It’s 2013 and iPad has revolutionized the world. Yes really.

Yes we know iPad is not a “do it all device” as it was expected to be. Yes we know it won’t render flash, like iPhone iPad won’t run applications in the background and we know it doesn’t have a video camera, still camera or a webcam. We also know that iPhone users are not fond of AT&T and the only alternative T-Mobile is even worse in terms of coverage. And most likely iPad will have the same choices in terms of their 3G network. We also know that iPad was dressed with an old-school 4:3 screen aspect ratio which is a bit peculiar by today’s standards especially when it comes to watching widescreen movies (I suppose Apple wants iPad users to use the device in portrait mode for the most part.) So we clearly know what iPad is not.  However, what we also know is that iPad has revolutionized the way world will operate going forward and here is why.

Imagine entering your house where you see couple of iPads laying around on a coffee table just like books. These iPads are not owned by anyone but are available for common use. You see an iPad in the kitchen streaming Food Network. You see an iPad on your nightstand for some casual light browsing before you catch your zzzz and as revolting as it maybe, you even see an iPad in your bathroom instead of a magazine rack where you can take care of your business and read the latest and greatest instantly.  This reality may not sound affordable now at $2000 for 4 low-end iPads but it’s a pretty convincing scenario for 2013.

Steve Jobs is a visionary. Sometimes his instant judgment shocks people but he has the ability to plan things out, spot upcoming challenges, craft solutions, and see how his concepts and ideas will work years from now. iPad may not be much right now but we believe a lot of its revolutionary characteristics lie in how it’s being marketed and its price points. What does that really mean?

Let’s take a look at how the pricing can shift an entire industry. Entry level cost of the new iPad is $499. The high end iPad is priced at $829 which for the sake of this article is not relevant. As bare as iPad is, the evidence is persuasive that the price of the iPad makes it unsettling for competitors to offer something with the Apple quality and within the same price range.

Like most manufacturers and historically speaking, Apple has always reduced the costs of its products after couple of years. In September 2007, Steve Jobs cut the costs of new iPhone to $399, a $200 discount off the initial launch price. The news of a 33 percent drop in the iPhone’s price rose Apple’s market share to another gazillion dollars and the total number of iPhones sold rose to over 42 million (according to Apple’s Q1 Report published this year.)

This means, in 2012 the low-end iPad could potentially sell for $399 and in 2013 it will be selling for $199.  At $199, iPad becomes incredible affordable, accessible and revolutionary. People will buy them as casually as they buy iPods and other low-cost devices. As Apple says, “With iPad, you get all our latest innovations. And all our most advanced technologies. In one of the most revolutionary products we’ve ever created. All at a price that’s well within reach.” And although that may not sync in with consumers right now, it will make perfect sense in couple of years. Are you ready for an iPadded house? Please comment below or to read this article on Examiner, click here

Posted: February 2nd, 2010 under Apple, Books, Product Marketing, Technology - No Comments. Tags: Apple, ipad, mac, tablet

Abracadabra! iPad is a winner even if it looks like a loser and here is why …

So the iPad is out. People are analyzing it from every angle. Some are wondering about if this is going to be as big as iPhone or iPod and if not, is this going to be Apple’s biggest failure? Most of the people who are putting iPad under a microscope are not marketers and marketing is one thing Apple has mastered over its 30+ year history. We all know marketing is incredibly vital for any organization but why does it play even a more momentous role for Apple? Because it makes Apple look captivating to the rest of the world. If you look in a dictionary, magical is defined as “produced or as if by magic” or “mysteriously enchanting” and that’s what Apple’s marketing team has done successfully over and over again. They have made their products “mysteriously enchanting” because Steve Jobs sees himself as a magician who is in the business of selling magic.

There is another thing Apple has done successfully. Apple has done revolutionary things in a revolutionary fashion whether it was the invention of iPod that clearly shook up the music industry, or iPhone which no one has been able to come close to in terms of usability and functionality. With iPad, Apple just destroyed every digital frame manufacturer and every e-reader in the market including Kindle, the most popular e-reader until yesterday and combination of magic and revolution is almost impossible to beat.

Technology experts are already talking about, how are they going to sell this iPad thing? The answer clearly lies in what Jobs said yesterday “The iPad is the most ‘magical’ device ever” or how Apple has positioned iPad: “Our most advanced technology in a magical and revolutionary device at an unbelievable price.”  That positioning statement alone will sell millions of iPads because who wouldn’t want the most advanced technology in a magical and revolutionary device at an unbelievable price? Some technology experts are mad because iPad is not a real computer or it doesn’t do this or that or maybe because it’s simply a puffed up iPod touch. This is primarily because tech guys, geeks and nerds don’t know much about advertising and marketing. Apple understands the importance, impact and magnitude of magic and revolution and that’s something techies don’t understand (unless of course they are playing WOW or watching Star Wars.)

Some may argue that because Apple is 45 billion dollar rich, can hire the best industrial designers, and charge an arm and leg for their products, they can do anything; but I ask, why couldn’t the richest man in the world i.e. Bill Gates produce the same results with PC? It’s important to understand this because Bill Gates is a techie and not a magician. Every PC advertisement comes out with a list of technical features; you will get 999 GB HD; you will get XYZ Processor; you will get ABC Memory but when Apple sells it’s magic it shows how an Apple app can make your life easier. How you can find your lost car in a parking lot or how you can user first aid if you are hurt or how you can use Skype on your iPhone to make international calls for free! Or how you can do anything and everything you need to do with one little device, ready to go out of the box. That’s the magic that Apple sells and this is the reason why iPad is going to be a huge success in days to come. What do you think?

Posted: January 28th, 2010 under Apple, Product Marketing - No Comments. Tags: Apple, ipad, magic, marketing, steve jobs, tablet

iPad is the most “unmagical” name ever

Today is the day Apple fans have been waiting for; for the past eight months. iPad has finally arrived. Over the course of the past eight months we have heard many variations of the name; iSlate, iTablet, iCanvas and one magazine actually called it iDream which we thought was too dreamy for Apple.
Announcing the iPad tablet today, Steve Jobs said, “The iPad Is The Most “Magical” Device Ever.” To Apple’s credit, starting at $499, it’s cheaper than we thought, which will drive adoption quickly but because Jobs didnt show off any must-have features people are not nearly as impressed as they were with iPhone or iPod. So what is the iPad? It’s a big iPhone that can run iPhone apps, iPad apps, iTunes media, iBook books, and the Web. At this price and feature set, it will compete with netbooks from the likes of Acer, HP and Dell, perhaps with the Amazon Kindle, Barnes and Nobles Nook, Sony and other e-readers, and low-end MacBooks.

Apple always does a phenomenal job with marketing and adoption however this time around, they have clearly missed the boat. iPad is the most “unmagical” name ever. Infact, iPad is a horrible name. In a recent Twitter trending and online blogs, majority of the people have preferred iCanvas and iSlate over iPad because:

1) iPad sounds too much like iPod (If you are from Boston, good luck)

2) iPad doesnt have any mystery to it as iPod did or iPhone did

3) To female followers, it doesnt sound very classy

Twitter is already going crazy over the iPad name primarily because some female followers are actually offended by it. Think about it. Females. Pads. Still wondering why? well because hundreds of jokes are surfacing every minute and it’s becoming a fast trend on Twitter; @davidhoang tweeted “The iPad will be available in roughly 2.5 menstrual cycles.”

What do you think about the name iPad? Do you prefer iSlate or iCanvas over it? Comment below!

Posted: January 27th, 2010 under Apple, Business, Online Marketing, Product Marketing - No Comments. Tags: Apple, ipad, kindle, steve jobs, tablet

Google threatens to leave China. Who is losing this battle?

After three years of launching Google.cn in 2006, Google has decided to get out of China in the name of free speech. Google has made this decision after it learned of numerous security attacks and attempts to gain access to the Gmail accounts of Chinese human rights activists. First, this attack was not just on Google. As part of their investigation Google discovered that at least twenty other large companies from a wide range of businesses–including the Internet, finance, technology, media and chemical sectors–have been similarly targeted.

This is a challenging time for Google as it has several hundred employees in China yet Google lags far behind the Chinese search engine Baidu. By quickly deciding to abandon their Chinese operation, Google might be taking a huge risk that will have potentially far-reaching consequences.

According the Google’s official blog, David Drummond, SVP, Corporate Development and Chief Legal Officer for Google wrote “We have decided we are no longer willing to continue censoring our results on Google.cn, and so over the next few weeks we will be discussing with the Chinese government the basis on which we could operate an unfiltered search engine within the law, if at all. We recognize that this may well mean having to shut down Google.cn, and potentially our offices in China.”

In an interview posted by NY Times, Drummond said that Google’s revenue in China was “immaterial.” But he acknowledged that Google could eventually miss an opportunity presented by a booming Internet market. “I suppose there is a risk there if it becomes a major market. We are not going to make a financially based decision to stay in a market that is intolerable for us,” he said.

According to Business Insider, Google’s business in China is not huge, but it could drive future growth, especially if Google were to gain more traction in the country. For context, Google’s search share in China is around 15%-20%, much lower than leader Baidu, which is around 75%-80%.

Baidu shares are up 2.33% after hours to $395.50, while Google shares are down 1.6% to $581.01.

Do you think Google will have any influence on Chinese government or their policies or will Chinese government feel the financial impact of losing Google?

Posted: January 12th, 2010 under Randomness - No Comments. Tags: china, free speech, Google, hackers, marketing, security

Is Facebook making you dumber?

Is Facebook making you dumber?

By Nabeel Ahmed

It’s been a long day at work and as you decide to take your first mental break from the chaos, you switch screens and log into the engaging and familiar world of Facebook. Your “Live Feed” shows you real-time feed from your friends.

You know you have some great friends on the social networking site that you have had long lasting relationships with and then you also have this other domain of friends who are your nanosecond relationships, high in quantity but low in quality.

Then all of the sudden something catches your eye. It’s a thumbnail picture of someone who looks incredibly attractive, you get closer to the screen and start reading – “Pro-choice is the way to go”. You are happy instantly because you agree with this person’s point of view. Excitingly you move closer to the screen and read the status again, “Pro-choice is NOT the way to go”. “Huh, oh I just read it wrong?” your brain signals your heart to stop smiling immediately and convert that smile into immediate irritation. You click and start looking at this person’s profile. Irritation soon turns into rage and within few moments you are furious. You realize your “friend” does not have the same point of view as you do. This is not what you believe in. You start moving through your privacy settings to “unfriend” this person who has just made you angry. Within few moments, you have severed ties with your nanosecond friend whose friend count will be one less upon his next login.  The reality deepens and you start browsing and clicking through other thumbnails and statuses. As the scroll bar on your browser slides downs and stops, you realize “I don’t really know many of these people!” You sheepishly try to comfort yourself by thinking about your “real” friends, people you have had long lasting bonds, relationships and friendships with spanning over several years. These are the people who actually agree with you for the most part. You also begin to think about these nanosecond relationships with hundreds of “friends”. You start moving through your privacy settings to “unfriend” this person who has just made you angry and few others who kind of annoy you with their opposing views.

Some people suggest that you have nothing to lose and everything to gain when someone adds you as a friend on any social media website. They are giving you permission to share messages with them while bestowing attention on your recommendations within the social site. According to Washington Post reporter Susan Jacoby, whose acclaimed books include the bestseller The Age of American Unreason, “For all its convenience, the Internet and its digital relatives are addictive media that undermine reading, distract us from learning, and lure us into isolation”. There is some value in that and I am not denying that. However I also believe when social media and relevant technologies make the choices so accessible, where we are able to block anything that does not fit our mold, we lack the intellectual spirit of learning more about the opposing view. We don’t engage to explore, learn and figure out the “whys” behind these statuses. While we may listen to our friends in real life and try to understand where they are coming from, we are quick to discount their opinions online because it’s easier to do so.  Intellectually it hurts us all. Do you agree or disagree and why?

Posted: January 4th, 2010 under Business, Online Marketing, Social Media - No Comments. Tags: facebook, intellect, marketing, Online Marketing, Social Media, society