Just an illusion - the iPhone hype machine
On the walk from Oxford Circus tube station to the Computing office in London’s Soho, there is a Carphone Warehouse shop. It is normally unremarkable – except today at 9am there was a queue of (mainly male) people outside, apparently eager to be the first to buy the new 3G iPhone, out today.
Well, you might have thought, there’s a popular product. The last times there were queues in Oxford Street were for the opening of a new Primark store and the latest Harry Potter book.
But in this case, there also happened to be a camera crew set up outside the phone shop to film the queue. And another camera crew inside, no doubt waiting to film the “rush” of punters to get their hands on an iPhone.
Hmm. In-demand, or very carefully stage managed? I think the latter.
Apple, O2 and Carphone Warehouse have done a great PR job on the new phone – creating the illusion of massive demand regardless of how many units they will ship.
Newspaper stories this morning claimed that supply was limited to one iPhone per customer, or two per business. Given the big bucks Apple is chasing by establishing the product as an genuine corporate alternative to the BlackBerry, this is hardly likely to be the case.
Imagine the conversation: “Hi Apple, I’m the IT manager at [insert global multinational company]. I’d like to buy 10,000 iPhones please.”
“Sorry Mr Global Multinational. You can only have two.”
Yeah, right.
It’s become classic consumer electronics marketing – create a buzz around a product by making people think everyone is desperate to own one.
In the case of the new iPhone, it probably needs the buzz. After all, the great new features of the second-generation product include 3G connectivity for faster web surfing – already available in, erm, every other product on the market. And an online store of 900 ready-to-download consumer and business applications to help make your smartphone more functional.
Or you could buy a Symbian-based phone and download any of the 9,000-plus applications already developed for that platform.
Oh, and the iPhone costs a bomb.
Perhaps I’ve been in this game too long and the cynicism has set in after seeing too many product launches, but if anything is more likely to turn me off the iPhone – already the most over-hyped technology product in history – it’s the stage-managed artifice surrounding a me-too, catch-up phone.
iPhone costs a bomb? It's free! What do you want, them to pay you to take it??
Posted by: Stephen | Friday, 11 July 2008 at 12:32 PM
On the face of it iphone does seem like a rip off. But once you have used Safari on the iphone you cant go back. The touch keypad initally takes getting used to but its auto correction really works!
Posted by: Bob alob | Friday, 11 July 2008 at 12:47 PM
I am sorry but this entry is twaddle. You don't seem to understand the appeal of the iPhone, I would doubt if you have ever used one. Firstly, Apple is around 10+ years behind all the other manufacturers so creating a phone fully featured is quite a feat.
Secondly, sure you get a Symbian, Nokia or whatever-your-think-of phone but they don't have the easy of use or the simplicity of the iPhone. Syncing with iTunes is easy and works every time. The applications are fully vetted and tested by Apple, so only the cream of the crop get through.
I'm not disagreeing that the PR for this event has been stage managed - it has been managed very well - but they have a good product to back it up. For discerning customers who want something easier, more friendly and better looking than a BlackBerry, the iPhone is finally ready.
Posted by: Sebastian Payne | Friday, 11 July 2008 at 12:51 PM
When the functionality of an object is already replicated on the market, the only way to sell it is image. Unfortunately fashion will change and in 6 months time, which means all the iPhone owners will have to wait 5 years before the phones are retro. . . and cool enough to use again.
http://virtuphill.blogspot.com/2008/07/emperors-new-clothes.html
iPhone has become pokemon for adults.
Posted by: phil_style | Friday, 11 July 2008 at 12:53 PM
when was the last time a large corporate walked into a store to order phones??? All your arguments are rediculously biased as all you want to write is an anti iPhone article. Being in the game to long should help you write a balanced article realising the goal apple is striving for rather than suggest that a symbian based phone is better because it has more apps available
Why bother...
Posted by: Bolton | Friday, 11 July 2008 at 01:09 PM
So how does marketing theory work with the Wii Fit? Cant even buy one from anywhere apart from the Amazon crowd for £130????
Posted by: Craig | Friday, 11 July 2008 at 01:13 PM
iPhone has become pokemon for adults. Love it!
I have a 1st gen I phone.
Its slow to browse the internet
It cant send mms
It cant forward SMS's
It cant record video
Its camera is pants
Its Bluetooth doesnt work with virtually anything
It doesnt have cut and paste
It doesnt have flash
BUT it is by far the best phone ive ever had and the first truely useable convergence device i've ever seen. I absoulty love it and im going to upgrade when i can get my hands on a 3(.5)G version.
Posted by: Roger | Friday, 11 July 2008 at 01:29 PM
i think Nokia N95 is much better. wonderful browsing enough screen for viewing/surfing.I thhink one should not go for a contract buy the phone with cash. Contract costs much than usal phone price.
Posted by: zenab | Friday, 11 July 2008 at 01:45 PM
Thanks to everyone for their comments – very interesting feedback. A few of you have challenged me to respond, so I’ll pick up on your comments:
“The iPhone is free” suggests Stephen. Erm, only if you pay £75 per month for a minimum of 18 months – that works out at £1350 by my calculations. You can buy a similarly-featured phone for significantly less, it just doesn’t have an Apple badge on it.
Sebastian turns the lateness of the key iPhone features into a benefit when he says:
“Apple is around 10+ years behind all the other manufacturers so creating a phone fully featured is quite a feat.”
Isn’t that the argument that Apple fans usually make to show how much better the Mac is than a Windows PC – that Windows is a catch-up, follow-me product always beaten to the punch by Apple?
You’re right – Macs are more innovative than Windows PCs. If the iPhone has as much commercial success in its market as Windows has in PCs, then which argument wins?
And Bolton encourages me to “realise the goal Apple is striving for.” I think we all realise that – the megabucks that comes from pitching a fairly standard product with a few whizzy features at a premium price.
Apple’s marketing is genius – creating a buzz around the iPhone the way it did with the iPod is the only way to break into the notoriously competitive mobile phone market.
If you want to pay the premium, then enjoy the product. I’m not anti-Apple - I’m not pro- or anti-anyone - but I prefer to look beyond the hype.
Posted by: Bryan Glick | Friday, 11 July 2008 at 03:20 PM
Bryan,
Apple is a fantastic marketing company. John Scully (ex-CEO of Appl) said that "Apple is quoted as being the best technology company of the decade, it was the best marketing company of the decade". Obviously, this illustrated many of the problems Apple had in the early 90s.
I think comparing the Apple's iPhone catchup to Windows is a bit unfair. Windows came along 12 months after the original Macintosh, whereas the iPhone has come along around five years after the first smartphones and twenty years after the first telephones. Also, the iPhone involved a new architecture and new device for the company whereas Windows was just another piece of software for Microsoft (at that time).
Most commerical buys have stayed off the iPhone and left the first generation for early adopters. All the signs show that Apple has got itself in gear and higher rates of adoption for the phone should proceed.
Posted by: Sebastian Payen | Friday, 11 July 2008 at 04:45 PM
You can't back up you're argument by just restating your original article without expanding. I think you are missing the point if you think the iPhone just has a few whizzy features. The ideal I was alluding to was a completely synch'd up world where all of my devices talk to each other and share data without a manual process each time. Properly designed applications that are intuitive and encourage use by being easy to use. My Blackberry doesn't do this for sure. How will I sync the music, calendar, email, contacts etc on my blackberry, pc, laptop?? I can't all in one place.
Phones shouldn't be rated based on brand new features - concentrating on the features it has and making the best device possible counts for a lot in my world. Companies such as RIM, Nokia etc have only started adding polish to their products since the iPhone so even if you don't appreciate the iPhone, you must appreciate the effect that it has had on the competition and their products
You say that you like to look past the hype but you are caught up in the hype more than any of us. If you weren't so irritated by 'hype' you would see that the product is a very well designed product that is worth paying a premium for (cheapest contract is £45 with a free phone btw). Your arguments are all based on an over emotional response against a product that is marketed based on design, creativity and usability rather than X new features.
I'm not a Mac fan by any standards (I only own an iPod that I don't use any more) but I can't stand journalism that shows a lack of empathy for the product involved. A lot of people try to appear more intelligent by going against the grain but that generally backfires as is the case here.
Exactly how are Mac's more innovative than Windows PC's?? Don't drop in a suck up statement just to try and keep the peace.
Also, please just confirm whether you have used one for a significant amount of time or not :)
Posted by: Bolton | Friday, 11 July 2008 at 04:47 PM
Hi Sebastian, hi Bolton,
Thanks for your further comments.
Sebastian – you’re spot on to say that Apple has got itself in gear now, and I agree that this is much more likely to be the company’s breakthrough product in the mobile / smartphone market than the original incarnation. But business buyers – IT managers and their peers – will ask much harder questions of the phone and its capabilities than consumers. Their needs for service, support and interconnectivity are quite different – and for me, this will be a big factor in whether or not the iPhone achieves its commercial potential.
Bolton – if an argument is worth making, it’s worth making again! But the world you describe – of true integration – is certainly the Holy Grail of the mobile world, and the lack of this has been the biggest barrier to full business adoption of the technology.
I’m not quite convinced the iPhone is all the way there yet – but you are right to say that Apple has made seamless integration a bigger issue for its rivals.
I don’t disagree either that the iPhone is a well designed product – but I’m afraid you won’t convince me yet that the premium is worth paying. You can still find well-designed, creative, usable mobile phones for less.
And I can’t show empathy for a product if I have no empathy for it – that has nothing to do with my journalism or intelligence. My job is to ignore the marketing and make an unemotional judgement about what is behind it, and my personal judgement is that this is a good product that will be successful, but is not groundbreaking. You are, of course, entitled to disagree with me on that.
On Macs – I think most people would agree that the Mac has, over the years, been a more innovative product than Windows PCs. Microsoft is a fast-follower, not an innovator. Steve Jobs is a great marketeer, but a genuine innovator too.
And this may please you most of all – no, I’ve not used an iPhone for any significant amount of time. But there is a good reason for that – I’ve seen nothing in it that makes me want to switch from what I already have.
Posted by: Bryan Glick | Friday, 11 July 2008 at 05:29 PM
I myself never used any Mac product and Im more into Nokia and Blackberry, so far they satisfy all my needs. You said you wouldnt change what you already have to anything? Can I ask what do you use?
Posted by: Mr T | Friday, 18 July 2008 at 02:09 PM
I think it all comes down to this.. if the iPhone was made by anyone else other than Apple (let's say "Senco"..) it would have failed.
A non 3G phone behind all the competition? Sure it "looks good" but isn't that the market that LG have been tapping for years?
There are skeptics who believe anything that Apple announces immediately receives huge interest there's come a point where we must begin to question if sometimes it's entirely justified.
I know only 1 person who has an iPhone and he said it was "ok".. as he struggled to tap in my number using the fancy touch screen before eventually telling me his so I would ring him and he could save it later.
The Nokia N95 and N82 are superior phones feature wise and cost significantly less, the only justifying the iPhone argument I've heard to date is "the iPhone is pretty".
Try and find a bad review of an iPhone.
Posted by: Matthew Roberts | Friday, 18 July 2008 at 10:14 PM