Logo
DiS Needs You: Save our site »
  • Logo_home2
  • Records
  • In Depth
  • In Photos
  • Blog
  • Podcast
  • Search
  • Community
  • Records
  • In Depth
  • Blog
  • Community

THIS SITE HAS BEEN ARCHIVED AND CLOSED.

Please join the conversation over on our new forums »

If you really want to read this, try using The Internet Archive.

Boards

Music Social More…

Why do certain brands

LordLuciusBanter [Edit] [Delete] 11:21, 10 September '08

And for this question I'm looking square at Nintendo and Apple, get away with constantly shitting in consumers' mouths yet they lap it up.

Case in point, every few months Apple bring out a NEW IPOD with NEW FEATURES, well actually usually just one new feature, and everyone goes BATSHIT, completely ignoring the fact that they now want you to stump up another £200 for a new one.

The same with Nintendo. Nintendo could just crank out Zelda and Mario updates for the rest of time and people would wank themselves to death over it.

Yet some brands who don't do these things get nothing but shit. Take the Foster's debate we had here a few months ago. A criticism was it's "tacked on" Australian image, in spite of the fact that it is an Australian beer, just brewed here. And everyone hates it for it. At least Fosters don't bring out a new Fosters every couple of months for bloggers to drown in their own jism over. Although maybe they should, Fosters really isn't very nice.

Anyway, what's my point. There isn't one. I just found it perplexing.


Drowned in Sound
  • DROWNED IN SOUND
  • HOME
  • SITE MAP
  • NEWS
  • IN DEPTH
  • IN PHOTOS
  • RECORDS
  • RECOMMENDED RECORDS
  • ALBUMS OF THE YEAR
  • FESTIVAL COVERAGE
  • COMMUNITY
  • MUSIC FORUM
  • SOCIAL BOARD
  • REPORT ERRORS
  • CONTACT US
  • JOIN OUR MAILING LIST
  • FOLLOW DiS
  • GOOGLE+
  • FACEBOOK
  • TWITTER
  • SHUFFLER
  • TUMBLR
  • YOUTUBE
  • RSS FEED
  • RSS EMAIL SUBSCRIBE
  • MISC
  • TERM OF USE
  • PRIVACY
  • ADVERTISING
  • OUR WIKIPEDIA
© 2000-2025 DROWNED IN SOUND