I'd like to start this post with a little run through some of the biggest general successes in the web and technology sphere of the past few years, and Apple's entries for each of the relevant markets. Portable mp3 devices for example have been pretty big - in particular the definitive iPod from Apple, while, also in the handheld market, smart-phones such as the recent iPhone also from Apple have done well. Sure Blackberry et al are popular - but no matter which way you turn it, Apple's iPhone seems to attract far more media attention (and market share) than most of its competitors, as does the iPod.
We could go on - in the desktop market Apple offers the iMac, while digital music software comes in the form of iTunes etc, but by now the point that the i-product branding, pioneered by Apple and associated with many of their most famous products, is potentially applicable to a vast range of consumer electronics/software is clear.
In essence there can be no doubt that such branding works extremely well for Apple, linking as it does with their emphasis on products that look different (hence the assertive individualism stressed by the 'i') and also connecting their entire product range with a common brand DNA which enables advertising on a general brand level (the effects of which then filter back through to all products).
Now, as is perhaps inevitable with an extrememly workable branding strategy like this, a few other things start to happen as a result of it:
a) Other companies try to get into the slipstream of such products by unofficial affiliation - like for example a company that designs an iPod waterproof case called, say, iSwim and wants to link itself to the primary product for which it is designed.
b) A variation on the above - but with software in question. For example Inventive, the company behind iClip, a scrapbook program for Macs. Since Inventive are in essence designing free software products exclusively for Macs, then they also borrow from the brand potential of the Apple in the choice of the iClip name, and basically create an unofficial extension to the Apple product family.
c) The final category, and the one which is growing at the fastest rate - while being also the one making least sense is the totally non Apple affiliated/connected product. For example iLike, the personalised concert info alert service which is currently close to being bought up by Myspace. Now this site, and the company behind it, has absolutely nothing at all to do with Apple or their products.
It is this final category which is starting to grate slightly each time I come across yet another example of it. It's not that the products are not good - in fact many of them are fantastic (i am a big fan of iLike for example) - just that i cannot help but feel like there are far too many companies borrowing the succesful formula developed and made effective by Apple, in what resembles a slightly uncreative branding process.
Not that it doesn't work: just look at iLike - going from strength to strength, as evidence that it does. Nor is it in any way illegal - Apple don't own rights to naming products 'i-something', nor could they if they wanted to. Despite all this however it's hard to escape the feeling that the current cliche branding trick of web 2.0 is quickly becoming the 'iProduct'.
Similar things happen with band names every now and then (notice the current vogue for 'the [somethings]' as a zeitgeist template). The sooner we move on from this current formulaic i-approach in the technology sphere, the sooner we'll find the next truly exciting and unique idea, which surely will be even more effective than trading on the icliche formula. Most of the time we are talking about really top quality software/hardware/ideas, which in all honesty deserve a bit better in terms of branding effort...
Dejan Levi
