macbook love and hate

Well I just got a new Macbook and boy is is awesome. Now I’m not the first person to think this, but having made the switch from PC to Mac (I’m no longer “a PC”…) all I can say is I now understand fully why people become fanatical about Apple.

What captured my attention was that the branding, the funky stuff you know and love from the ads, carries on even once you turn your macbook on for the first time. The Mac OS X introduction video – slick and welcoming makes the experience of turning on your new macbook fun and you can’t wait to see what happens next.

However this is where my gripe begins because what happens next is highly frustrating. Updates, updates, updates…

Quite simply, there is not much point in building a great brand through great advertising, creating a great first time experience but then rendering all that great brand work USELESS by forcing upon users a very “PC-esk” plethora of software and operating system updates. Over a gig of updates – just to make my macbook ’secure and stable’? Who in Apple slacked off at the final hurdle? Why release something that clearly isn’t ready…

But of course this is not just something that is limited to Apple users, it affects every computer user. Windows, as you may have experienced, is just as bad. But it seems to be more and more common, as if software or hardware companies believe we have accepted that patches and updates are part and parcel of any new product. 

Well I can’t say I feel that way. To me, nothing destroys brand cred more than making it plain to your customers that you rushed a product out the door without giving thorough testing first.

Is there anything we can do as consumers? Perhaps a collective push back to the decision makers at these organisations.

If we don’t tell them…they’ll never pick up on it themselves.

Shaken then stirred

Our early twenties is a time when many of us seek a better understanding of our lives – either professionally or personally. It can be confusing for many people and figuring out how to approach this phase can be a little daunting. I’ve been giving it a little thought myself lately and in the spirit of a good spirit I’ve come up with the Martini theory. Shaken then stirred.

Shaken.

You’re in a job and just cruising. Your days blend into one another. Stimulating, invigorating events don’t happen enough. Getting shaken is a move or change in lifestyle or professional development. Shaking your life up is not natural, and doing it is often a little scary. Leave your job, or ask for a new role. Challenge your friendships – are they providing you with the stimulus you need to grow? Get out of town if you need to. Get a little scared.

Shaken – the catalyst for stirred.

Stirred.

Once the froth has settled, you’ll find the benefits of being shaken are bouts of sudden clarity around the direction you want to take your life. Being stirred to do something, make a change or start a new business is an exciting time and can be quite challenging. But if you get stirred, be prepared for a host of new experiences to occur as a result.

Drunk?

And the product of being shaken then stirred? Well you could say it’s being drunk – drunk off success.

The Martini theory is only in its early stages of development at the moment and it would be great to hear your thoughts or experiences, if you’ve gone through these phases before yourself.

Not-for-profits bore me

I’m bored with how the only time I ever see you is when you’re out on the street asking me for money.

I’m bored with the doomsday talk.

I’m bored with constant appeals that shout the same message at me.

I’m not listening anymore; but I want to listen – just not to the same old noise. “support”, “donate”, “volunteer”, “desperate assistance”

I think there are two issues with the way not-for-profits and/or aid organisations are opperating these days.

1. They generally try to engage people at the problem through largely negative stories (but we’ve almost become numb to these through repetition)

2. They like the safety of traditional modes of communication – TV, magazines ads etc (but many people don’t read magazines or watch TV much so how can they see these?)

There is a new generation of highly socially aware individuals earning income and looking for a way to help these organisations. But they don’t want to help in the traditional way. It’s no longer sensible to ignore new ways of communicating to them. Online is the key. Correct me if I’m wrong but I’m seeing few examples of leadership from the not-for-profit community in engaging with online mediums.

Take for example the Red Cross. A quick search on Facebook shows a number of Groups for various international chapters – none of which have over 6,000 members.  The biggest group  is  “Invite a friend and I will give  $1 to American Red Cross” – a group created by an individual, Jeff Epp, which has 50,000 members.

Why doesn’t the Red Cross official groups have hundreds of thousands of members? Because they have yet to change the way they talk to people. Using Facebook and the like requires a new approach, one that is innovative, inclusive and challenging the norm.

There are a few making headway – check out the Field News section of  www.doctorswithoutborders.org for some good original video and podcast content. If you have anymore examples I’d love to hear them.

Is Boxee the Twitter of 2009?

 

 

So internet TV has been around a while now in the form of things such as Apple TV and streaming video from broadcasters such as CNN (here in New Zealand we have it in the form of TVNZ ondemand). 

Though we have certainly not reached tipping point in terms of  popularity, I predict 2009 will be the year that internet TV will really start to become a viable option for many more households.

And it makes sense, especially when you compare the cost of using internet TV vs a satellite or cable subscription.

For example, in New Zealand we get our digital television through Sky TV and they pretty much have a monopoly in the market. I was thinking lately about how much real value I get for the $80 a month I pay for a subscription to Sky. The answer, bugger all. I watch maybe four channels out of the 40 or so available on a regular basis. I’m getting ripped off.

And this is where internet TV will change things because I no longer have to pay for what I don’t watch – I only pay for what I do watch -  and I watch it when I want to.

There’s also some exciting stuff coming around the corner in terms of aggregation of internet TV channels. I was listening to the Internet Marketing Weekly podcast recently and it mentioned a new business called Boxee. Boxee looks to be leading the way in terms of providing a programme that not only aggregates a number of online streaming TV channels, but also aggregates all the media on your computer including music and photos. AND it provides information on what your friends are viewing at the same time, allowing you to jump in and watch the shows their watching as well.

I think this is pretty exciting as it takes the ‘home media centre’ idea and connects it with the social networking space. Boxee is only in Alpha right now but if all goes well it could make a big splash in 09 in a similar way to that of Twitter in 2008.

How to make IT sexy

Lately I’ve been working with, and meeting, a number of tech start-ups who are launching some fantastic new products. One has even found a way to make the world wide web faster. 

Anyway, what I’m finding is that while the products are great, the way they are delivered to the world is lacking in sex appeal. In fact I think I’ve stumbled upon a little marketing gold mine…

Ok, so what I’m saying might sound a little obvious, but I think there’s a real need for good communications advice in the IT industry – especially to start-ups. It’s during the start-up phase that IT companies need to sell themselves the most. To potential investors and potential customers.

But so often the message communicated is focused towards an IT and tech audience. Now I don’t blame the business owners for this. When your engrossed in the day to day development of your business it’s easiest to stick with what you know. But in New Zealand especially, the tech audience is small and there isn’t a lot of money to be found. The key may just lie in making IT sexy -  changing the message appeal to a wider business audience.

This means not talking product in terms of what it does, how it works or who it’s for. In fact it shouldn’t even be about the product in the first instance.

It should be about a need. What need exists that this product is out to solve? Why should I care? What’s the so what that makes this product unique?

There are, of course, a few IT products that cannot, and do not need to be made sexy. But I challenge any tech/IT start-ups to think about how they communicate their business in a fresh light. It may be a case of getting a communications consultant in to give the business the “outside in” perspective required to create a message that appeals to those fat cat investors.