Monday, December 30, 2013

The best doesn't always win.

I was talking with GalPal's dad over the holiday and the conversation steered towards Apple and their triumph over other brands through smart marketing and slowly positioning themselves as the cool brand everyone has to have. He mused that now Apple's reached this apex they were in danger of turning into Microsoft as far as constant upgrades to software—not all of them welcome—and a general trend to keep you tethered within their system. And, he noticed, it all tied back to Apple's slow but steadily successful marketing push. At this point is it even fair to say Apple is "better" than their competitors? Or has their system become so ingrained in the general media consciousness that they just win by default?*

I didn't get a chance to say it at the time but it also really reminded me that this paradigm is as old as Tesla versus Edison: the superior product doesn't always win but the best sales pitch always does. In Apple's case I think at one point they actually had both those factors working for them, which is why they ended up beating the Goliath's that surrounded them, but I'm beginning to think that over time David's feet have slowly turned into clay.**

*If you question this remember that if you are reading this you are probably someone that runs in the same general demographic, at least technologically, that I do and that our perception about what is "universal" is heavily skewed and not at all in touch with what the general populace is probably using or aware of.

**Mix those metaphors!

No comments: