My amateur marketing analysis follows... "Brand extension is a crime against marketing and against common sense" Agreed and it's an example of something Appl

My amateur marketing analysis follows... "Brand extension is a crime against marketing and against common sense" Agreed and it's an example of something Apple has gotten very right. Apple is the banner brand. What is Apple? It's a hardware device manufacturer with mostly excellent software and services. You buy an Apple X and you're buying (post Mac but still applies): iPod. iPod smaller. iPod much smaller. iPod with a touch screen. iPod with a touch screen and phone. iPod with a touch screen, internet and much bigger. iPod with a touch screen, internet and slightly bigger. Some thinner, some fatter, some with cameras, some without. They've almost never stumbled in extending the brand and creating new sub-brands because the initial umbrella brand isn't 'used in vain' or diluted. What is Google? Google is an ad supported AI interface with occasionally excellent hardware, and genius software services. You buy a Google X and you're buying? It remains to be seen (although I suspect it's coming) what exactly the 'Google Nexus' is. What is Microsoft? Microsoft makes Windows and Office, enterprise software and is a sticker on the side of other people's products. When you buy Microsoft Windows X you get??