Not an iWatch
Why did Apple take the i out of iWatch?
I recently learned—to my great shock—that the forthcoming iWatch is not actually named that. It’s Apple Watch.
So strong is the iFamily brand it never crossed my mind Watch wouldn’t inherit it.
I’m late to the party here and missed the window of fresh speculation. Chris Kocek had three theories back in September:
- iFatigue
- iLawsuits
- iSabotage
I find the third—the idea Google would game search results for iWatch or iWallet to non-Apple products—the least persuasive.
Lawsuits seem a stronger possibility. The proliferation of non-Apple iProducts speaks to the success of the iFamily, and it has made it harder for Apple to establish new iNames. Still, Apple would’ve, I think, gone to battle for iWatch if their heart had been set on it.
That brings us to iFatigue.
Maybe a new brand is needed for an Apple wearable. Not only is the product a clear departure from anything previously produced in the iFamily, the Watch will be as much about fashion as it will be technology. A new brand may be the most elegant, even sustainable, solution.
But rare is the generic brand name with widespread success. It’s damn hard to displace a common noun. A watch is a watch is a Watch. All in all, not a strong brand strategy showing here by Apple.
Just as with Microsoft’s monumental fail with Band and Health, and Google’s obsession with extending their company name for non-search products, it’s hard to not think this is an example of Apple putting the company name before the brand.
Unlike Microsoft, the Apple brand is strong enough to get away with it. An Apple Watch is likely to sell as many units as an iWatch or an XYZ. As long as it’s an Apple subbrand, people will buy.
That said, it’s hard to envision a day when anyone refers to another’s Apple Watch as Watch. Maybe people will accurately say “Apple Watch” every time they refer to the product.
I’m doubtful.
Chances are, given our tendency to shorten brand names, the Apple Watch will be refered to as…the iWatch. If Apple wanted to avoid iFatigue, they should’ve been bold enough to launch a new brand rather than let customers decide on their own how to deal with the generic name given.
