The Melting World

In response to the idea that Apple succeded due to great products:

Like my classmate, Doug, who sees advertising directing consumers
choices (and as perhaps somewhat of a techno-cynic,
since I tend to question the success stories of most
companies as a result of successful marketing more than
anything else),

I have to take a less ‘Darwinist’ approach on the rise
and fall, or steadfastness, of product popularity. I
think we cannot underestimate the power of the corporate
thinktanks who carefully research, design and target
very specifics subgroups in society to sell their
products. The same critique can be made about art, which
starts officially soon ;-).

Not all consumers in North America fall for the ‘cult of
identity,’ but I think many do, and many have been
lulled asleep to use the critical powers needed to be
aware of the fact that the ads targeting them are
succeeding in convincing them to “need” a product.

This is not to say Apple doesn’t have good products, or
that other companies don’t have quality products, etc.,
because to me, that is not essence of the issue when
examining business practices in a society. Who tries to
control whom? Who succeeds? Seems more apt to me.

In other words, is it possible that some people perhaps
choose Apple because they want to be ‘different’ from
the rest, a sort of consumer rebellion? But who profits
monetarily for this desire, not the consumer really.
Thus isn’t it then a false rebellion within the
capitalist system, and not one of significant social
upheaval, because after all, Microsoft continues and
Apple continues, and both survive quite happily.

Isn’t it just a sign that Apple has succeeded becoming a
powerful number two by selling a niche product that
makes the consumer feel like smart, alternative, rebels?

Playing the devil’s advocate…