4 ms·
Even if Apple did that, I imagine they wouldn't share co-branding prominently on the packaging/marketing, which would make it #3. How many devices have you see
by ja2ke 15y ago
Even if Apple did that, I imagine they wouldn't share co-branding prominently on the packaging/marketing, which would make it #3.
How many devices have you seen in the last decade which include an Apple logo AND another manufacturer's logo? I can think of one: the Apple/Nike+ http://www.apple.com/ipod/nike/ http://www.apple.com/ipod/nike/ . The Apple logo and the Nike swoosh are cited as two of the most recognized logos in the world. I suspect that's about the only caliber of partnered branding Jobs would allow on an Apple product at this point.
- ugh 15y agoThere was that strange HP iPod (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPod%2BHP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPod%2BHP) which, to this day, weirds me out. (It's also ancient history at this point in time. Apple sold only one gadget back then and it didn't run iOS. It's astonishing how Apple changed in the last five years.) You never know what Apple might do but I think you are very correct when you say that Apple usually doesn't do co-branding. Edit: Another point I just thought of and wanted to add: Neither Nike+ nor the HP iPod are or were ever mission critical for Apple. Nike+ is nice to have but if it disappeared from the face of the Earth tomorrow Apple wouldn't really be any worse off. Co-branding is apperantly something Apple does when the products have already become stupendously succesful. (Nike+ was added to iPods at their peak.)
- slashclee 15y agoI love how everybody seems to have forgotten this one... http://direct.motorola.com/hellomoto/rokr/ http://direct.motorola.com/hellomoto/rokr/
- ja2ke 15y agoI remember that thing. I'd forgotten about the HP iPod though! The only cross-branded product from that era still thats really left is the Nike+ though.