News, info, and opinion by Mac users, for Mac users.

October 15, 2007

ipod

iPod, iTouch, iDon’t even know

Posted Oct. 15, ’07, 1:00 PM PT by Dan Pourhadi
Category | iPod

itouch.jpgApple may have a branding snafu on its hands: According to a recent CNN/Gallop poll, a whopping 90% of the people I know refer to the iPod touch as simply the “iTouch.” Not as shorthand, but because they truly believe that’s the name of the phone-less iPhone.

It always throws me. “So you do you have an iTouch?” I’m constantly asked. I narrow one eye and angle my head, as if I’m confused. “An iPod touch? Oh, no, I don’t have one of those.”

It’s never good when you lose control of what people call your product. It’s similar to Google’s problem with “googling” — it’s no longer a term controlled by Google. People will say they “googled” something, even if they used Yahoo.com. Apple is losing control of the iPod touch brand, the consumer market instead independently adopting “iTouch” in its place.

I imagine it was similar to what happened with the iPhone: People started calling the Apple mobile the “iPhone” before we had any real evidence the device actually existed. And because of that, the expectations were already built up — Apple had to use the iPhone name, even though another company owned it, simply because the market had already branded the product.

What if Apple had intended to launch another product called iTouch — a multi-touch display, for example? I wonder how many people walk into the Apple Store and ask the employees to see an “iTouch.”

This can’t just be the people I know — do you refer to it as the iTouch? Do people you know refer to it like that? Or do I just live in a crazy alternate universe where device names are randomly altered as consumers see fit? Spill it in the comments. Thx.


9 Comments

krye said:

Accidentally, I have referred to it a few times in conversation as the iTouch, before quickly correcting myself. I guess it's just a Freudian slip.

Once the AppleTV came out using the apple logo appended to "TV", I was certain that the iPhone would become the ApplePhone (using the apple logo), but like you said, the market had already adopted "iPhone".

October 15, 2007 1:19 PM
sdk said:

I personally refer to it as an iPod Touch, and it seems to be about half and half with the people I know.

October 15, 2007 2:01 PM
Ken said:

I had someone do this to me last week. I didn't correct them because I didn't want to be rude. But then it was immediately contagious and I think I accidentally said iTouch later in the day. Too funny.

October 15, 2007 2:15 PM
rcp1980 said:

The only reason they changed from iTV to AppleTV was because there is a TV network here in the UK called ITV. Otherwise I'm guessing it would have stayed as iTV to match the rest or the product line.

October 15, 2007 2:58 PM
Dave-O said:

I hardly think the term "googling" is a problem for Google. In general, when your name has been genericized (think Xerox or Kleenex), it's a very good thing. People who say they "googled" something when they used a different service still give Google the word of mouth. "Hmm, Joe said he used Google, I guess I should too. Dan said he used Yahoo, so I'll definitely use Google."

However, calling a product by the wrong name is a problem. Apple wants people to know it's a iPod, not some calendar-editing, email-reading, google-mapping device.

October 15, 2007 3:09 PM
Paul0 said:

Not sure I agree with you there Dan.

When the shuffle came out, I knew stacks of people who called it the iShuffle.

I myself simple call it the Touch, as I did with the mini and the nano.

The last being great as I believe that Creative have a Zen Nano. but if anyone said "hey I bought a Nano" would anyone on this planet assume they meant a Zen? I think not

The iPod brand is so strong I don't see any problem.

October 15, 2007 8:23 PM
Dan Pourhadi said:

@Paul0 -- There's a difference between calling an iPod nano a "nano" (which is a distinct part of its name), and calling an iPod touch an "iTouch" (which itself could be an entirely separate product from Apple).

Apple wouldn't make a device simply called "nano" when it has the iPod nano. But "iTouch" could easily be a different product.

As for iShuffle...I never heard anyone call it that, actually.

October 15, 2007 8:55 PM
Joe Leo said:

Hi Dan. I just almost fell over in my seat! I'm completing a part two of a story I plan to publish on Thursday of this week, and mentioned in there that my students (my primary job... writing is my side job) call it the "iTouch." Where they got that? I don't know. They're Jr. High kids! And the most exposure they get with Apple (other than their own products, if they have them... Dell PC users who have iPods) is through me. I want to know too where they got that name?? We don't call the nanos, iNanos or the old minis, iMinis. Puzzling, huh?

October 15, 2007 10:27 PM
DBL said:

I say iTouch because its easier, sounds better, and because everybody knows what I'm talking about. And I will continue to do so. Why should I care about Apple's branding goals? Not my problem. iTouch is clearly the name that they should have chosen. I'm just fixing it for them. Most people I know seem to, consciously or not, agree with me. When this sort of thing happens it pays not to fight it. The users know best.

October 15, 2007 10:45 PM

Leave a comment

 



Visit other IDG sites: