All Brands Have Meaning
Whether carefully and strategically considered or by default, all brands hold associated meanings in the market place. Well considered brands establish a competitive brand proposition (their brand strategy) with layers of meaning to both differentiate themselves from their competitors and to connect with their audience. These brand reinforce their meaning through all of their actions or brand touch points. As a brand agency we help brands to define their meaning and create the brand design for all their communications in order to create a consistent association with these layers of meaning in the minds of their customers.
Apple Vs Microsoft
Today we compare the brand associations of consumer technology icons Apple & Microsoft.
A Snapshot of Brand Association
The clever people at Brand Tags have been busy collecting a comprehensive list of more than 1.7 million associations that people have with brands. The result is a unique opportunity for those brands to compare the meaning and messages of their brand communication strategy with the brand associations of a cross section of the market.
A Comparison of Brand Associations
As expected, both brands have a high level of association with descriptive terms such as ‘computer’, ‘pc’ and ‘software’. Both brands boast strong levels of association with their product line; ‘Windows’, ‘Mac’, ‘iPod’ , ‘Office’ and ‘Word’. Also, interestingly both brands maintain a strong association with their founders and leaders; ‘Steve Jobs’ and ‘Bill Gates’, reflecting the brand equity that these two industry icons continue to maintain. However, from there it gets interesting to say the least. Given the enormous number of people who have contributed the brand associations (more than 300,000 of them of all ages, nationalities and brand affiliations) the differing tone of brand association is astounding.
The Apple Brand
The Apple brand is openly loved, maybe even adored with strong levels of association to words like ‘cool’ ‘awesome’ and even ‘love’. Plenty of brands want to be loved, but very few can lay claim to that strongest of positive associations. The words ‘design’, ‘creative’ and ‘innovation’ are also strongly associated with the Apple brand. When pooled with associations of ‘quality’, ‘sleek’, ‘simple’ and ‘style’ it is easy to see why Apple commands such high levels of brand loyalty and continues to create enourmous anticipation for each new product launch.
The Microsoft Brand
On the other hand I could barely believe my eyes when tracking the negative tone of much of the strongest brand association for Microsoft. Few successful brands include such high levels of negative association including; ‘evil’, ‘monopoly’, ‘crap’, ‘shit’ and that classic of poor customer feedback – ‘sucks’. Whilst at a commercial level, Microsoft’s strategic, commercial partnerships have built incredibly high levels of product use, it appears that the brand has seriously failed to translate that product use into positive brand association and brand loyalty.
If you’d like some help to define the meaning for your brand and create your communications in order to create a consistent association with these layers of meaning in the minds of their customers, why not drop us a line?
David Ansett, Brandamentalist
If you’d like daily updates of our brand thinking, you can follow me on Twitter here.
Graphic Design Melbourne
Tags: Apple, Bill-Gates, Brand Agency, brand association, Brand Design, Brand Experience, Brand Personality, Brand Strategy, brand-tags, Corporate Image, Graphic Design Melbourne, iPad, iPhone, iPod, Mac, Melbourne Brand Strategy, Microsoft, Steve-Jobs, Vista, Windows
Apple : Microsoft
The difference between a brand that does and a brand that says it does.
That is quite remarkable Dave, these brand association snapshots give you a pretty good insight. No wonder I’ve only ever used Apple!
Andrew, one thing I’ve found – Apple owners are incredibly proud of their brand association. These insights certainly paint that picture.
[...] David Ansett of Storm in Australia approached the subject from a different angle and you can read his piece here [...]
Get real dude! Microsoft rules.
Love it Mark. Thanks for sharing your passion – it’s only 700,000 people’s opinion.
ye bro, Microsoft rules over Apple, David… so bias
Alex, I’ve gotta put up my hand I’m an Apple obsessive. The thing with this brand association is it’s not about which brand is better – more about what meaning people associate with the brands, and how well that aligns with the positioning strategy of the brand. Love the Microsoft passion out there.
[...] audience should be the one behind the wheel, telling you what route to go and why. Here’s an interesting post on the differences in branding, albeit not place branding, between Microsoft and Apple. Why does [...]
Interesting to see what it will be in a couple of years time. I love Apple, have done since the Mac Classic but I’m becoming uncomfortable with the way they’re going – they’re getting ‘Big company syndrome’ and people are starting to hate them for it. Everyone loves the underdog. Apple may have to change how they’re doing things now they’re no longer the little upstart they once were, otherwise they’ll become the new Microsoft.
Sad but true Mark – a challenge facing all brands who build these highly loyal relationships as part of their strategy for success – then when they become successful they are at a size of business that provides a tension with much of the brand culture that drove the loyalty in the first place.
This article is trurly and deeply biased against microsoft….
Thanks for your comments Jitendra. If it wasn’t clear from the blog – the brand associations published are drawn from a site called brand tags that combines more than 1.7 million opinions on brands. I agree the associations don’t paint a particularly positive picture of Microsoft, but we don’t edit or influence those associations, we literally re-publish the impressions they collect. As I mention – I was particularly surprised by the vein of negativity as I personally hold a neutral view of the brand. I’d love to understand in more detail which of our interpretations you disagree with – not from your personal view-point, but from the associations collected.