Nice,I like it! Be yourself. Be powerful. Be SAFE.
You understand where this is going.
The user should always be the center of the message.
1 Like
Hello Bluebird. Your quite a smart cookie or Iām just to
stupid to understand some of your posts.
I enjoy your higher level of thinking or ability to abstract things.
I can only imagine and then combined with coding skillā¦ oh yeah.
So I can see your stance on marketing. You may even think
the above is just marketing to get you to read the following.
I am starting to doubt this may be the case.
Everyone is into marketing. Marketing is a science of effective
communication. I believe that besides coding we should learn it
at school too. It would make us so much better communicators
if only the masses understood how we receive, process and reflect
on information.
Build it and they will come is only partly true. Apple makes the
best hard and software. Iām still helping people around me
with their Windows issues. From way back when to now.
Most people donāt know any better. Now what?
Canāt point to Apple because marketing?
What if Facebook and other competitors start convincing
the world SAFE is S**T? Starting to censor?
We canāt use marketing? That is also a wrong postion.
xxx
1 Like
I know the feeling. The team has put itself forward and Iām just organising the first meeting, look like being Friday. Iāll send out an update tomorrow.
3 Likes
Actually that judgement is also the result of good marketing 
5 Likes
I have to agree with @Artiscience.
More correctly āApple is perceived as having the best hard and software to & by the uninformedā
In reality they built the best conformist hard and soft ware. At no time did their hardware have the best benchmark figures and certainly always at a premium price for what you got. Their software was āso greatā that they swapped over to a customised version of linux/unix on their desk/lap tops. Even their revolutionary āiconā graphical interface was adapted from Xerox so at no time did they make anything new, just consistent across devices.
There is a reason business remained with non-apple products over the decades. Governments only now use Apple because they have to diversify product and souces
The advantage SAFE will have is that it is being built to be the best for the purpose it is designed for, unlike apple which was designed to appeal to the fashion conscience.
2 Likes
Well, I certainly have to relativise here: business computers are not generally non-apple-products. In fact the whole creative branch relies on Apple and that is not because they are fashion-victims - Apple developed ressources that turned out to work best with their infrastructure. One shouldnĀ“t conflate Apples > iPod history with the history of Apple in general.
I agree though, that they built best conformist - that was particular what worked out for creatives.
āAll About Usā 
You are so right that certain businesses did move over to Apple because it suited their needs. The advertising and/or art departments often had apples for the artists/writers and department admin had cp/m or ibm or unix computers. I even wrote a recreational race kart track controller using a Apple IIe (~1984), so I am not unfamiliar with apple, even as repair manager for 6 months for an Apple computer chain.
But during the 80ās 90ās 00ās it was like 100:1 non apple to apple business products used. More recently with the tablet revolution there is more a perception that apple tablets will provide the same usefulness to business as non-apple tablets.
iPods was consumer and for a time the player of choice if one had the money to buy it. But now even iPhones are fighting for any dominance in the market place.
SAFE is not like Apple in that Apple was creating computers to compete with similarly powerful computers by other companies. But it is truly a upgraded/new internet that doesnāt exist now. Providing features that do not exist on the current internet.
1 Like
Yes exactly. 20 char
@neo @artiscience: I hope you see this is besides the point, you do validate mine. Thanks
Actually unsure what you are trying to say.
1 Like
intel insideā¦ built on SAFE.
question, that app that does x y z?
ahh, is it built on safe?
Later on, it will simply be refered to as āon Safeā
So a potential tagline for many apps or enterprise sofware that might want to proclaim their privacy first approach and its resistance to attack might be something like that. (it may treat a network as a platform and that may be incorrect to technologs but it kind of rolls of the tongue)
On SAFE. built on SAFE. Its on SAFE.
1 Like
[re Solfeggio]
That makes two of us.
@neo āconsistencyā is a technical asset, and not mere marketing. Appleās stuff works well out of the box and with maximum user-friendliness. I too have seen art departments standardize on them and it isnāt marketing, but the fact that they get to use the Adobe Suite with minimal distraction from the computing platform.
EDIT: Appleās extreme attention to detail (nice GUI) and careful product engineering (elegant look) also has something to do with it for those artistic, visual types.
EDIT1: Back in the days of Windows 3.1, the technical superiority of the Macintosh was clear. Do you remember having to tweak the WIN.INI and other settings to get Windows to run efficiently? Entire books were written on the subject of getting your Windows to run efficiently. I shudder to recall those days. The Macintosh was a simpler thing to use altogether.
1 Like
Thatās alright.
My point being made is that marketing is needed and has been effective for Apple
as you folks point out that Apple isnāt really that amazing as believed by many.
Personal preferences left aside I was trying to illustrate a point that marketing is needed.
Build it and they will come. This building does include marketing. Period.
Perhaps I shouldāve let Apple out of this so the reactions would be on topic as I think
I added some good insights to the topic.
For some awkward reason I get nostalgic feelings reading this.
I would spend days going through optimal settings to get the fastest boot and load times.
And all to often the thing would crash having starting me all over again.
At some point I decided I was done.
1 Like
Maybe there is too much attention spent on specificity of the product or more acuratley what it represents as that really lies in the name safe and the acronym of S.A.F.E. There are so many ways this could go. But to throw out some more general tag lines to follow,
āwhere the worlds ideas come togetherā or
āInnovation onlineā
āLiving safely in the cloudsā
āSafety Firstā
āGet togetherā
āA truly neutral internetā
āA future for a changing worldā
These may be generic or miss the mark but Iām hoping these at least spark some ideas for others
1 Like
I like āBE SAFEā as our ājust do itā personallyā¦ itās a direct call to action, creates the sense of a clique, or group you can join and be a part of, itās simple and short etc.
EDIT: or maybe, āBe smart, Be SAFEā or something?
Afaik the current OS X is a direct descendant of NeXT (itself a BSD spin-off), which was the OS of the computer made by Steve Jobsā company after he was kicked out of Apple. I remember reading about NeXT back in the early '90s; I was fascinated because it was so ahead of its time. NeXT didnāt get traction, but when Steve Jobs was back with Apple, it made complete sense to replace their OS with that stuff. Itās all from memory, so feel free to correct if Iām wrong about something 
I kinda agree, but I think that misses the point. They managed to turn their stuff into a religion: people donāt just use their stuff, they identify by it. Now letās get down to business and try to replicate that model 
There is something interesting to be taken away from what Apple does for providing a consistent experience. I donāt care for their corporate exploitation of the consumer but a lot of people evidently do prefer stability over flexibility - and perhaps what they have mastered is perception of solid hardware and reliability.
I wonder beyond brand and into design, that having something stable can be preferred at times over something that caters to everyone. Having then software that is limiting might be a good option for those who want a simple and reliable experience. Thereās no reason then that more ambitious users should not have another alternate option. Perhaps even those two can be as one, if products are like Linux flavours often - one stable long term release and others that are full function bleeding edge.
Ideal perhaps is that at a low level use of SAFE doesnāt need a brand, itās just there; on top that then perhaps comes a branded experience and people sign up to whatever fairy tale falls out of the inefficiencies and randomness of marketing and branding committees.
Question then - will there only be one launcher? Iām expecting it would be simple to spawn one with a different design - āskinsā I think is the name for that. Perhaps thereās opportunity to have multiple flavours of design put on to a core launcher functionality. Split off the design and brand from the base launcher capability and then present simplicity; complexity; or design, with a brand stamping etc.