News & views
Blog /
10 November 2008/
Apple’s not-so-secret branding advantage
by Seth Weintraub at 5:56 pm 10 November 2008
Filed under: Branding
Apple's product naming is easy to love
Apple’s recent success in the technology market is, of course, the result of several factors. The solid hardware, the meticulously maintained and simplified software, and a fantastic retail show from the store floor to the unboxing of its products. They have a total user experience that no one has yet been able to touch.
Something that isn’t talked about much, however, is quite basic: Apple’s product naming strategy. No other company puts as much effort into distilling and simplifying their product naming.
You’ll even notice that when referring to their gadgets, Steve Jobs and other Apple employees refer to them as “iPod” or “iPhone”, not “the iPod” or “the iPhone”. Taking out the definite article anthropomorphizes these products, likening them to a friend or pet.
Because of this, it’s easy to get your head around Apple’s array of products. Just four basic product lines – Macintosh, iPod, iPhone and AppleTV – and not much else besides a few accessories, software and services that Apple sells.
For iPhone and AppleTV, that’s all you need to know. The only other classification information for these two product lines is the memory space. iPhone 8GB, 16GB. AppleTV 40/160GB. Easy.
For iPods and Macs, there are a few more variables. But nowhere will you find confusing model numbers in the product lines.
When Steve Jobs returned to Apple in 1996, he slashed everything that wasn’t profitable and moving forward, simplified the Apple lineup. Gone were the many different clones, the Power Macintosh 8500/180s, the Newton MessagePad 2100/Emate 300 and the Powerbook 1400, 2400 and 3400.
In came the PowerMac G3, the iMac, the Powerbook G3 and then later the iBook, MacPros, MacBooks and MacMini. iPods are no different: Shuffle, Nano, Classic, Touch; no numbers, just names.
Contrast this with Nokia, which sells its solid N-series phone lineup from N70 to N96. Ask all but the most hardened geek what differentiates each one and you’ll get little more than a confused expression. How about the Toshiba G900 or the Samsung F700? – both great phones with forgettable names. It’s hard to have a relationship with an anonymous number.
How about a network product from Linksys or Dlink? My NAS is a Dlink DNS-323 but it doesn’t do domain naming. I love the Linksys WRT54G router line for its hacktasticness, but it’s hard to even identify. The software I use to run it is called DD-WRT. Is that, wert?
Apple calls its wireless product Airport. It has for years. When it adds more features like a Gigabit Ethernet hub and USB hard drive support, it becomes Airport Extreme (I know “extreme” is oh so tired – but stick with me here). The smaller, portable model? Airport Express. Non-techies can get this.
Or how about PC Manufacturers like Dell, HP and Sony, which offer models like the VGN-PR2 or the XPS 420. It’s hard to endear yourself to an XPS-420 unless your name is R2-D2 or C3PO.
Certain other tech companies have had success with real names. The LG Chocolate. The Samsung Blackjack. Motorola’s RAZR, KRZR, etc. But these are the exception rather than the rule.
With the success that Apple has had with its simplified naming strategy, it is a wonder that more technology companies aren’t copying such an obvious success and persist in confusing and alienating their customers.
As an Apple fan I cannot but agree with you here Seth. But for the sake of argument I dare say that this is not necessarily THE approach.
Indeed Nokia has an impossible to remember product naming system, but it’s surely on purpose. Nokia users are precisely that, Nokia users. They might have a preference for the 5110 or the N8970, but they’re not loyal to the phone, a mere device, but to its provider. And oh, are they loyal!
For a company that produces more mobiles a year one could imagine it’s impossible to build on emotional names coherently. Their strategy has been to arrange their mobile production in 4 clusters – 1) business, for pros 2) innovation, for techies 3) connection, for basic users and 4 )style, for fashionistas – and develop a pile of number series for each.
… the battle has started, who will win?
Comment by Luz Erhardt — 11/11/2008 @ 3:58 pm
Ooh. Big type…
One difference between Apple and the “other guys” you talk about is that Apple limits features on their devices.
Consider a recent example: If you want a MacBook with a FireWire port, you’re out of luck. Buying a Macintosh is usually about trade-offs. “Do I really need FireWire so much that I’ll spend another $400-$700?” You usually have to settle one way or another (eg, buy a more expensive machine or go without something you want). Because, let’s face it, what are you gonna do? Go buy a Windows machine?!
The Windows world, of course, is much different. Margins are lower and volume is king. Dell can’t afford to have a customer even consider buying an HP machine. Dell must offer a solution for everything you would need. That means they have to offer far more choices in order to compete. So Dell doesn’t really get the luxury of using cute and clever names that the customer can relate to because their product catalog would look like a Webster’s Dictionary.
Comment by Peter — 11/11/2008 @ 6:50 pm
This is so true, Apple Inc has a brutally simple brand philosophy and experience that extends from its products through to its advertising, logo type, store design (e.g. the cube store in NYC), and even its website. Apple Inc’s website homepage is so simplified it just has one big center picture and ‘learn more’ links. Apple’s philosophy is: ‘highly advanced technology that is simple to use and that just works’.
P.S. Who designed Saffron Consultant’s website? It is rather interesting, especially for a brand consultancy!
Comment by Aaron Vaughn — 11/13/2008 @ 3:56 am
To comment on Nokia , the naming they use is not really brand strategy driven, but more engineering and requirement driven. There approach is not on purpose. it’s a complete mess and they know it. They struggle with this internally and cannot come up with anything else at the moment. I know this from working directly for them and dealing with these issues in the retails stores they launched. The four clusters Luz speaks of were reworked recently and are now 1. Business 2. Multi-media 3. Originals 4. Lifestyles. These were developed by our very own Jeannie and Eric while they continued to work for Nokia at Eight Inc. To get them to do this change was a painfully long process apparently as it needed to go through many approvals etc, etc. People are loyal because it’s a good product, not because they like the naming. If they were to have a more likable naming convention i would venture to say the loyal customer would become even more loyal.
Comment by MIke Abbink — 11/13/2008 @ 5:17 pm
Apple´s naming strategy just grabs people by the throat whereas Nokia´s naming strategy is not as cool.
Names should become more human. They have to. Not just to secure trademarks and domain name registration but to compete against other products that already have adopted bold names, like Apple.
People want to understand and relate to product brands and Nokia´s naming strategy is seen by consumers to be cold, and difficult to remember.
But how do you name a portfolio of over 60 different phone models?
Comment by Kevin Forssmann — 11/18/2008 @ 8:14 am
Very informative post no doubt. A great blog overall. Will be back soon. Keep up the good work.
Comment by Ipod Touch 32GB — 6/25/2009 @ 12:27 am