Chado-Design.com

Adobe and Apple are in the middle of a PR skirmish that is starting to heat up. Although his displeasure with Flash has been hinted at for some time, in April Steve Jobs finally trashed Adobe and Flash publically in an open letter. Jobs states that Flash did well during the “PC era” but we are now in the “mobile era” with low power devices and touch interfaces that don’t work with Flash. Also, and most importantly, Flash is a closed system and does not support open web standards. This is no surprise that Jobs would not support Flash because most of the portable products he sells do not support it either.

I understand why many developers try to steer away from Flash; it requires more system resources slowing down the system and is not supported by the W3C. However, it gives developers more options and is very widely used across the Internet, mostly for video and interactive content.

Adobe has responded to Jobs’s Flash bashing with an interesting strategy, to kill the opposition with kindness. In their own open letter, they started an opposing campaign based on Love of all things. They have also followed up with an ad in the Business section of the LATimes with the copy:

We love creativity

We love innovation

We love apps

We love the web

We love Flash

We love our 3 million developers

We love healthy competition

We love touch screens

We love our Open Screen Project partners

We love HTML5

We love authoring code only once

We love all devices

We love all platforms

What we don’t love is anybody taking away your freedom to choose what you create, how you create it, and what you experience on the web

Adobe has cleverly fired back at Jobs pointing out the hypocrisy of his claims. Jobs fully supports open web standards as long as they only apply to his competitors and not his own software platform. He claims that he does not support Flash because he refuses to put his products at the mercy of a third party but that is exactly what Apple demands of its iPhone app developers. He is accusing Adobe of the exact same things Apple is guilty of. This is why I feel that open web standards is not the issue at all; I believe the main reason Jobs does not support Flash is because it enables free streaming video and games online. If Apple products supported Flash on their portable devices, people would have access to media without having to spend money in the App store and iTunes store. Many of Jobs’s negative claims about Flash in his open letter are blown out of proportion or completely unfounded (see security and battery-life for example). And while is true that HTML5 is the future and will likely replace Flash in most applications, its still in its infancy and it is very unlikely it will be recommended as standard for at least another few years, until then Flash is still completely necessary. The fact is that Apple would have to compete with Flash enabled media on its devices and Jobs does not want the competition, this is not about open web standards and healthy competition, it is the opposite of that. In a perfect world, users could decide whether or not they want to use flash on their portable devices similar to how we can on computers.

While I am impressed by Adobe’s clever response and resulting campaign, I feel that this escalating feud between the companies is completely unnecessary and both sides will lose in the long run. Apple and Adobe have had a long-standing relationship that has greatly benefited both parties. At Chado, we love both brands and use Adobe software on Apple products everyday. Both companies are firmly grounded in creative industries and both can attribute their initial successes to their products being used together in this industry. In fact, the only reason I use a MacBook is because how well it supports Adobe products. Whether they like it or not, both companies are dependent upon each other to some degree; without Adobe’s superior creative products there would be very little demand for professional Mac hardware. Also, Apple would not be the brand it is today without the praise and exposure it received from creative professionals. With the growing popularity of their portable devices, Apple seems to have lost focus on where they came from and what their true strengths are. If this battle continues there will be no winner. Both companies would greatly benefit if they continued to work together as allies rather than going on the offensive as enemies.

Product placement has always been a bit of a controversial topic in advertising. Some feel that it is unethical pitching consumer products and brands in mediums meant to entertain and can be seen as disrespectful to the viewer trying to sneak in blatant advertisements. I have usually taken the stance that it is acceptable in most cases and can usually add to the viewer’s experience. Placing real products in television programs and movies makes the film’s universe seem more realistic and, as long as the brand being represented doesn’t take artistic control away from the writers, actors, and everyone else involved in production, it is an ultimately good thing. Also with the rise of DVRs, Tivos, and streaming video with the capability to skip commercial breaks, traditional television commercials are becoming less effective and being seen by relatively fewer viewers. To remedy this situation it makes sense that ad dollars would be spent on adding the brand directly to the content for maximum exposure.

AMC’s Mad Men does an excellent job of realistic product placement; the advertising firm on the “period piece” show has real brands as clients such as Lucky Strike cigarettes, Heineken Beer, and Hilton Hotels. They also use retro ads to make the 1960s they portray more realistic and engaging.

Another example of well-executed product placement is a recent episode of ABC’s Modern Family, where one of the main characters was very excited about the release of the iPad coinciding with his birthday and not only did the iPad make a cameo, it was the focal point of the episode. The main storyline was about his family going to great lengths to buy the hot new product in time for his birthday. It was mentioned throughout the episode by name numerous times with testimonials on how awesome it will be. Viewers were also treated to a demonstration at the end when the character finally received his new iPad with 37 seconds of screen time.  The episode was very well received with about 9.5 million viewers making iPad’s product placement work close to $1 million. Surprisingly, Apple did not pay a dime for this high profile placement! They did a great job of maintaining the show’s integrity while still incorporating a product placement.

This recent example immediately reminded me of past Seinfeld episodes where products and brands like Junior Mints, Bosco, Drake’s coffee cakes, and even Kenny Roger’s Chicken Roaster restaurants were the main focus of the episode and moved the storyline along playing an integral part of the episode’s plot.

Another medium where we seen increased product and brand placement is videogames. Although much different than television the same theory applies; as long as it doesn’t take away from the content and adds a touch of realism to the game’s universe it can be done ethically. So far it has mainly been sports games that feature real brands and products that add realism to the game’s universe with in-game advertisements and sponsors. For example, in every game in the Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater series the player can skate on real skateboard decks, wears real clothing, and be sponsored by real companies. These in-game placements added value to the player’s experience while enriching the game’s universe.Although product placement in video games has been done well in recent years, it seems to be changing. It was recently reported that the next title in the wildly successful Metal Gear Solid franchise, Metal Gear Solid: Peace Walker will feature product placement for brands like Axe body spray, Doritos, Walkman, and Pepsi Next (a flavor currently available in Asia only). This wouldn’t be a problem in most games but this game’s storyline takes place in the early 1970s, long before any of these products were available. Discussion boards and blogs are already going nuts with Metal Gear’s rabid fan base and looks like it is already starting to backfire.

I believe that content creators have responsibility when determining whether or not to include product placement. They should be the gatekeepers to determine if including brands will add value or cheapen the consumer’s experience. Product placement is becoming more and more necessary as the industry changes but ethical considerations must be taken.

Yesterday, along with the iPhone OS 4.0, Steve Jobs introduced iAd, Apple’s own mobile advertising platform that according to Apple, “combines the emotion of TV ads with the interactivity of web ads”. This new platform, that will directly compete with Google’s new mobile ad platform, enables users to view fun, interactive in-app advertisements that unlike current ads do not require the user to go into a separate browser to view content. The average iPhone user spends an estimated 30 minutes inside apps everyday so if an ad is displayed every three minutes there would be over one billion ad impressions everyday on all of Apple’s 100 million devices in use. The new ads will be different than traditional mobile ads. They will feature interactive and video content within the ad enabling instant video playback, sound clips, and even games. For example, a Nike ad lets users watch videos, design their own custom shoe, or find a store all within the app. Apple plans to sell and host the ads while giving developers 60% of the revenue. Since Apple devices do not support Flash media all interactive ads will be done through HTML5. The ads will also be targeted towards specific users based on the content in their app.

I think iAd is a great idea for Apple to release now for a number of reasons. First it keeps the actual prices of the apps down while allowing app developers to get paid. As the developers get paid more for their apps they are more likely to develop better apps or provide better support for current apps. Also it gives magazines and other publications a good reason to move to the iPad. They make their money and run their business from advertising sales and these specialty apps give them an incentive to transition to their product. Lastly, this new platform will be very profitable for Apple. It will be very interesting to see how the new ads evolve, how they are received by users, and what impact they have on the industry.

After several months of speculation and rumors Apple has finally launched revealed their newest product, the iPad. For years tech blogs have been buzzing about a new Apple tablet to follow up their old tablet product The Newton and it has finally arrived.  What is it exactly? What does it do? What doesn’t it do? And how can it change the face of advertising?

The iPad can be best described as a convergence between the iPhone and a Macbook, fusing together specifications from both product lines. Initially it looks like nothing more than a giant iPhone, utilizing an improved operating system based on the iPhone OS. It also has about the same thickness measured at a half inch. The screen is slightly smaller than a Macbook’s with 9.7 diagonal inches of screen and has 1024×768 resolution. Apple has reported that the battery can last about ten hours on constant use with a one-month standby rating! This would make the iPad an excellent travel companion. Models will support Wi-Fi and some will also support 3G. Unfortunately, it seems that AT&T may be the only provider at this point, which is bad news for their already terrible 3G coverage. Navigating the system is done by hand utilizing a touch screen similar to the iPhone. The touch keyboard should be a bit easier to use than the iPhone, as it is nearly life size and can be typed on using fingers instead of just thumbs. It would still be awkward to type on but a definite improvement over the iPhone. By taking technologies from the iPhone they are ensuring that the new product will have a small learning curve and will be easily adopted by current iPhone users.

The interface seems pretty good, but what about media and apps? The tablet handles various types of media like music, pictures and video, supporting 720p HD playback using iTunes as the default player. The iTunes software for the tablet is a redesigned hybrid between the mobile iPod interface and the full iTunes program including features from both for improved functionality. Videos can also be enjoyed using a YouTube app similar to the iPhone’s. Speaking of apps, the iPad will have full support of all iPhone apps as well as some new apps made specifically for the iPad. Its also been confirmed that iPhone users can transfer their apps to the iPad so they don’t have to buy them again.

Apple also plans to use their iPad to compete directly with Amazon’s Kindle. With the iPad’s release they will enter the eBook market with a new program appropriately named iBooks. They have also designed a new iWork suite specifically for the tablet including new versions of Keynote, Pages, and Numbers with new interfaces designed for the touch screen.

As great as this new product seems, there are a few things that I would want to see before I would drop over $600 on a tablet. My biggest problem is it does not support multitasking. You can’t listen to music while writing in a word processor or open twitter while browsing the internet. Most professionals wouldn’t even consider using the iPad as an alternative to their computer without the ability to multitask. Another obvious improvement would be adding a camera. The current design doesn’t include a camera so there is no possibility for taking pictures or using iChat. Also, this makes the incorporation of augmented reality apps impossible. The other glaring problem is it does not support Flash making it unable to view streaming video directly from web sites while leaving wide barren gaps in web pages you are viewing. When most sites utilize flash and one of the main selling points of the product is using it to surf the web, it is paramount that Flash is supported. Lastly, the name; iPad. Since its introduction this morning there have been quite a few allusions made on tech blogs comparing the tablet’s name to feminine hygiene products. While my mind doesn’t immediately go there, I think they could have come up with something a little better. Just think of how difficult it’s going to be differentiating between an iPad and an iPod in Boston.

This new product has the potential of being awesome; it combines the functionality and interface of the iPhone with more programs like iWork and their new iBooks software. The new iWork software would make this perfect for giving impromptu presentations using Keynote to clients and a few improvements like Flash support, an HDMI port, and widescreen would make it perfect for media. Problems aside, it is sure to sell out and open the door to tablet computing.

Now that we have a firm understanding of what the iPad is and what it can do, how can it be used for advertising? With the increased screen size and potential for media viewing plus increased functionality with the touch screen and internet connectivity there is great potential to improve the mobile advertising/interactive advertising experience.

With 3G connectivity, the iPad is always aware of your location so location based ads in real time are a definite possibility. Also, with the larger screen, there will be increased media consumption on the iPad potentially using its technology to introduce a new medium for interactive advertising. The iTunes store could offer media specifically made to view on the iPad that could utilize the touch screen to make movies and shows more interactive for the viewer. This could enable the user to touch the screen and link to a product being shown in the media or directly answer a call to action from a mobile ad. With the ability to literally touch what you are viewing, branded apps have the capability of being more interactive. The iPad is also expected to improve the gaming experience of Apple products with its improved screen and functionality so in-game advertising could be applied to game apps. Lastly, the new iBook capabilities could reinvigorate traditional print ads. Newspaper and magazine ads could take back their audience when the content is viewed through an iPad. Also, while reading through and viewing an ad the user would now have the capability to touch the ad and link directly to the offer.

To conclude, the iPad may not be perfect but it opens up seemingly limitless possibilities for advertising that have never been realized before. With the potential for highly interactive ads, direct connectivity, and the possible re-emergence of newspaper ads through iBook, the iPad could become the next great medium for advertising.

The iPad tablet will ship in 60 days to America and only the Wi-FI models will be available internationally.