-3 more or less. You can select benchmarks to make one or the other faster.
I expect Apple to try and become cost effective and compete in terms of ease of use and connectability at the same price.
I do not expect them to say we are faster and easier to use and we cost more too, same cost per byte per day taken to learn.
This elite market concept will not attract new converts. Those in niches are trapped(and escaping all the time) and must buy(some graphics, audio, film, music).
To get new share you must be the same price and better. Not better and more money, they have that choice now.
You need a no-brainer.
Do not forget the consumers do not do sophisticated comparisons. they weigh their wallet and compare the price. All systems seem similar to new buyers. experienced buyers are not swayed. The only swaying is done by new buyers with Apple buddies. At 3% share there are not enough budies to sway enough people.
What is needed is an APple buddy program, so a Wintel addict can call them if they are tempted to buy a Wintel. AA= Apple Anonymous <VBG>
Perhaps I lack brains and sophistication, but whatever the apple ideas are they have failed dismally over the past ten years.
Years ago Apple had an AD, only $4900, under ten pounds. for an Apple III portable(??is that number right). Anyone at all in electronics knows nothing costs $490 per pound in that formaet, and all felt ripped. The product failed dismally. The first thing yoy saw was $490 per pound, how dumb can you get. It was in 1983-4 if I recall rightly.
Well, has Apple changed ad agencies in the past 15 years?, often?
Bill |
