Apple should include Samsung's latest Galaxy S ll advertisement in their next patent infringement suit.
The Samsung ad above starts out with a faceless philosopher expounding on the purpose of our aspirations as competitive individuals.
"Nobody ever set their sights on second place."
The images flashing across the screen progress from kids racing in gym class, to running in track meets, to filming said track meet on the Galaxy S ll. Then images of Martin Luther King Jr, Rocky and Evel Knievel appear with the philosopher asking "Who aspires to be almost remembered?"
"There are definitely more kids dressed as Batman than Robin." And then—as if to admit that Samsung is still in second place working as hard as they can to reach Apple levels of success—the philosopher laments "We all aspire."
Forty seconds of inspirational imagery and philosophical posturing is then suddenly cut out at the knees by the cliched marketing droll that has plagued smartphone and tech advertisements for so many years. Screw the Apple-esque philosophical heart strings and throw some tech specs claiming the Galaxy S ll has the "most vivid screen out there on our fastest phone ever. Because we're samsung and that's just the way we're wired."
The consumer doesn't care about the way you or your gadgets are wired Samsung. Tech specs, and benchmark performance statistics are reserved for the PC gaming industry and chest-pounding geeks who use liquid nitrogen to cool their desktop PCs. Samsung is supposed to be selling consumer products to every-day users. These people want to find a reason to relate to and use your products on a different level than tech specs alone. Samsung was moments away from accomplishing subtly forcing the themes of aspiration and becoming more than what you currently are through hard work down the throats of the viewer without them even noticing. Then Samsung pulled the rug out from underneath the viewer and entered into Droid and Xoom territory.
Samsung came close to emulating Apple's ability to convince average consumers that they need their product on a philosophical level, but ultimately the technocrat deep inside won out.