iPhone is ringing a lot of bells
If you have not yet watched the video of Steve Jobs introducing the iPhone, do yourself a favor and go watch it here (just click the “Watch iPhone Introduction” button, as I am not able to link directly).
I found another good article today about the impact that the Apple iPhone on the entire consumer device market, which is remarkable considering that it will not even be in the hands of the public until June 1st, 2007. This is the true spirit of capitalism, and I am excited to see it. It will also be interesting to see what happens with the lawsuit over the name iPhone, that evidently Cisco has owned the rights to since 2000. This could end up being a marketing headache for Apple. If they do end up renaming the device, I will venture to guess it will be “iFone” or something akin. “iPod” is a rather meaningless name, yet oddly descriptive, so I was surprised when Apple chose to use such an uninspired descriptor as “phone” in the name.
It is also a funny irony that Apple is so cutting edge with their products, and yet they are using branding whose lowercase “i” is now passé, such as the whole “My” this and “My” that, popularized by Microsoft circa mid-nineties. It brings up an interesting conundrum between traditional branding and the incredible speed at which the technology world and its culture now progress. If a business brands its products technology-culture neutral, then it has less risk of being outdated in a few years but is less hip and thus may not do a good job of grabbing the attention of its target market. On the other hand, if a company takes advantage of the cultural branding trends, it may have to change often to keep up with the curve, and thus risk losing its branding mind share.
January 19th, 2007 at 10:43 am
The copyright suit is certainly an interesting issue. Cisco is right in fighting for the name they’ve owned, but who will it benefit in the long run?
Here is an interesting post from a Cisco executive regarding the suit:
http://blogs.cisco.com/news/2007/01/update_on_ciscos_iphone_tradem.html
There are also several good posts responding to it at the bottom.
One one hand, Cisco has owned the name (both by themselves, and by the company the bought that had the name back in the mid 90s) for some time, and, despite negotiations, Apple blatantly went public with it. So, Cisco has every right to protect their property. Apple shouldn’t feel and act like they are entitled to any type of branding that has the lower case i in front of it.
However, on the other hand, the consumer base automatically associates any product with a lower case i to be an Apple product (thanks to strong marketing of the iMac and iPod). As is pointed out in the responses to the article I listed, this consumer assumption may not be worth the cost to Cisco to get the name back. Apple’s phone would always be the “iPhone” and Cisco’s the “other iPhone.”
Of course, given the fact that all things change, Apple may want to consider a different name altogether, as the typically younger market that is gobbling up the iAnythings is getting older and will eventually associate the i branding as being old.
So, again, while I think Cisco is right in filing the lawsuit, I don’t see much in the way of benefits (for Cisco or Apple) past upholding trademark law.
March 17th, 2007 at 10:57 pm
I make i jokes routinely. But, I find the “i” branding is quite different from the “e” one. “i” is still, well, cool. Even if in a geeky way. “e” is just lame.