Apple’s advertising is clever, visually attractive, hip, and funny. It does a great job of showing off what its products can do, and how your life could change as a result. What Apple ads don’t talk about is money. As someone who’s already more than willing to part with my little disposable income in order to nab Apple gear, I’m fine with that. But what about everyone else?

There are no doubt reasons Apple doesn’t talk about price. I’ll mention a few of them later on in this post. The thing is, especially at the low end of its product line, Apple stands to gain a lot by trumpeting its price tags to the masses.

Why People Are Switching

In the past three months, I’ve seen three friends buy their first Mac computer. None of them purchased the 13-inch MacBook Pro that Apple has been so lauded for online and by the tech journalism community. Instead, all three bought either a Mac mini or a white plastic MacBook, and all three did so because these machines represent the lowest cost of entry into Apple’s Mac lineup.

That’s great news for Apple. Its low-end computers are doing their job, and bringing people in who otherwise might not have looked at a Mac. The problem is that none of those three people would’ve considered a Mac if I hadn’t recommended them. The reason? They all perceived Macs as too expensive.

I know this evidence is anecdotal at best, and doesn’t mean this is the case for the general computer-buying population, but everyday I meet people who just weren’t aware that there existed such a thing as a Mac that costs less than $1,500 or $1,600. Some used to use them for work in the eighties, when it would cost you $1,800 to get one for home use, but speak with fond longing about the user experience they remember.

When I tell these people that they can get back into Mac for as little as $600, they are completely flabbergasted. As in, never even conceived such a thing was possible, totally unaware. To me, that means that Apple isn’t doing its job right on the marketing side of things. Of course, word of mouth is probably part of the company’s marketing plan, but why depend on individual evangelists like me to spread pricing info when televised media is so much more efficient?

The Great Unmentionable

Apple has some very good reasons not to talk about price. For one, they can’t beat PC manufacturers in that area. There will always be a cheaper PC with better specs on paper out there. But talking to PC users, that isn’t as big of an issue as I thought it was. People who remember Macs from times past don’t care that you could get a better spec’d PC for the same price or better as the Mac mini. They care that Macs are so affordable as compared to their precursors from 20 years ago.

Another reason Apple might not want to talk about price is that it would be inconsistent with its branding to date. Apple’s computer products are targeted at a demographic that doesn’t list price as its top priority. The average Apple consumer is financially comfortable, and willing to pay for a quality product that sets them apart. “Think Different” really means “Buy Different.”

Getting Past Taboos

The fact is, Apple’s changed its pricing policy to target new growth and new demographics, and it should change its marketing strategy to be more in line with those new sales goals. A Mac mini commercial, done with all the usual Apple visual appeal, with a simple “Starting at $599″ at the end would do wonders for raising consumer awareness regarding pricing without diluting the strong brand Cupertino’s worked so hard to establish.

You can talk about features and reliability till you’re blue in the face, but if you want price-conscious consumers to listen, you’ve also got to talk about cost. If Apple really wants to convert new pricing structure into an exponential increase in sales, it would do well to make sure people know about it.

Last week Gizmodo published a leaked proposal (32MB PDF) from marketing agency Lippincott detailing plans for Microsoft’s upcoming brick-and-morter retail stores. It makes for mind-numbing reading, running at a mammoth 124 pages of (mostly) brain-freezing execu-speak.

I’m glad I don’t work in Marketing. It’s a troubled, stressful world where there’s no such thing as a “lie” and the customer is considered little more than an uninformed, paranoid bag of walking money. Marketing execs rabbit incessantly about “managing expectations” or “steering brand awareness” and other essentially meaningless buzz-phrases. Either it’s subtle genius, or howling bum-gravy.

Here are a few of the “highlights:”

• Customer experience seems to be high on the agenda, though geared toward Emily, a hypothetical customer broadly categorized as one of three types: Basic Communicator, Productive Connector and Escapist.
• “Reconsideration of the Microsoft brand by consumers” — speaks for itself.
• NikeTown, AT&T, Sony, Nokia and Apple are acknowledged as providing retail/customer service benchmarks that Microsoft could learn from or aspire to.
• A Digital Media Wall is planned that will span the length of the store wall. There are lots of design mockups of what might appear on it. Check out the proposal for details.
• Windows 7, PCTV and Windows Mobile will also get their own dedicated stages.
• The stages will get their own dedicated Microsoft Surface Tables.

There’s a lot more in there besides these few points. Here are a few of the visualizations. No prizes for spotting similarities with the Apple Store. (But, to be fair, how many ways are there to design a retail store that sells computers and software?)

Proposed Windows 7 Stage

Here it's called the Guru Bar. In the proposal it's called the Answer Bar.

If you squint, this looks like an Apple store. What are the odds?!

I found this one odd. Buried in the proposal is a chart that explains which sort of customers use Microsoft’s various services. Bing is said to be for “Search Explorers” and “Search Productives.” MSN is for “Information Seekers” and “Functional Organizers.” Frankly, I’m failing to see how these are truly distinct, different things?

Microsoft was quick to post a comment on the Gizmondo website, saying:

“As a part of our process in briefing creative agencies, we shared some early prototypes and concepts of our retail store plans. No final decisions have been made. As we previously announced, we are on track to open retail stores this Fall.”

I wish Microsoft every success in their Retail stores. I’ll happily visit them to see what techy goodness is on offer. But for what is supposed to be a proposal that should make me want to run out and start building the first Microsoft Store with my own two hands, the language in this document leaves me cold.

“The brand vision: realizing potential. The value proposition for the retail offering and experience is: inclusive exuberance.”

Inclusive Exuberance? Seriously?

OK, I know I’ll be flamed for my criticism. But look — if you think this sort of language is not a screaming insult to human intelligence and dignity… well, then, you’re probably already in Marketing.

For the rest of us looking forward to seeing what these new stores have to offer, we can only hope they’re not as cynical, “corporate” and soulless as this document manages to be!

I posted a while back about Apple’s freely available Summer Camps for Kids. These camps let children pick an iLife application that they’d like to learn about during a 3-hour session in an Apple retail store.

My son just attended his first Apple Camp and loved it. Since he’s younger — and because I was interested to see what it was all about — I went along with him for the 3-hour camp. The following is a recount of the experience, and what makes this Apple program so ingenious.

Welcome!

There were about a dozen kids on this particular day, each of whom were given a very cool green “Apple Camp” t-shirt upon arrival and sign-in. Geoff, the instructor, immediately learned the name of each camper. This seemed to be key in engaging the kids and keeping their interest and involvement for the remainder of the time. Now, my son is a bit on the shy side, but Geoff (and Apple) created such a comfortable environment that he had no problem interacting with the other kids and this relative stranger leading the group. This alone was a huge success in my book!

iTunes Store

This particular camp was focused on Garageband. As such, I expected a direct dive into the music-making iLife application, but Apple’s lesson plan started with the basics — a plan that came full circle in the end. They began by learning iTunes — looking for music in the iTunes store, specifically. Now I knew going in that this was essentially a great marketing campaign, designed to hopefully create life-long customers out of these kids, but Apple really went for the jugular!

The first thing the kids were shown how to do was search for music, movies, audio books, and so on in the iTunes Store. My son already knew about this, but hadn’t done it on his own before. (Now I’m thinking I’d better turn 1-click purchases off!) The intro to iTunes continued by showing the kids how to search their own music library for music they liked, and then create their own playlist, which they’d revisit later on at the end of the course.

Garageband

Now it was finally time to launch Garageband. To start, they were shown how to use the Learn to Play feature. (And let’s make sure everyone checks out the Artist Lessons that can be purchased at an additional cost! My son especially liked the Fall Out Boy lesson on “I Don’t Care.”) After a little playing with this premium content, they moved on to the Magic Garageband feature, where they saw how all the instruments went together to make a song. They were shown how to isolate some instruments and alter others, all the while getting a feel for Garageband’s potential and the user interface at the same time.

When they were finally given a chance to get into the Loops browser, a little bit of instruction was given on the user interface before they were set free to create their masterpieces from the available instruments and loops. And oh, by the way — there are additional Jam Packs that can be purchased for more loops! These references weren’t a big deal to me; after all, most of it was stuff I would love to buy anyway. Geoff went down the line during the free work time, helping kids as they went, and showing little tips as they seemed ready to absorb them. When it was time to save their music, they learned how to share it to iTunes and add it to their playlist. At this point they were given a blank CD, and taught how to burn their playlist.

Not Going Home Empty-Handed

So at the end of the Camp, my son came home with much more than just the knowledge of how to use Garageband to make some interesting music. He brought his work home on CD (which my wife is really glad to be listening to in the car…over and over again!), but also the desire to check out the iTunes Store, Learn to Play with real Artists, and tinker with endlessly available loops. Oh, and don’t forget the shirt that he’s worn for a couple of days, which has made him the envy of friends young and old!

Apple (and my hat’s off to the instructor, Geoff) did an incredible job of putting on a fun and informative technology camp for kids. Not only did the kids pick up some great skills and learn some new software, but Apple also managed to push some of its premium content at the same time. I’m OK with the marketing, too. I mean, it’s to be expected from a free offering! I was truly impressed with the program, and now my son is chomping at the bit for the next one, when he’ll get to learn iMovie. Great work, Apple. I’m sure you’ve secured yet another life-long customer in my son.

If you ask any of the Apple “fanboys” why they are so devoted to Apple, at least one of the reasons you will hear is that Apple “sweats the small stuff,” which really proves its dedication to user experience and attention to detail.

Here’s a few of my favorites that demonstrate Apple’s attention, not just to its hardware and software, but to even the product packaging. See how many you may have noticed before, and feel free to add any that I might have missed in the comments below.

Serial Numbers

In the world of computers, serial numbers are important for a variety of reasons, including verifying warranty status and determining the correct specifications, to name a few. Many Apple products feature, in addition to their standard serial number, a barcode that makes reading this serial number much easier for Geniuses or other technicians.

Though some newer models have forgone barcodes, such as the 2009 model MacBook Pros and MacBook Air, barcodes can still be found on many other Apple products. In addition to serial numbers represented as barcodes, some Macs, like the Mac Pro, also include a barcode for the system’s MAC address. Though it changes from model to model, Apple has often put these barcodes and serial numbers in easily accessible places.

On the Power Mac G5, the serial number was located on the inside of the tower, behind the aluminum side panel. On iMac G4s and eMacs, the serial number was located on the inside of the optical drive cover. This really made it easy to quickly locate a serial number if you couldn’t access it through the OS.

Fiat Lux a la Mac

As many people leave their Macs running non-stop throughout the day, they have likely stumbled upon the infamous sleep light. Much like a heartbeat (or “snoring”), the little light pulses while your Mac sleeps. When the iMac G5 originally shipped, its sleep light indicator was bright! It didn’t bother people during the day, but for those who kept their iMac in an office or bedroom, it could light up the whole room at night. Apple issued a firmware update that reduced the sleep light’s brightness during evening hours, giving a much more relaxing pulse than before.

Beyond sleep lights, other indicators on newer Macs are typically hidden until needed. Take for instance the iSight indicator light, built into displays, which is seemingly non-existent until the camera is activated. Similar to the sleep light on the unibody MacBook Pros, the power light on the new aluminum Apple Wireless Keyboard blends in seamlessly until its activated. The thin aluminum that has been perforated with tiny holes for the light to shine through, but when there is no light, the keyboard looks seamless.

Indicator lights on power adapters are also worthy of mention. With once quick glance, you can easily see what is going on. If the light is amber, the battery is charging. If the light is green, the battery is fully charged and ready to go.

Another interesting use of light is the Apple logo on the rear of the portables. The light that illuminates this logo is simply excess ambient light from your display. Go ahead and take a look. Lower the brightness on your display and watch the apple dim.

Product Shots

The next time you see a promotional shot for an Apple product, take notice of the time. For many years, whenever a Mac has been shown displaying the OS X desktop, the clock indicates the system version that the Mac ships pre-installed. This trend even carries forth to Apple’s retail stores, where display signage and wall banners that showcase Leopard prominently feature the system clock at 10:50. Due to only having 60 minutes in an hour, showing a clock at 10:60 for Snow Leopard would not make much sense. Pre-release screenshots from Apple still display 10:50, so this trend will likely end soon.

In the iPhone arena, all of the promotional images of the iPhone and iPod touch all display 9:42 (except one preliminary image,which displayed 9:41). What’s the significance of this? Some think it may relate to the time the iPhone was originally introduced; others see it as a somewhat disjointed homage to Douglas Adam’s “Hitchhiker’s Guide To The Galaxy.” Most of my research seems to confirm that 9:42 was the actual time of the iPhone announcement during Steve’s keynote in 2007.

Hidden OS X Easter Eggs

Apple’s attention to detail moves beyond the hardware and into its software as well. Take for example the Clock widget in the Dashboard. Look closely at the second hand and notice how it vibrates much like a real clock does.

For those that use Mail, as you drag the divider between the date column to expand or make the column smaller, the formatting of the date dynamically adjusts to fit. If there’s room to display the time, it shows up. As you make the column smaller, the formatting reduces to fit. Most email applications would just truncate whatever did not fit in the column.

This is just a small list of a huge number of little details found on a lot of Apple products that really make them a joy to use. The tipping point, so to speak, is that Apple doesn’t market any of these as “features,” it’s just the fact that they took the time to integrate them subtly into the Apple experience that makes it all worthwhile.

If you’ve found other examples of Apple’s attention to detail, let us know in the comments!

Greenpeace released the 12th edition of its Guide to Greener Electronics today (PDF), with Apple falling somewhere between tangerine and burnt orange. For those who take the rating seriously, Apple scored 4.7 out of 10, unchanged from last time, though the company slipped from 10th to 11th place in the ranking of 18 companies.

The guide is based on three “demands” (their word) by Greenpeace: eliminating toxic substances, e-waste recycling and energy usage. Those demands are then broken down into four sub-demands, which are ranked: bad, partially bad, partially good, and good. Overall, Apple scores mostly in the middle, but with several bad grades.

The single, wholly positive ranking Apple receives is for the timeline on phasing out nasty PVCs and BFRs from manufacturing. As Apple and the Environment notes, “Printed circuit boards, electrical components, mechanical parts, and internal cables are BFR-free and PVC-free.” However, Greenpeace even takes issue with that claim because Apple has “unreasonably high threshold limits for BFRs and PVC in products that are allegedly PVC-/BFR-free.”

Greenpeace criticizes Apple strongly on e-waste recycling, while at the same time noting the company has extended coverage of its recycling program to Asia, and that Apple has set a goal of a 50 percent recycling rate by 2010. The main problem, according to Greenpeace, is a matter of disclosure on the part of Apple. On the issue of energy, Apple again scores poorly. First, because the company does not report on GHG (greenhouse gasses) emissions, Apple fails. Second, because the company does not report on renewable energy usage, Apple fails.

If you don’t see a pattern here, what it comes down to is that Greenpeace grades companies on words as much as action. Apple is a secretive company by nature. Considering how confrontational Greenpeace has been with Apple in the past, it’s hardly a surprise that Apple makes no effort to meet the “demands” of Greenpeace.

The real question here is why Greenpeace focuses so much on Apple. Both Dell and HP sell far more computers than Apple. Both have dropped in ranking, according to the latest guide, and both now score lower than Apple. Does this mean we will see protestors at the headquarters of HP? Will there be advertising campaigns about a “yellow” Dell? If Greenpeace followed its own guide, that’s what should happen.

However, the difference between Apple and every company in the guide is brand. Apple is easily the most popular brand. By focusing on Apple negatively, Greenpeace can theoretically threaten Apple’s brand popularity. Further, any changes Apple makes because of pressure from Greenpeace could then be leveraged against companies that actually pollute more than Apple. Finally, attacking the most popular company raises awareness of Greenpeace itself, not that the environmental organization would ever be so self-serving.

Keep going green, Apple, but keep going without Greenpeace.

Do you have what it takes to create the next great iPhone app? Or have it featured on iPhone commercials and installed on the all iTouches at the Apple store? Maybe have a big ol’ icon flashing so fast at the next WWDC that you have to include a seizure warning? There’s an app for that!

It’s called your checkbook.

The folks at AdWhirl recently calculated (PDF) what it costs to get your app into Apple’s Top 100 rankings: $1,875 a day. They determined this by looking at so-called untargeted marketing, click-through rates on ads, and actual app sales. Since AdWhirl sells targeted ads, I wondered if their findings were accurate or merely a sales pitch of their own. Does popularity have a simple price tag?

Fortunately, I know someone from the original Grocery iQ team. Grocery iQ was able to win the triple crown of apps: a Top 100 ranking, Apple Pick of the Week, and being featured under “What’s Hot.” What was its secret to success? When Apple released its Top Apps of 2008, Grocery iQ was in the top 50. I think that makes the Grocery iQ team qualified to talk about App Store success.

Jason Boehle, co-founder of Free State Labs (developer of Grocery iQ) and now a software engineer at Coupons, Inc, was able to give me some insights on AdWhirl’s findings. In the interest of open disclosure, I helped test the Grocery iQ app at the beginning, which earned me some face time with Jason.

Jason’s first response to the $1,875 per day price tag: “Yup, that’s about right!” The Grocery iQ team dabbled with paid ad networks and calculated that to make the top 100, they’d have to spend close to that amount for at least two weeks. “Small indie developers simply don’t have that kind of money,” Jason said.

Jason also agreed with AdWhirl’s assertion that free or “lite” apps do lead to, rather than cannibalize away, sales of paid apps. Since the App Store doesn’t have any way to try apps before you buy, free versions seem to be a good way to get buzz about your paid app. Free versions sometimes have ads, so AdWhirl’s report may be biased towards this view. Finding the right mix of features and ads while maintaining quality is tricky.

How did Grocery iQ get to be the pick of the week? “We did our best to build a great product and it got noticed,” according to Jason. During this time, Grocery iQ was ranked as high as eighth in the App Store and generated thousands of sales a day. The Grocery IQ team was told that the group at Apple that determined the picks meets weekly. Each member of the Apple team comes in with ideas of what he or she likes, and they vote. Grocery iQ didn’t know anyone or use a special formula. Paying for ads might get your app noticed by Apple, but it won’t get it named as pick of the week.

Though Jason couldn’t comment specifically, the Coupons.com purchase obviously helps Grocery iQ reach a target market of grocery purchasers, and is consistent with AdWhirl’s findings that one way to reduce the $1,875 price tag is by finding a target audience for your product. Shopping and coupons are a natural fit, and we should expect to see more web properties using the App Store to promote their products, and vice versa.

What if you don’t have the cash for advertising, or you can’t find a target market? Jason thinks it’s become much harder to get your app noticed due to all the competition. He said that small developers “need to find features that differentiate them from the competition and then develop apps people really want.” Then you have to go viral with your marketing efforts, which unfortunately is often quite difficult.

So, all you need is $1,875 a day. Either that, or develop a great app. Grocery IQ used the latter, while it appears some other apps have the pockets deep enough to do the former. A little luck probably doesn’t hurt, either.

Having received confirmation from Apple PR, TheAppleBlog can now confirm that the official name for Apple’s latest phone is iPhone 3GS (no space).

While this might not seem like a big deal to you, for those of us having to write about the formerly awkward name, the plural alone was worth the change. Since the “S” stands for speed, and is an abbreviation, the correct usage was to add an “s,” as in “iPhone 3G Ss.” Now, the much-improved plural will be “iPhone 3GSs.”

There’s one other issue that may or may not be related to the change, something you might not have noticed from the announcement of one million iPhone 3GSs sold. The change first occurred in that official press release. Coincidentally, or maybe not, that press release also quoted Steve Jobs, who has recently been confirmed as returning to Apple. Fixing that kind of detail is just the sort of thing a super-focused person like Steve Jobs does. Whether or not positions in Apple marketing will be opening soon remains to be seen.

Anyway, an iPhone by any name is still just as cool.

Tapulous is obviously aware they have a hit on their hands with Tap Tap Revenge, hence the individually branded Weezer and Nine Inch Nails versions, the paid Tap Tap Dance, and the wildly successful sequel, Tap Tap Revenge 2. But a recent survey reveals that they may be more successful than anyone could have guessed, since they have the largest installed base of any application currently available from the App Store. That’s no small feat in a competitive field of tens of thousands.

According to comScore, the market research firm behind the recent survey and an accompanying report, Tap Tap Revenge has been installed by 32 percent of iPhone and iPod touch users as of February 2009. That means one-third of the millions who use the App Store have downloaded Tap Tap Revenge at one point or another. I know one company who won’t have any trouble selling advertising space.

The purpose of the survey was in fact to give marketers a bird’s eye view of the App Store landscape. It also revealed some interesting facts about what kind of apps users are most likely to download and use. The top three categories that app users gravitated towards were retail, social networking and entertainment, respectively. Although I’m a little confused by the retail category (I can think of Amazon, and maybe Stanza and the Amazon Kindle app that might fit this description and be widely used), the other two make sense, especially if entertainment is broad enough to include games.

In a report accompanying the survey, comScore also pointed out that people who downloaded apps were likely to occupy mid- to high-range income brackets, who as a consequence probably have a lot more disposable income to spend on things like fart simulators and sexy pen apps. It notes that 35 percent of app store customers were likely to belong to households with an income of more than $100,000, while over 50 percent earned at least $75,000.

Basically, the final takeaway of the report is that advertisers would do well to look at the App Store as a potentially game-changing outlet from which to sell their shiny baubles. With the ad industry facing a crisis and pulling out of print and online sales, the App Store could present an attractive alternative. Since it has proven reach in a much sought-after demographic, and because of the unique content delivery method offered by apps, it avoids some of the usual failings of Internet advertising. There are no ad-blockers for individual apps, and there’s less competition for the viewer’s attention.

Personally, I’m conflicted. I like free stuff, but I hate ads, and therefore ad-supported software. My solution? Offer an ad-supported lite or trial version of all software, and I’ll buy whatever I actually use just to get rid of the marketing material. Any better ideas?

In case you hadn’t figured it out by now, I like the new iPod shuffle. So much so that I ordered one (in black) the day they were announced.

I bought it online since shipping and engraving are free. I lose the instant gratification of the Apple Store, but I gain the personalization of engraving. (Though I admit it was challenging to come up with an engraving because there’s a small limit on letters.) Shortly after ordering, I got a confirmation email saying it would ship in three to five business days. So far, so good, now all I can do is wait. But look what I received today: I think somebody goofed. I mean, it’s nice that Apple thought of me and all that, but I have a couple of issues with this email:

• “We hope you’re enjoying your iPod.” Well, no, I’m not. Because I don’t have it yet. In fact, unless you’re hiding something from me, you haven’t even shipped it yet.
• The picture is of an antiquated shuffle, not the shiny new one I ordered. I mean, the thing has the controls on it instead of using remote headphone controls. Remember back when we used to control these things that way? That was ages ago. You know, before the Enlightenment.
• The email makes no mention of the new shuffle at all.

Apple, you should get a note to the appropriate groups to have your canned email updated ASAP. And maybe not send it until you think the recipient actually has the item in question, OK? Oh, and maybe include a reference to the actual item that was purchased? Thanks anyway… I guess… Man, if they ship me that green one I’m gonna so go ballistic.

There’s a trusted maxim in the marketing game: cheap razor, expensive blades. It comes from the practice of selling razors like the Mach3 or Fusion for next to nothing, and then selling the disposable blades for said razors at a rather more expensive price. Consumers tend to overlook the long-term price of purchase, and instead see the initial price as a bargain. The iPhone may not be cheap, but apps generally are, and they seem to be provoking a lot of pricey ‘blade’ purchases, so to speak.

A recent post on the Sonos forums emphasizes my point. In it, the poster provides an anecdote about how, despite prior resistance, the Sonos remote app for the iPhone convinced him to drop a considerable chunk of change on a Sonos system. The poster’s argument is this: the mere potential the iPhone offered in terms of perceived future added value actually motivated the purchase. When contacted, a Sonos PR rep confirmed that sales of Sonos systems have definitely benefitted from the release of the Sonos CR for iPhone. The company has even produced a video for people who may have the app, but no Sonos system to control, demonstrating how the controller will work.

It may sound ridiculous, but I can’t claim to be immune. Apple’s own Remote app has me contemplating an Apple TV purchase, despite the limited content library iTunes offers here in Canada, and our inability to access Hulu. The appeal is in how easy it would be to use Apple TV with the iPhone, not in what I would do with the media hub itself.

Netflix and TiVo also offer tantalizing tie-ins with the iPhone/iPod touch. Thanks to a recent update, i.TV, a popular TV listing app, now also offers the ability to manage your Netflix queue. Which is giving people a reason to have a Netflix queue. TiVo has just launched a web app that allows TiVo subscribers to plan and schedule recordings. Although this can be used with any phone, the point is that you can do it on your iPhone, as well as manage your Netflix queue, control your Apple TV and your Sonos system, and most other things if you have one of the home automation systems that are iPhone compatible set up.

The examples are many, and not limited to home and home theater control. I recently signed up for Remember the Milk Pro, something which I would never have done if it wasn’t for the RTM iPhone application. In an informal survey conducted by TAB, a number of apps that inspired Other purchases came up. OmniFocus and Things are two other GTD apps which, though they work on their own, work like gateway drugs, pushing you towards their desktop counterparts. 1Password and Wallet, login information storage and management apps, also had the same effect.

There’s also the FreshBooks app, which makes web-based time tracking that much more appealing, since it truly becomes accessible almost anywhere. A FreshBooks representative told us that they’ve seen massive download numbers for the new app, but they’ve yet to figure out if those numbers are causally related to their increased subscriptions. The offered the app based on user demand, so for them an iPhone app was good customer service, and any sales benefits are tangential.

Most of these applications were probably designed to add to, or supplement the existing functionality of a stand-alone product or application. What is actually happening, and what is more exciting from a marketing standpoint, is that customers are moving in the other direction. The promise of enhanced usability, and true one-device-for-all remote integration, is resulting in users seeking out software, hardware and services that help them increase what they can do with their iPhones. The iPhone is the ultimate peripheral: universal; customizable; and generating more, rather than being the result of, consumer purchases.

Consumers may be perceiving Apple as a more ecologically friendly company than they actually are, according to a new report by marketing research firm TDG.

Results of a survey of randomly selected participants found that roughly 30% believed Apple was the most environmentally friendly tech brand, with Dell and HP the next most popular choices, at 21% and 15% respectively.  The results are somewhat baffling, since Apple does not do nearly as much as some other companies to paint themselves as a so-called “green” company.

Survey participants were also just plain wrong about Apple.  While it has recently improved its standings in Greenpeace’s “Guide to Green Electronics,” it still falls behind Dell and HP based on the environmental organization’s comprehensive ranking system.  In the inaugural study in August of 2006, Jobs’ baby scored a paltry 2.7 out of a possible 10.  September 2008’s results saw Apple’s score climb to 4.1, which is still behind LG, Toshiba, Dell and HP.  Apple was listed as having improved in some categories, but still isn’t quite up to snuff on energy management and recycling.

So how does Apple get to be the greenest without actually getting the best scores or engineering their image through huge green-specific ad campaigns?  According to the author of the TDG study, Michael Greeson:

Chalk it up to effective marketing and the brand’s aura of simplicity in both design and usage.  In today’s market, aesthetics in branding and design matter when it comes to portraying a pro-environment message. Independent of whether Apple’s products and services are actually environmentally friendly, consumers perceive them as such. While other CE vendors may have to invest a fortune to improve their green image, Apple doesn’t seem to have this problem.

In other words, Apple’s branding seems to be subtly, inherently green.  It’s true that consumers tend to to cluster environmental responsibility with contemporary, clean, simple brands.  Apple is perhaps the best example in computer electronics, but Ikea demonstrates the same effect in the home furnishing sector.

When marketing trend analysts, and even some environmentalists, are forecasting an end to the effectiveness of green marketing, Apple may represent the green company of the future.  Commercials with voiceovers about carbon emission reduction are beginning to fall on deaf ears, but a company that appears casually environmental seems to strike a chord with those resistant to the in-your-face approach.  So how best to capitalize on this consumer misconception?  Bottom line is that Apple should just continue doing what they do, offering more services like iPod battery disposal and reducing their ecological footprint, but without showing off.  It’s the “Meh” approach to green marketing, and it sure seems to beat wrapping everything in bamboo.

Apple have recently announced a new field trip scheme, encouraging youngsters to visit their local Apple Store. The aim is to either let children use the hardware and software in the store to create a new project (likely using different iLife packages), or to turn the area into a theater to showcase a movie or production to the children’s teachers, families and parents.

A field trip lasts one hour, and Apple have created a package around the event offering a free t-shirt to children and a complimentary year long One-to-One membership to the event organizer. It’s a great idea, but does raise a few questions about the motives behind the promotion and whether it can really add much value to education.

Ripe for the picking

Children soak up information like a sponge at a young age. Apple is definitely portraying the field trip scheme as something which will be a fun and creative event, but it’s clear that their main aim is to have young minds exposed to their products and software. They will like nothing better than a class of 25 kids to go home and explain in animated and passionate voices to their parents the virtues of being able to run iLife.

Apple already have a very high brand recognition with teenagers, as surveys illustrate. They need to be very careful when moving into the territory of younger minds that they don’t push their products too hard.

Is it a sign of our material times that children will be taken to an Apple store on a field trip rather than a beach, park or museum? It’s a great idea from Apple, but one that generates a lot of potential debate.

For the most part, I find Apple’s marketing messages to be clever, engaging and somewhat accurate. Usually, pretty imagery accompanied by a five to eight word sentence is enough to make me drool and start fumbling around for my wallet to fork over my hard earned cash.

But then there are times where Apple’s wording misses the mark and makes me snort in disbelief (remember the “too thin” iMac banner on Apple’s site?). Such is the case with the most recent email I just received touting Leopard:

Yeah, right. After witnessing my co-worker’s MacBook Pro get totally nuked after an attempted upgrade and reading some of the horror stories on the support forums, I’d have to say that there are plenty of folks out there that would beg to differ. And I’m sure there are many who would be angered by this message (though I guess it should be noted that Apple isn’t really touching on the quality of the install, just how simple and “easy” the process is).

But in all fairness to Apple and Leopard, the majority of installs seem to have gone pretty well. Despite some discouraging stories, I’m looking forward to upgrading my machine. Well, when I have an entire day to dedicate to creating backups, deauthorizing apps and actually installing the OS that is.

So Leopard finally launched last Friday at 6pm. It’s great, it’s lame – no matter your stance, it’s here. And in case you were unaware, it’s at least a little better (and dare I say, technically advanced?) than Microsoft’s Vista which hasn’t received the warmest of welcomes since it dropped earlier this year.

In recent weeks there was an article in the New York Times which essentially got after Apple for not capitalizing on the so-called flop of Vista and the cold-shoudler it’s received from the tech industry. So now that Apple’s latest iteration of OS X (that’s ‘10′, for those new to the game) is on shelves, let the comparisons and true winners and losers be determined. (Or do what I do and just use it because you love it and ignore all the hoopla – your choice of course.)

But as Microsoft ultimately struggles to regain some respect and dedication to their operating system offering(s), it seems they may be taking the ambiguous shot across the bow if you pay attention. Background: Apparently one night long past – most likely hopped-up on Barq’s with caffeine – I signed up for email updates for Microsoft’s Office for Mac progress. Yeah, I know… Anyway, Friday evening came around, and there was an email in my box with the subject-line, “Exploring Windows: Make 6:00PM Your Time Again.”

Now maybe it was just dumb luck (I’ll leave that to your judgement), but getting an email from Microsoft on the day of Apple’s OS launch, offering to make 6pm my time again?? May I remind you that 6pm was the launch time of Leopard. It’s very likely it’s just the super-nerd in me that’s reading too much into a chance email, but the timing and wording seemed like too much of a reference to an opposing operating system.

Did you get this email? What’s your take on it – coincidence, or directed marketing?

Putting aside my general feelings about how annoyed I am by the constant noise of ringtones in any public place, Apple is obviously free to offer any type of product they want.

What does it in for me, however, is that Apple is pushing their ringtone product at me when I don’t even own an iPhone.

In the iTunes store for every album that has any ringtones available for its songs it shows the little bell next to the songs I could purchase as a ringtone as well as an entire section in the sidebar dedicated to ringtones.

You could call it cross selling/marketing but I call it overcrowding and unnecessary. It wastes valuable screen space pushing a product I have absolutely no possible way of even using.

Maybe Apple is doing it in the hopes that some poor soul without an iPhone will accidentally purchase it thinking they can use it or maybe the marketing guru’s think a few 30 second loops of a song will make me buy an iPhone. I’m not sure. I am sure that I’d like a Preference option to turn off any and all traces of ringtones in the store though.

If they’re really looking to cross sell some things, maybe a more useful feature would be suggesting the movies and TV shows that certain songs by that artist include.