4 ms·

Not sure that worked so well for Diaspora. Can you give some examples of companies that have successfully "smeared" the market leader with FUD and ended up ahe

• jasonlotito 16y ago
  > Can you give some examples of companies that have successfully "smeared" the market leader with FUD and ended up ahead? Apple. See Mac v.s PC TV campaign.
  • Kylekramer 16y ago
    Strange definition of ahead.
    • jasonlotito 16y ago
      Considering iOS devices, revenue and growth in various markets, they are ahead. Edit: Apparently someone disagrees, and thinks Apple is losing to Microsoft. I'd love to have a company lose to a rival in the same way Apple has.
  • __david__ 16y ago
    In what way are they ahead that had anything to do with that campaign? The iPod, iPhone, and iPad are all markets that they are ahead in but those all have nothing to do with the Mac vs PC campaign. They still are not "ahead" in the general computer marketplace.
    • jasonlotito 16y ago
      > In what way are they ahead that had anything to do with that campaign? Because the campaign was more than just Mac v.s. PC. It was also the Apple ecosystem. > The iPod, iPhone, and iPad are all markets that they are ahead in but those all have nothing to do with the Mac vs PC campaign. This statement is not true. The campaigns did impact the perception of the Apple brand. To assume the campaign had nothing to do with the success of these devices is wishful thinking. > They still are not "ahead" in the general computer marketplace. In terms of pure numbers, no. But in numerous other ways to measure success they are. Just look at the growth of Apple after a campaign where it attack the PC. Discounting this isn't smart.
      • __david__ 16y ago
        > The campaign was more than just Mac v.s. PC. It was also the Apple ecosystem. It was mostly about the Mac OS X vs. Windows. And I'll repeat, they are still not ahead there. > Just look at the growth of Apple after a campaign where it attack the PC. Discounting this isn't smart. Correlation != causation. I would say instead, "Just look at the growth of Apple after it introduced several really amazing products that had no equal in the marketplace".
        • jasonlotito 16y ago
          > Correlation != causation. I would say instead, "Just look at the growth of Apple after it introduced several really amazing products that had no equal in the marketplace". Which is beside the point. Apple's ads and growth are relevant to the question. The question didn't ask for an example where attack advertising directly led to growth. I'm not implying that the ads led directly to Apple's amazing growth and dethroning Microsoft at the revenue level (amongst other areas). Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing for or against attack ads. I'm also not arguing against your points in this comment. Merely that they don't matter in context.
          • __david__ 16y ago
            > The question didn't ask for an example where attack advertising directly led to growth. I think that's an awfully pedantic interpretation of the original question. To me, 'Can you give some examples of companies that have successfully "smeared" the market leader with FUD and ended up ahead?' very clearly implies just that.
            • jasonlotito 16y ago
              > I think that's an awfully pedantic interpretation of the original question Nevertheless, that's the question. It's a simple question, and a better one then what you imply it is. "Can you give some examples of companies that have successfully smeared a market leader with FUD and ended up ahead as a direct result of that smear campaign" is a loaded question. Rather, the question as asked is simple: Despite having a smear campaign, have companies succeeded? Are their success stories? Yes, yes there is. There are countless success stories of companies and organizations directly attacking their competitor and being successful, if not market leaders. Apple is just one example.
    • jacquesm 16y ago
      You probably missed the original wave of Mac vs PC ads.