Design Element
Comment on "iPod Shuffle and Zune Ads Compared"
by Mantra — Nov 23
From a orthodox marketing perspective, the Apple focus on the product is more "correct". Plenty of ads for too many products forget the purpose of advertising is to establish the product and its brand in peoples' minds. To do that you must, at minimum, keep the product front and center and <b>then</b> hope to get the brand benefits across.

The Microsoft ads are starting with the benefits and then slipping in the product. Big mistake, because it's too easy to identify with the benefit and then forget what the ad for for - we've all seen "artsy" ads on TV that leave you with the question: "now what was that advertisement for? I have no idea!"

Compounding this are two bigger problems: 1) what to early adopters see as valuable, and 2) is the brand promise of "the social" going to be delivered on or be perceived to be deliverable? The entire concept of social WiFi mp3 players is bleeding edge in terms of technology adoption. That means the "mainstream" mid-to-late adopters pictured in the ad are <b>not</b> the people who this ad must reach or sell. Next, we already know from these early adopters analysis and publication on the web that "the social" isn't because the Zune has a fatally flawed design due to spineless kow-towing by-committe to media IP control freaks - thus the ads are <i><b>Anti-Branding</b></i> the Zune by promising something that ultimately can't and won't be delivered if you buy the product.

Base on past historical examples of both company's marketing, none of this is very surprising.
Back to "iPod Shuffle and Zune Ads Compared"
Design Element

Copyright © Scott Stevenson 2004-2015