Back to Mobile View

Skip to Content

Babies go gaga for Apple? Not hardly

Martin Lindstrom says he found something interesting while doing some research for an upcoming book about brands: He handed a BlackBerry phone to about 20 different babies, and then watched their reactions to it. Without exception, they all reached up to touch the screen of the phone, which didn't do anything (since the BlackBerry wasn't a touchscreen), and then got bored. "These babies, all under two years old," he says, "have already been converted to the Apple brand."

Which makes for a fun tagline, and that leads into an article about how old brand experiences, like waiting for film to process, are being replaced by technology. But Lindstrom apparently forgets another possibility: That these babies aren't already conditioned to a certain brand, but that touch is just the natural way they would deal with the world anyway.

Yes, Apple has done a lot of work to build its brand and its reputation, and yes, the quality of the iPhone speaks volumes to anyone who has experience with one. But babies looking to touch something shiny doesn't mean they've been "brandwashed" by Apple -- it more likely means Apple has simply "tapped" into something that was already there in the first place.

[Image from oxtopus on Flickr]



Categories

Odds and ends Apple iPad

Martin Lindstrom says he found something interesting while doing some research for an upcoming book about brands: He handed a...
 

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum Comment Moderation Enabled. Your comment will appear after it is cleared by an editor.

23 Comments

Filter by:
Matthew

Not only is directly touching a thing the natural response, the indirect interaction of a mouse or a keyboard (including a phone keyboard) is distinctly _unnatural_. Nothing in nature has that kind of indirect interaction where you touch something here and something over there responds.

August 17 2011 at 7:05 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Asbjørn Ulsberg

Yea, this has absolutely nothing to do with Apple. Well, it is related to Apple in the sense that they invented the intuitive touch interface all touch phones have these days, but besides that, this has nothing to do with Apple as a brand. Touch is of course the intuitive thing to do from the moment a human is able to reach out for anything. The next reaction is often to shove the grabbed thing into your own mouth. I assume that goes regardless of whether the thing is labeled "Apple" or "Samsung".

My niece got an iPhone in her hands from the moment she could hold it and she could use it before she was one year old. She understood pinch to zoom, swipe to move back and forward, click to open, etc., long before she developed language. The touch phone interface is simply so intuitive that humans, especially at a young age, understand it out of being exploratory animals, without needing to learn it. The gestures Apple has patently implemented are that intuitive.

August 17 2011 at 3:35 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Jonathan Ober

I would agree with any of the parents out here that the devices with touch are just easy for a child to pick up and operate, it's how they are wired. My, now 4 year old, daughter's first word was iPod (we had a classic at the time). She now can unlock my phone (4 digit code and all). She has a folder of a dozen or so learning games, she can find Dora, Blue's Clues and Word World on Netflix, he knows where her movies are too. I think that there are a lot of things going for the touch interface and the UI. 1. Ease of use, natural movement of swiping, etc. 2. Great icons make for quick and easy recognition (high contrast and clear uncluttered icon/logos). 3. Lack of buttons/obstructions for getting to what you really want. There are probably more but those are what came to my mind. My 1 1/2 year old sees the iPad and iPhone as 'the thing that plays the cow movies'. I have honestly watched or listened to Cows Mooing like a million times. I will say that one new 'irk' is that there are iAds in little kid apps. This is troublesome because a child that has not yet developed their fine motor skills will often touch an ad. The xylophone app my daughter was playing has an ad in it which doesn't make sense to me. So developers...remove the ads, I would gladly pay 99 cents for something my daughter can play without fear of her hitting an ad and going online.

August 17 2011 at 9:36 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
vinodh

Well, that's what apple has done.. it has taken the simplicity of a human/child intuition and presented that in the phone.. so that even baby can just go ahead and touch with his finger and explore.

August 17 2011 at 6:10 AM Report abuse +2 rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to vinodh's comment
thanatos

"touch with his finger and explore."

That's what she said.

August 17 2011 at 10:14 AM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
Adrian von Gegerfelt

It's not about Apple making beautiful and intuitive products. It's that babies expect things to happen when you tough an object. Touch devices make them happy, old dinosaur Blackberrys don't.

August 17 2011 at 4:11 AM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
UnLaoised

I have a few apps for my 18 month old son on my iPod touch, but up to now he's been happy just pressing the home button, flicking back between the home screen and the search screen.

He's started to interact with the "In the Night Garden…" app in the last couple of weeks. Between him and his five year old sister, I reckon I'll have to get a new one for myself before long.

August 17 2011 at 4:10 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
SorboTheGeek

I've said this since watching my now 7 yr old Niece and Nephew using my various iOS devices over the years. Touch is a way that a toddler/child interacts and communicates with the world. Apple is just leveraging something that is already wired in humans. Touch!

August 16 2011 at 11:42 PM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to SorboTheGeek's comment
Meredith McKay

Touché!

August 17 2011 at 7:09 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
City 17

Not hardly? Is it just me or is that really hard to understand in the title.

August 16 2011 at 7:22 PM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to City 17's comment
david schloss

That's because "not hardly" is a double negative and isn't English. Well it's not hardly not English.

August 16 2011 at 11:03 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Nathan Derksen

My daughter learned completely on her own the gesture to unlock my iPhone at a year and a half, and her older brother learned the same on my previous iPhone at about the same age. She easily scrolls from screen to screen and presses icons for the apps. Touch is probably the most intuitive thing we can do, so it's no surprise that they dropped the BlackBerries. That, and the BlackBerry UI is pretty unintuitive in numerous ways.

August 16 2011 at 6:49 PM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to Nathan Derksen's comment
cas

when my son was 8 months old he unlocked my ipod touch, swiped pages to find the "dice" app, clicked the icon, picked up the ipod, and shook it to make the dice role. things got a lot more interesting when the ipad came out. its definitely perfect for the young. now my baby daughter tries to "touch" the tv... haha.

August 17 2011 at 9:08 AM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to cas's comment
Mabhatter

Next up is the Gummy GUI.

It's mouth activated for young and old people (not warranted for biting though)

August 17 2011 at 1:13 PM Report abuse rate up rate down
Spencer

Whoa, there are some awful trolls around here.

Chill people.

August 16 2011 at 6:43 PM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
Buy an ad here

Tweets

© 2012 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.