Lunar Adventures: exploring a little bit of everything

Blog post [Displaying post and comments]

Creative gets creative with language

Signals vs. Noise pointed out this remarkable stretch of the rules of etymology.

In a way, I kind of feel bad for Creative. I remember when every computer had a Sound Blaster sound card in it (I even shelled out major bucks for a Wave Blaster so I could listen to MIDIs in super-high quality back in 1994 or so). Now, computers have on-board sound and hardcore gamers, movie watchers, and recording specialists are the only people that buy sound cards (many of whom don’t touch Creative products — such as the recording industry).

Then Apple came along and swiped the portable digital player market out from under them (Creative was in the portable digital media business in 1999, the iPod didn’t come along until 2001). Apple’s iPod was so successful and market-dominant that the term “Podcast” was coined when broadcasting via RSS notifications became popular — even though the technology for Podcasting predates the popularity explosion of digital portable music players.

Companies not named Apple hate the fact that Apple’s product gets a mention in association with a generic technology. Microsoft fought back by declaring that Podcasts are actually blogcasts.

Creative is fighting back by trying to deny the existence of the iPod and its widespread popularity:

Podcasts, short for Personal On Demand broadCast, are audio files you can download into any MP3 player or computer.

Great thinking Creative! Try to deny the entire etymology of a word. Try to pretend it is what it isn’t. Face it, Creative. The term Podcast exists because iPods are extremely popular. It doesn’t necessarily mean your product stinks, which it really doesn’t — it just means Apple has a stranglehold on the market and thus the slang that comes from that market. Besides, look on the bright side! Kleenex doesn’t dominate the tissue market anymore, does it?

Mon January 9th, 2006 5:41 pm

Filed under Advertising & Marketing