APPLE FINAL CUT PRO: Apple Final Cut Pro X FCPX Debates FCP Legacy FCP Tutorials

Re: Apple drops ProApps from corporate definition

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index   •   Read entire thread

Tim Wilson
Re: Apple drops ProApps from corporate definition
on Sep 17, 2014 at 3:36:31 pm

[James Ewart] "I think the marketing was a total disaster."

No, you think the product life cycle management of FCP 7 was a disaster. Things like withdrawing the previous version had nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing to do with marketing.

Let me say it again: marketing creates demand. There was a figurative line around the block for the launch of the FCPX. There is absolutely no standard on earth by which this is not marketing success.

The use of the word "success" has nothing to do with notoriety or controversy. It has to do with the word "marketing." The goal was to get people to download the software. People did.

[James Ewart] "It would have been much better to have been totally transparent about its state of development from a marketing point of view."

At the risk of raising old ghosts, Apple has never included transparency about anything as part of its marketing programs....

....but WAS transparent about is future exactly ONCE, in its first presentation of FCPX.

I'll say it again: pre-release marketing creates demand. The end. Nothing more. That's ALL it does. Did Apple have to beat the drum to get people to download the software once it was available? NO.

The nature of the software, and other Apple policies related to the release, as well as people's response to it, have nothing whatsoever to do with marketing.

This isn't a trivial distinction. This basic misunderstanding of the nature of marketing, and the fundamental nature of Apple re: transparency from the day it was founded, created entirely unnecessary friction in the early days of trying to make sense of all of this. People like Larry muddied the water so thoroughly that I wondered (and still do) if they did it on purpose. Otherwise, I'd be left with the conclusion that he, and they, simply don't understand the basics of what words mean and how Apple has always worked. Or that they don't care.

I may well have the lowest opinion of Apple of anyone anywhere in the COW, and it pains me to say anything nice about them -- but they absolutely stuck the landing with the marketing of FCPX, the role of which was to drive downloads, and which it did in fact accomplish.

Did people download it? Yes. Did LOTS of people download it? Yes.


And for that matter, the marketing very specifically said that FCPX represented Apple's future. Did FCPX in fact represent Apple's future? Yes, absolutely and unequivocally.

The largest outrcy was, and is, the timing for which FCPX represented Apple's exclusive present.

That's not a marketing issue. CONCEIVABLY it's a PR issue...

...but to approach this from the other direction, could any amount of marketing fix the issues that people had with the release? NO. The only changes would have been, a) a different product upon its arrival, b) the previous version not immediately departing.

Neither of which are marketing issues.

Posts IndexRead Thread 

Current Message Thread:

© 2019 All Rights Reserved