The problem with current tech is it's obsessed with efficiency for things that aren't enhanced by "efficiency". Creating is a wonderfully human act -- at times tedious and frustrating and sublime and satisfying. It needs time and space and patience. We tend to associate the tools with the process, so our love for creating rubs off a little on your guitar or keyboard or pen or desk or whatever. It's an emotional connection.
Implying we can make that better via replacement with an iPad just doesn't get the joy or creating the way earlier Apple ads ("Think Different") did. The iPad is a new tool to add to the toolbox, not the one tool to replace them all.
It's telling that this does mirror the desktop meme, which focuses more on office work, where cost and efficiency rule. That's the wrong vibe for creative endeavors, though.
But the apology doesn't seem to be located anywhere else. A Reuters story about the Ad Age story has this: "An Apple spokesperson declined to comment but directed inquiries to the Ad Age report."
Meanwhile, Tim Cook's twitter account still has the original tweet about the ad up, but has no apology https://twitter.com/tim_cook
Another great piece of analysis here, Andrew. So spot-on. It seems to me that there have been a lot of jaw-dropingly off-base ads as of late. The recent series of smug, insulting Metrolinx ads come to mind. I thought these companies and government agencies tested early versions of ads in focus groups and surveys before choosing and fine-tuning the right one, but methinks that many organizations have cut back on spending on such checks/cheques. Because - really - I can't see the Metrolinx ads or this Apple ad performing well amongst a room of 10-20 people (or a survey of 1,000s). They are just so obviously bad. And that raises the other question: How did executives at these companies, at the ad agencies... there must have been at least 50 sets of eyes that saw these ads during the design and creation stages... how did they ever think these were good, right, and effective? Has everyone just gotten bad at their jobs? Are the senior execs truly engaged on this stuff or just partially blindly giving the thumbs up? Has everyone become afraid to question senior execs? It is baffling.
The problem with current tech is it's obsessed with efficiency for things that aren't enhanced by "efficiency". Creating is a wonderfully human act -- at times tedious and frustrating and sublime and satisfying. It needs time and space and patience. We tend to associate the tools with the process, so our love for creating rubs off a little on your guitar or keyboard or pen or desk or whatever. It's an emotional connection.
Implying we can make that better via replacement with an iPad just doesn't get the joy or creating the way earlier Apple ads ("Think Different") did. The iPad is a new tool to add to the toolbox, not the one tool to replace them all.
It's telling that this does mirror the desktop meme, which focuses more on office work, where cost and efficiency rule. That's the wrong vibe for creative endeavors, though.
Whoever greenlit that ad should be launched into the Sun... with that ad on repeat ::>_<::
It really is amazing
yes, after all, the iPod (music) saved Apple, lets not forget...
So this is odd. Ad Age is reporting that Apple has apologized for the ad. It's a gated story though: https://adage.com/article/digital-marketing-ad-tech-news/apple-apologizes-ipad-pro-crushed-ad-it-missed-mark/2559321
But the apology doesn't seem to be located anywhere else. A Reuters story about the Ad Age story has this: "An Apple spokesperson declined to comment but directed inquiries to the Ad Age report."
Meanwhile, Tim Cook's twitter account still has the original tweet about the ad up, but has no apology https://twitter.com/tim_cook
What kind of corporate comms this this?
Another great piece of analysis here, Andrew. So spot-on. It seems to me that there have been a lot of jaw-dropingly off-base ads as of late. The recent series of smug, insulting Metrolinx ads come to mind. I thought these companies and government agencies tested early versions of ads in focus groups and surveys before choosing and fine-tuning the right one, but methinks that many organizations have cut back on spending on such checks/cheques. Because - really - I can't see the Metrolinx ads or this Apple ad performing well amongst a room of 10-20 people (or a survey of 1,000s). They are just so obviously bad. And that raises the other question: How did executives at these companies, at the ad agencies... there must have been at least 50 sets of eyes that saw these ads during the design and creation stages... how did they ever think these were good, right, and effective? Has everyone just gotten bad at their jobs? Are the senior execs truly engaged on this stuff or just partially blindly giving the thumbs up? Has everyone become afraid to question senior execs? It is baffling.