Slightly off-topic, but can we talk about that video?
I would love it if Google could just sell me on the idea of their products for once, instead of trying to sell me on a twentysomething Brooklyn lifestyle.
When I get hit in the face with these cheap emotional ploys that feel like an early 2000s Microsoft Zune ad, I get distracted from the actual product being touted. My resistance goes up.
Does this approach work for anyone? If you really are a Williamsburg hipster, I'd expect this kind of pandering would feel off-putting. If you're not, it's alienating.
There's certainly a place for emotion in ads. But how about a bit more product, and respect for our intelligence?
The video actually caused me to laugh from how cliche it is: A racially diverse group of 20-somethings doing "active" things like skateboarding and running on the beach.
Is that what 20-somethings do (or aspire to do) these days? Skateboarding and hanging out on the beach? Most of my peers and I spent our twenties busting our ass studying and then busting ass establishing a career. I must be getting old--watching that video I couldn't help but think, "It's daylight. Shouldn't you guys be in the office?"
Ads are aspirational, not representational according to mostly everything wrote by thelastpsychiatrist. While they are bust-assing their studies they still aspire to look cool, friendly and careless. Hence the add.
I think I can guarantee that none of them are using email to talk to their friends. Snapchat and FB messenger are much more popular among my friend group.
I only use email if I know someone doesn't use or check Facebook very often.
I find it interesting that I'm not the only one turned off by that video. I thought maybe I'm just not the target demographic but now that you mention it; it looks like just about every other video marketing some tech production. Its so... cookie cutter.
Agreed. Disappointing to have so little technical details on something as critical as email on the blog post. Understand less technical approach in tv ads and such but the blog is the place to provide some actual details about the product.
I also found myself thinking about the lifestyle of the people in the video, instead of the product. I'm no marketing expert but I suspect that this is a bad thing for a successful campaign. I haven't seen anything in the video that's not already available with the combination of Google Plus, Gmail, Google Keep and Google Now - maybe that's why I feel that way. Can't tell.
Marketing like this is supposed to form a link between the context (Brooklyn hipster lifestyle) and the product. So next time you hear about Inbox you'll think of the lifestyle and subconsciously go "maybe if I have inbox my life will be more like those cool happy good looking rich Brooklyn hipsters on the ad". Their target market with this ad is people that want to be like or have this (or a subset of this).
Apple is a more inherently hipster company that (I'm guessing here) has a large hipster marketshare. It's known for being hipster, so the link is already there. No need for ads like this to form that link to try and capture the twenty something crowd that wants this lifestyle.
Hacker news is full of people that value function, results and optimised workflow, which are essentially all that matters with an email app. So this form of marketing is lost on them :)
I usually get annoyed by too-hip advertising. But I think it makes sense here. Inbox is designed for mobile use, on the go, for a diverse array of tasks. Young urban people fit that demographic a lot more than a suburban commuter would, since that lifestyle comes with a pretty set routine and a limited variety of schedules.
Such ads make less sense when you have too-happy hipsters dancing in a park about the latest Windows edition, admittedly. But showing ads in the context of their use and probable demographic seems reasonable.
Is there any tech product today whose creators would say it is not "designed for mobile use, on the go, for a diverse array of tasks"?
> Young urban people fit that demographic a lot more than a suburban commuter would, since that lifestyle comes with a pretty set routine and a limited variety of schedules
Yeah, no way a person with three kids and a full-time job has a hectic schedule.
Indeed, the video got me thinking that they've probably done a lot of user testing already and they're confident to market it past the HN-type of people.
It also looks so confident that I thought I (31 years old) wasn't in their demographics anymore, and given I'm used to a Gmail interface which was invented in 2006, it may soon be going out of the door, but that's an inner fear of me which is talking.
I was also put off by the video, made me pretty much disinterested in the product as well.
After a bit of introspection, I think the turn off is the cheap emotional ploy that you will somehow gain a lifestyle from using their inbox filtering app.
You know, after finishing a shift on your kickstarted-funded peruvian food truck, you can go practice with your band and take selfies.
For me, it would be far more effective if they showed me how the product would help an average everyday person.
I would argue this product is not made for you. It is made to grab market share of the twentysomething crowd from Twitter/Facebook as Google sees it's gmail views shrink. These types of ads appeal to twentysomethings. Yes they're vapid and contentless, but that's what works to get that market to sign up to a product.
I felt like the text of the blog post did a pretty good job of explaining the goals of the product without much fluff. If guess if you're the sort of person who watches the video instead of reading the article, you get the marketing content designed for the people who don't read.
Video often gives you a better idea of how the product will feel to use, not emotionally, but dynamically.
Take for example Google's "Material Design" in Android L, you can read all the articles you want, but the concept won't make sense until you watch a video of the animation/transitions/etc. There are a lot of products/ideas like that. They say an image is a thousand words, and this isn't a sixty thousand word article.
I think it is silly to suggest that people who prefer video content over an article are "less intelligent." Instead those people want to get an idea of how the product would actually work in reality rather than just eating up all the carefully crafted marketing language within the article.
This is why unboxing videos and amateur product demos are so damn popular on YouTube: They actually give you a true-to-life idea of how a product would be. Articles are too carefully crafted, and seeing the product without the person interacting with the product is only 1/2 the message or less.
Who are the majority of people who work for tech companies? Twenty-something people who live a Brooklyn lifestyle. Guess who the products are made for?
When I get hit in the face with these cheap emotional ploys that feel like an early 2000s Microsoft Zune ad, I get distracted from the actual product being touted. My resistance goes up.
Does this approach work for anyone? If you really are a Williamsburg hipster, I'd expect this kind of pandering would feel off-putting. If you're not, it's alienating.
There's certainly a place for emotion in ads. But how about a bit more product, and respect for our intelligence?