by Rachel Bernard and Lauryn Bennett
Does Apple know that other meaning of "pad"? Didn't they run the name by any women? The incredulous blog world reels, iTampon rises as a top trending topic on Twitter, and the MadTV iPad spoof resurfaces again.
Look, let’s get one thing out of the way. It’s extremely unlikely that Apple didn't run the name past consumers. Not doing a linguistic disaster check on a name before final launch is a rookie mistake. And this is not Apple's first time at the rodeo. The association with maxi-pads probably came up. Someone made a judgment call: the name is stronger than the static that would surely crackle for a week or two before the Internet gets down to the real debate – how the iPad will impact content consumption and the straggling publishing world.
Why not iTablet?
So why iPad and not iTablet or iSlate? While iTablet was leading the Internet horserace leading up to the launch, iPad and iSlate were neck-and-neck. Well, HP already owns "Slate," and even if Apple could have squatted on the same trademark as HP, why would they want to? Apple will always lead, never follow. Nor are they generic, which is what iTablet would make them, since the whole tech industry uses tablet. By not going that route, they’re signaling that iPad is a hero product, proprietary of Apple and Apple alone.
Can’t they iThink of something more iClever?
Apple's had a good run with the “i___” convention. But history shows us that they probably never intended for their entire portfolio to be comprised of iThis and iThat.
Let's think way back to 2002 when they introduced the eMac, the low cost alternative to their iMac and PowerBook. At that point, they had not just one but three prefixes in their branding arsenal: “e” stood for educational products, while “power” signaled a professional device, and “i” was used for personal gadgets.
But as technology became more accessible, products could no longer live in just one silo, so everything in Apple's portfolio became personal, everything became an “i” product, and therefore Apple became synonymous with “i.” Personal, friendly, instantly-familiar and immediately-accessible, it’s a perfect fit for a product that, as Jobs said himself, should be all of these things.
Too Close for Comfort
The name certainly fits nicely within Apple’s portfolio. iPad, to state the obvious, is just one vowel away from iPod. But does that make them too similar? Google certainly thought so. If you had searched for "iPad" the day of the launch, thanks to their latest Synonym System, Google would have given you results for both "iPad" and "iPod".
By now, Google’s fancy artificial intelligence has learned that that little vowel is pretty important, so you won’t see results for both. But what about the average consumer, are they going to confuse the two? Aside from the fact that you'd have to live under a rock to not have heard about the iPad launch and most of Apple's customers are pretty tech savvy, both the iPad and the iPod are well-considered purchases. Consumers are going to take some time to consider before they check out.
Did You Giggle About Google?
There are a lot of names out there that make the nine-year-old in us chuckle when they first hit the market: Google, Zappos, FCUK (French Connection UK), Wii, Virgin. If it’s a great brand, we get over our initial cold feet about the name.
Bottom line, beyond some negative feedback this week, the iPad has been generally well received. And, let's not forget, Steve Jobs had no problem saying "iPad" with a straight face. He will continue to. And you will too. Names are like that. If you say them with conviction for long enough, and they’re attached to a good product, the world at large with eventually fall in line.
