Chances are that when you read the title to this post, you thought of Apple. Am I right?
Seth Godin has this to say about naming a product, and it all makes complete sense. But I don’t totally agree. And the fact that you thought of your Mac or your iPod or your iPhone after reading my title only proves it.
Godin argues that Apple could have done a better job at naming their product. I disagree. They have so significantly and successfully branded the letter “i” (even if it’s not a legal trademark) that just seeing it makes you think Apple. And that’s essentially what branding is, yes?
Sure, other companies are taking advantage of it. There’s the iHome, and iSound, and iBlock, and even iBlog. All of whom are obviously taking complete and unwarranted advantage of Apple’s work and success. But I guarantee you these companies are not enjoying the fruits of their labor, in the long run, like Apple is.
Because you thought of Apple every time you read one of their names. It’s branding at it’s finest.
————–
Subscribe now to MarketingInProgress.com by email or RSS feed.
You’ll automatically be notified whenever something new is posted.
———-
This article was originally posted at http://www.marketinginprogress.com.
Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.
How dare you question the great Seth Godin! You will never work again.
Bauer
Your point is well taken. Mine was a little simpler: if you’re going to spend millions and have all these flaks working on trademarks for you, might as well pick something that doesn’t leak.
Who said I was working now? Don’t you have some websites to go call out. “We’re running out of time, Chloe!”
Couldn’t agree with you more.
The fact that other companies are using the “i” moniker proves the strength of the brand and the power of a naming architecture.
And to tell you the truth, I couldn’t follow Seth’s criticism of the names Newton and Powerbook. Should everything Apple puts out conform to a single naming convention/architecture?
iCouv couldn’t agree more. keep it up brett.
p.s. what was the on the cheese factor? 12 out of 10?
I agree with you, despite the declaration of the great Yoda-Seth. Here’s a podcast about sensory branding from the Times Online: http://tinyurl.com/3dxgxq. Martin Lindstrom explains that with the lowercase “i”, Apple has created a “smashable” brand–meaning that people know exactly what to expect…even from a single letter.
Sorry, that last link didn’t work. Here it is: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/audio_video/podcasts/mba/
RShevlin – Yeah, I had a little difficulty following along. It’s nice to have a very organized nomenclature, but more times than not, we evolve, our product offerings evolve, the company evolves. So, the naming approach evolves, too. I’m not saying I don’t see his point – Cadillac and Impala are very distinct – but it seems to have a few holes in it.
Couv – 14 on the iCheesy scale.
Michael – Thanks for the podcast – I’ll listen to it soon.
I need an assistant to constantly search sites that are cheating for me. Brett? since you aren’t working…come on.
Seth – sorry for the delayed comment appearance, got hung up in my filter, for some reason.
You’re right – perfect world, you want the ownership of the letter AND the complete rights to it. Which is all theoretical, cuz it could never happen. And I really, really doubt that the branding I’m talking about was all part of Apple’s plan from the beginning. Just a pleasant surprise, I guess. I could use one like that.
Thanks for the comment, though – I’m flattered. ‘The Dip’ had a direct impact on my recent job change, so thanks for the clarity there.
Moth1 – You don’t pay enough.