If you have ever unboxed an Apple product — say, a new iPod — one of the very first things you see during the unboxing process is Apple’s friendly, concise “Designed by Apple in California.” That’s it. From there, that single statement goes on to work its emotional magic on you, as subtle as it may be.
By way of comparison, Microsoft, largely incapable of an original idea in the consumer space, inscribes the Zune with “Hello from Seattle.” It’s similar to the Apple sauce, just without any of the power or understanding about what makes the Apple slogan work.
Joel Spolsky explains exactly why this fails, and why Microsoft just can’t take a distant, brain-damaged cousin of Apple’s product packaging slogan and call it a day.
Of course, Microsoft’s Apple Envy is so impossible to disguise that the back of the Zune says, “Hello from Seattle:”
Um… excuse me? Hello from Seattle? That has, I’m afraid, none of the same resonance. It evokes nothing. Boeing and rain, maybe. Kurt Cobain’s unhappiness.
But really it’s just a desperate desire to be like Apple, without even a smidgen of understanding of the culture code that makes Designed by Apple in California work. It’s not even clear that anyone at Microsoft would understand that there is such a thing as a culture code, although they are to be forgiven for not reading important books by French intellectuals. After all, they’re in Seattle and it’s raining.
Anyway, we already did “Hello.” “Hello” was charming once. In 1984.
Trying to be Apple when Apple is already Apple is a tacit admission that the original is better than the copycat. If you’re going to try to be like Apple, why shouldn’t I just go buy an iPod? What reason on earth do I have to buy an imitation over the original?
And to be fair, Microsoft isn’t the only one moving into a copycat stance vis-a-vis Apple’s products. Seeking Alpha’s Carl Howe goes beyond the Zune to discuss LG’s new Verizon-based Voyager phone, which — you guessed it — is an iPhone knockoff. It looks like the iPhone cosmetically, the OS aesthetic looks similar (just check out the icons) and the form factor is approximate enough for the mass market. It does boast a physical keyboard once you manage to flip it open somehow, which circumvents the iPhone’s touch keyboard to some degree (I would personally explode if I had to slide/open my smartphone every time I wanted to use the keyboard).
As good of an idea as this may have been in the boardroom with a bunch of stuffy suited wonks getting breathless about getting their share of Apple’s pie, Howe elegantly cuts the idea off at its knees:
See, the problem with imitating a market leading product is that you give the prospect no reason to buy your product instead of the lower-perceived-risk dominant vendor. Said another way, marketing a me-too product, by its very nature, increases awareness of both the new product and the market leader. Unless the upstart company provides significant — I repeat significant — differentiating value to the buyer, the competitor ends up promoting the market leading product as well as their own. And since the market-leading product already has established its value proposition before the competitor showed up (if they hadn’t, they wouldn’t be the market leader), they are more likely to make the sale.
Howe’s argument might border on academic more than pragmatic, because if a Verizon customer wanted to skip the knock-off Voyager and get an iPhone, he’d have to bail on his Verizon contract and switch to AT&T, whose network is dogshit compared to Verizon’s. So he might instead go for the next best thing, which is an iPhone knockoff running some unknown OS on Verizon’s network.
That’s a scary mechanism to rely on to help a new model that is clearly imitating a market leader get off the ground. Nonetheless, the Voyager will sell some units. It won’t ever be mentioned in the same sentence as the iPhone save blog posts like this one, but I don’t think Verizon cares given their notoriously bad history of having lousy devices.
If I were competing against Apple and I had to decide marketing messaging and direction, I would avoid any semblance of Apple-ness in every possible way. It’s great if you want to pay homage to a market leader if you’re an esteemed partner; it’s shitty strategy if you’re trying to compete in earnest.
Still, the suits don’t get it. Give me shiny, like Apple, they say. The minions obey.
And Apple remains Apple. In fact, Apple probably loves the imitation, as it really is the most sincere form of flattery.
24 responses so far ↓
David Scrivner // October 6, 2007 at 1:12 am
You hit the nail on the head here. I totally agree that others are trying to imitate Apple when in fact that is the stupidest thing that they could try and do. We all know that Apple has a very unique product line and is the company that comes up with unique concepts that people go crazy over. If you want the compete you have to either make something better (not likely), or simply avoid comparing yourself and try to advertise things that you have that possibly Apple does not offer in its product. If you try and offer a product that is supposed to be an iPhone Killer, then you are setting yourself for failure. Thanks for the great post.
microsoft » Apple envy everywhere. // October 6, 2007 at 5:49 am
[...] | Open Source | ZDNet.com wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerpt If you have ever unboxed an Apple product — say, a new iPod — one of the very first things you see during the unboxing process is Apple’s friendly, concise “Designed by Apple in California.” That’s it. From there, that single statement goes on to work its emotional magic on you, as subtle as it may be. By way of comparison, Microsoft, [...]
Mea Culpa // October 6, 2007 at 10:03 am
http://www.gapingvoid.com/Moveable_Type/archives/004216.html
I love Hugh.
rambodoc // October 6, 2007 at 11:02 am
Very insightful post, I must say!
I fully agree, which is why I said good things here!
secret squirrel // October 6, 2007 at 11:45 am
I totally agree with you. And that’s the very thing that so turns me off about other companies products that are supposed to compete with Apple - that they can’t design a product to compete because they’re too busy “copying” Apple. Everywhere you look and with every new product that comes out, you can easily see design elements that mimic Apple in some shape form or fashion. The new Zunes that just been announced - all I see is an imitation of Apple. Since Apple invented the easy-to-use click-scroll wheel, every Tom, Dick, and Harry device on the planet has been trying to imitate it in some shape or fashion. And here’s another good example, the new Serenata mobile phone (supposed to be an iPhone killer) just announced by Samsung and designed in conjunction with Bang & Olufsen. Here’s the link:
http://www.serenatamobile.com/
I have to admit, the Serenata is one cool phone, perhaps the coolest I’ve seen on the market. And the design is something I really really love. But the problem is, it also reminds me of Apple. The Serenta’s overall interface design and its slick scroll menus, all remind me of an iPod turned upside down. And that’s the whole problem. Can’t anyone think of anything new! Every new product that comes out seems only to be a validation and variation on something Apple has done. It flattering, yes, but hardly new and inventive.
beanie // October 6, 2007 at 1:50 pm
LG Voyager is successor to LG enV and combines LG Prada touchscreen phone and LG enV. LG Voyager’s serial number is VX10000 and LG enV is VX9900. enV seems to sell well on Amazon. If Voyager sells as well it will do OK.
Some say iPhone is a knock-off of LG Prada design which was introduced in 2006. Who knows? Maybe Steve Jobs copied the design like he copied GUI and mouse from Xerox when he visited Xerox’s research facility.
SteveP // October 6, 2007 at 4:28 pm
HEY!!!
Now, dammit, I’M in Seattle! (Or as near as Redmond is. The ‘burbs.)
AND it’s raining. (Of course!)
BUT, I had recently just started re-reading Camus’ “The Plague”!
So where does your writer get off?
(and HOW does he get off, hmmm?)
bc // October 6, 2007 at 6:13 pm
Apple snobbery > Apple envy.
Apple’s products are over-rated. Maybe 2% of all iPhone users can afford to actually utilize all of the phone’s features. The price of the phone was cut by $200 because sales were not meeting company expectations.
Because the phone is grossly over-engineered, you have to RETURN THE PHONE to Apple when the battery can longer be charged- because they have to replace the battery.
Apple = hype.
Hardbox // October 6, 2007 at 6:13 pm
Um, didn’t LG unveil a touch-based phone a couple of months before Apple showed its own design for the iPhone? LG also shipped the device months before the iPhone did.
So one could, if one wanted, make the claim that, based on who shipped first, it was Apple that was starting up the photocopier.
Go ahead, flame me and point out how the iPhone is superior and different and 5 years ahead and la-la-la-la-la. That won’t change the fact that, based on the logic presented in the article above — Verizon is copying Apple cos the iPhone came out before the Voyager — I’m still right.
Hardbox // October 6, 2007 at 6:15 pm
Oh, yeah… forgot to add: Apple didn’t invent the iPod. The guy who’d just left Apple for Palm did. And he invented it BEFORE he joined Apple.
La-la-la-la-laaa.
beanie // October 6, 2007 at 6:52 pm
Joel Spolsky of http://www.joelonsoftware.com says he is a software developer. So you are quoting a software developer on Apple culture. Seems like he was just taking a poke at Microsot. He does not seem to be a hardcore Apple fan.
Now any techie knows Microsoft and Starbucks are headquartered in Seattle. In fact, one of Joel’s blog post says he went to Seattle just last month to demo his company software. Microsoftees canceled because of a Microsoft company function.
KenC // October 6, 2007 at 8:44 pm
Wow, all the revisionism. BC doesn’t even know that there are NO additional charges when using the iPhones features. The unlimited data plan is included. It doesn’t cost you a cent to check Google maps or to check the weather.
For Hardbox, the guy who worked for Apple and then left for Palm didn’t invent the iPod. He’d invented a concept design. It took refinement at Apple to decide upon Firewire to both charge and sync the iPod. Before that, everyone used slow USB1. It took refinement at Apple to put in a click wheel, the idea attributed to Phil Schiller. It took refinement at Apple to decide to buy up virtually the whole supply of 1.8″ Toshiba harddrives, to make putting the player in your pocket a reality. It took Apple to decide to integrate iTunes, from Soundjam, with the iPod. It took Apple to negotiate the contracts for the iTunes Music Store. Remember, it’s the three legs, the player, the jukebox and the store that is the secret sauce of Apple’s success. While the guy Apple had the original concept that he shopped around, it took Apple to engineer the actual solution.
And, to the numbnuts who think Apple knocked off the Prada, anyone who sees and actually uses the two, will quickly dismiss the coincidental similarities. I mean, how else are two touchscreen phones supposed to look?
David // October 6, 2007 at 9:05 pm
I have a bone to pick with the Apple design crew. Your packaging is elegant looking but excessive and notably UNgreen. Too many layers of plastic and cardboard and plastic and twist ties and cardboard and plastic etc.
Come ON Steve, get green.
fifthdecade // October 6, 2007 at 10:35 pm
A lot of what you say is true, but honestly, Apple can be just as bad an imitator.
Walk into your local computer retailer and look at all the monitors with glossy screens. Three years ago there were next to none, if any. Now they’re all at it. And who has come latest to the glossy screen party? Why, Apple of course with the new iMac.
Personally I find the reflections distracting, but hey, you have to keep up with the fashions don’t you - ie copy everybody else…
But MS really is the arch-copier out there. With versions of the iPod, Sony playstation, Apple’s Aqua interface, Google’s online apps and search, I could go on. They remind me of Superman’s flawed “copy” Bizarro…
microsoft » Apple envy everywhere. " GracefulFlavor // October 7, 2007 at 1:06 am
[...] nmaxwell wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptRegardless of the opinions presented in the various comments, the point here is in branding. Apple has made a huge mark, and comparable (or even better) products don’t stand a chance for the most part. [...]
acriste // October 7, 2007 at 1:31 am
To the posters who said that Apple copied the LG Prada, do you think that while Apple was designing a cell phone to market, then saw the Prada, that they could change midstream and design a working iPhone in a couple of months? I may be wrong but I would guess that Apple would have been working on the iPhone concept for at least a year, maybe more. Implementing the touch screen, reworking OS X to work on the iPhone as well as Safari , etc. would take a ton of time. Touch screen technology has been around for a number of years now. The thought or idea of a touchscreen phone may already have been floating around the tech industry but it took Apple to show how it’s done. Before the Mac, Apple and the probably the rest of the industry were heading towards a GUI computer, but it took XEROX to show Apple how it was done, and it took Apple to make it work for the masses and market it with the original Mac. Now it’s Apple who’s showing everyone how a touch screen phone should work.
MySpace Addons // October 7, 2007 at 3:32 am
I love apple iPhone… nothing is comparison to the LG Prada… although LG is coming back with the “iPhone Killer” lol!
Hardbox // October 7, 2007 at 3:00 pm
That’s true: Apple has never innovated anything successful in their (corporate) life. Every commercially-groundbreaking idea they’ve had is someone else’s. (What about the ADC, you cry. Well, what *about* the ADC? Where is it now?)
They’re just very adept at putting them all together. Before you know it, the media’s popping out their eyes at these ingenious “innovations” out of Apple and before long everyone thinks Apple invented the mouse, GUI, SCSI, all-in-one computer, glossy screen, etc.
Bill // October 7, 2007 at 3:19 pm
Beanie, I watched a few parts of Pirates of Silicon Valley while channel surfing. My impression from the movie was that nothing was copied from Xerox, because it was just stolen. I think that there is a big difference. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I am just going on the movie. Wasn’t Steve given the GUI/mouse interface, then adopted it into Apple’s hardware? That’s what the movie suggested. The movie also suggested that Microsoft did the same thing with Windows, as they were given an Apple prototype.
acriste // October 8, 2007 at 3:24 am
Bill,
Apple allowed Xerox to purchase some of their stock and in exchange Xerox invited Steve Jobs and some of his staff to their research lab where they showed off a computer with a graphical user interface and a mouse. Steve Jobs had an “aha!” moment when he saw that and when they went back to Apple headquarters he had his crew working on their own GUI based on what they saw at the Xerox lab. From what I understand, Xerox had no plan to market what their research team had developed. Apple eventually hired maybe one or more of the Xerox engineers to work on their own GUI, which eventually became the original Mac OS. Microsoft got to see the Mac and its OS before it debuted because Apple hired them to develope software, mainly Microsoft Word. They promptly copied the Mac GUI and called it Windows. But if you really want to get the full story, there are several books out there that will give you a more accurate depiction of the events. One really good book is Apple Confidential by Owen W. Linzmayer. Also, Revolution in the Valley by Andy Hertzfeld. I’d also recommend iCon [Steve Jobs The Greatest Second Act in the History of Business] by Jeffrey S. Young and William L. Simon.
On the web check out http://folklore.org/index.py
A // October 8, 2007 at 10:48 am
The LG Prada undoubtedly came out before the iPhone. I don’t think we can have any argument there. The LG Voyager is certainly based on that product (the Prada). This is not meant to say that Apple “copied” the Prada, which they of course did not. It is not easy to copy something within such a short period of time.
However, the poster of this article seems to believe that Verizon and LG copied Apple. I don’t think we can deny some of the similarities, as there are only so many ways that a touch screen phone can be made. Since the Voyager is based off the Prada and enV, it is quite ingenuous to say that LG and Verizon are copying Apple. Besides, the Voyager will work on a superior high speed network, replaceable battery (with high cap available), expandable, interchangeable memory, MMS, stereo bluetooth, and a physical QWERTY keyboard.
Now that is not to say that the iPhone doesn’t have some salient points. Higher resolution screen, the multitouch interface is quite compelling, and I have no doubt that the mobile Safari browser will work much better than the as yet tested HTML browser in the Voyager.
In either case, talking about the merits/demerits of a device that is not out yet is somewhat moot, and avoid making any final conclusions.
why market leader copycats rarely ever succeed « Brand Aid // October 8, 2007 at 2:46 pm
[...] Great post here by way of Brand Flakes. Explains perfectly why products & services that do nothing more than copycat the market leader (i.e. “me-too products & services”
rarely ever succeed. [...]
Should Apple Encourage Copycats? // October 8, 2007 at 3:08 pm
[...] One of the greatest things about Apple products is that they are unique in design and function. The first Apple desk top that I worked on was in college and I instantly fell in love with the software. Imagine my shock a few years later when the IBM compatible computer at work was running a similar program. It seems that everyone wants to copy Apple. [...]
michaelsanford // October 25, 2007 at 1:04 am
“But really it’s just a desperate desire to be like Apple, without even a smidgen of understanding of the culture code that makes $Apple_product work.”
Leave a Comment