Apple Watch絕對不是個沒用的東西

When people say Apple has built things people didn't know they need, it's not really true. Apple has built things that meet the needs people have always had. More than any other consumer company, Apple gets what people really, fundamentally need. That's why announcements like last week's Apple Watch tend to have the cultural impact they do.
當人們談及蘋果品牌，常常說，它製造了一些人們不知道自己需要的產品，其實並非如此。蘋果早已製造了人們日常所需的產品。甚至比其他的產品公司，蘋果從人們根本所需的基礎上製造產品，正如不久前Apple Watch首發時所標榜的，它正產生着深刻的文化影響力。

When we think of needs and products we often go right to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, the ubiquitous theory that human needs manifest in a specific sequence, from base survival to the pinnacle of self-actualization. Marketers have spent decades figuring out at what level of Maslow's hierarchy their customers are stuck, and then offering products and marketing for that need. Think of Campbell's "Mmm-mmm Good" campaign at one end and Lexus's "Relentless Pursuit of Perfection" at the other. If Maslow was right, brands needed to target a single need, satisfy it well, and be done.
當談及到人們的生活所需，我們常常都會想到馬斯洛需求層次理論，也就是人類在每個階段的不同需求，從底部最基本的生存需求到頂端的自我實現需求。市場營銷人員多年來不斷進行研究，消費者的需求處於哪個層次，並相應地爲人們提供生活所需品。試思考，以"嗯…不錯"爲口號的坎貝爾罐頭公司的市場戰役和以"不懈地追求完美"爲目標的凌志汽車公司是如何不斷追求滿足消費者需求的。如果馬斯洛的理論是符合現實的，那麼那些著名的品牌就需要重新定位，把目標從人們的基本需求方面制定，做到盡善盡美。

Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs：馬斯洛需求層次理論，也稱爲基本需求層次理論。分別是生理上的需要，安全上的需要，情感和歸屬的需要，尊重的需要，自我實現的需要和自我超越的需求。
ubiquitous,adj.：普遍存在的；無所不在的。此處指的是馬斯洛所提出的六大需求層次理論，就是人類所普遍存在的需求。
pinnacle n. :高峯，頂尖，極點。
Campbell:坎貝爾罐頭公司
Lexus:雷克薩斯（凌志汽車）,日本豐田汽車公司旗下豪華車品牌。

But it turns out that Maslow wasn't entirely right. My own research at Forrester Research has focused on synthesizing a much more complete and empirical description of people's fundamental needs based on research in psychology, economics, and neuroscience. When we talk about human needs, we use four categories:
然而，研究發現馬斯洛理論似乎不太符合當今的社會狀況。筆者在福雷斯特研究公司進行了一項研究，其關注於建立一個關於人們需求的更完整更有說服力的理論描述，其中涵蓋了心理學，經濟學和神經學科方面的知識。當我們談論到人類需求，有四個方面是需要考慮的：

Connection
關聯性
Comfort
舒適性
Uniqueness
個性化
Variety
多樣化

Crucially, we've learned that these needs are not hierarchical. Think of yourself: You don't wake up in the morning and only think about food, then worry about making money, then think about loftier pursuits. Neither your day nor your life unfolds like that. It's messier, because of our adaptive and clever biology. Our hormones, our neurotransmitters, even our gut bacteria cause us to think about base needs like survival and loftier ones like personal fulfillment simultaneously. In fact, they compete with one another for our attention, and we prioritize and re-prioritize them on the fly, as context changes.
要注意的是，我們早已明白這些需求並不是最重要的。請考慮一下自身情況：早上起牀的時候，我們並不會擔心沒有食物或者無法賺錢養家，那麼我們就思考更高層次的需求。我們每天的生活都不會以這樣的擔憂而開始，還有比這更復雜的，因爲我們擁有人類天生擁有的適應性和智慧。我們的荷爾蒙，神經傳遞介質，甚至是腸道細菌都會讓我們同時思考自身的基本需求，如生存需求和實現自身滿足感的更高層次的需求。實際上，它們正利用我們的注意力彼此互相抗衡，正如不同的情境變換，我們把它們多次不斷更改優先的位置。

lofty adj.：崇高的，高級的。此處loftier pursuits,更高層次的需求，指的是精神層面的追求。
neurotransmitter ['nʊrotrænzmɪtɚ], n.：神經遞質

Apple's understanding of this is what sets it apart when it comes to launching market-changing products, including the newly announced Apple Watch. Apple doesn't lock into one need on the hierarchy (soup that satisfies hunger, or perfect luxury car), but instead builds and markets products that connect on all four of the human needs that we're grappling with constantly. Let's use the Apple Watch as an example:
蘋果公司根據其對於人類需求的理解，在市場變動的情況下推廣產品的時候，包括Apple Watch，把這兩個概念分離開來。蘋果公司並不侷限優先滿足某一個需求（生理需求還是精神需求），相反地，它製造和推廣符合人們不斷掙扎的四大需求的新產品，下面就以Apple Watch爲例，給大家分析蘋果公司是如何的獨領風騷。

Connection
關聯性

Texts, finger-drawn emoticons, even the feature some consider hopelessly gimmicky, heartbeat sharing, are all central to the device keeping you connected.
文本信息，手寫表情符號，甚至是任何逗趣狡猾的元素，情感分享，都是你和外界聯繫的媒介。

Comfort:
舒適性

Connections to loved ones is part of comfort, and so is the built-in health and fitness tracking, which makes the device something of a coach in your quest to improve yourself.
與所愛的人產生聯繫能夠讓你感到安逸舒適，那麼機帶的健康追蹤功能也能滿足這一需求，它能夠適時貼心地給你提供健身的提醒。

Uniqueness
個性化

An easy box for Apple to check. Though many were surprised by the Apple Watch's conventional look (which pundits immediately declared savvy), Apple actually took the traditional winding crown of a watch and with it created a unique UI and UX, making it a tool for zooming in and out of maps or menus. The same is true in Apple's creation of an original touch interface which distinguishes between a tap and a press, giving the small screen twice as much utility as it would otherwise have.
很簡單，以小見大。儘管很多人都驚訝於蘋果手錶的傳統造型（智者所標榜的悟性），設計師在設計的過程中，採用了傳統的環形皇冠造型，並設計了獨特的用戶界面和用戶體驗，使之能夠幫助用戶放大和縮小觀看地圖和菜單選項。同樣的，蘋果獨創的傳統識別點擊和長按的觸屏，提供了比屏幕大兩倍的增縮功能。UI: user interface 用戶界面
UX：user experience 用戶體驗
Variety
多樣化

Design plays a big role here through interchangeable watch bands. We've seen recently examples even in Apple's own marketing of customers celebrating uniqueness even though the products are remarkably uniform. Think of the commercial that flashes through the lids of dozens of MacBooks, each been dressed up with its own clever stickers, literally wrapped around the company's brand mark. Variety can of course also come from the suite of apps available to put on your watch.
設計，是手錶品牌可以不斷變化的皇牌。我們可以從最近的手錶發佈會，包括蘋果手錶的發佈會慶祝其個性化的場合中發現，不同品牌的手錶都有其獨特的設計標誌。想想從中的商業鏈是怎樣連接起來的，從Macbooks的滑蓋，每一件產品都有其獨特的智能貼紙，也就是把公司商標直接地展示在產品上。當然，多種手機應用也能適應不同品牌的客戶端。

But couldn't other smart watch entrants do the same thing? Forrester survey data shows that interest in wearing a wrist-based computing or sensoring device had grown from an already-high 28% in 2013 to an impressive 42% in 2014, all before the Apple Watch was a thing. But ask an average person if they know about the Pebble, the Samsung Gear products, or the new Moto 360 and you'll get blank stares in return. They may know the Nike Fuel Band or Fit Bit.
那麼，其他新興的智能手錶製造商不就可以照樣宣傳了嗎？福雷斯特研究公司的數據顯示，人們對於攜帶智能腕錶的興趣從2013年的28%上升到2014年的42%，這全都歸功於蘋果手錶的出現。不過，通過採訪路人，問及他們是否認識一款名爲Pebble的三星智能手錶，或者最新的摩托羅拉360手錶，得到的答覆都是不知道。也許他們只知道耐克的運動腕帶或者是Fit Bit智能腕帶。

I'd argue that none of those devices delivers on our four needs as fully or as conveniently as Apple. For example, even though Pebble is aiming for all four needs, it has used less-convenient technology to deliver on those needs — admirable as the early entrant but insufficient at this stage in the market. Samsung, on the other hand, has created a device that promises to meet these four needs fully, but as a company it doesn't have the market power to draw other app makers into the environment as quickly as Apple can, giving Apple an app variety advantage from its first day on sale — as the mobile payment system announcement demonstrates. And in the mind of the potential buyer, Samsung and the others suffer vis-a-vis Apple because none can offer the reassurance — itself a form of comfort — that the company behind it has delivered on this before.[/en
筆者敢斷言，任何一個類似的電子產品銷售商都無法像蘋果公司那樣滿足消費者的四大需求。比如，即使Pebble旨在滿足人們的四大需求，它所採用的技術相對複雜——初次發行時還能吸引消費者，但是無法長久符合市場需求。至於三星，創造了一個標榜能夠滿足四大需求的設備，但是三星公司卻無法像蘋果公司一樣創立屬於自己品牌獨有的應用市場，這就給蘋果公司足夠的空間出售本公司的應用產品，作爲一個手機支付系統而運營。同時，在潛在的消費者心目中，三星和其他品牌與蘋果品牌正面交鋒，只會慘敗，因爲它們都無法保證其產品的舒適性，這也是公司之前所提倡的理念。

That's another secret to Apple's dominance. Once it established itself as a company that could meet these needs, people tend to trust the brand more — maybe more than it deserves, but certainly more than other entrants — giving it an advantage that other brands need to fight just to get people to listen; that's why so many competing companies literally use Apple in their marketing, comparing their own products and features to the one's that seem to hog all the attention: Apple's. Apple seems to own the conversation. Other, highly-regarded smartwatches already exist, but now people are talking about Apple's proposed definition of a smartwatch.

另外，蘋果能夠獨領風騷的原因還有一個。當公司建立了自己的品牌形象後，人們就會相信這個品牌——也許品牌效應在實際上並不那麼重要，但是這就是與其他新興同行相比的優勢。品牌優勢能夠使消費者願意關注它的動態，這就是爲什麼那麼多競爭公司把蘋果公司當做市場模範，不斷比較和檢測自己公司的產品能否吸引到"果粉"。似乎蘋果公司在此期間有其發言權。另一方面，倍受關注的智能手錶早已面世，不過人們如今正在談論的就只有蘋果的智能手錶了。

This was precisely the strategy that Apple used to sell the iPad, showing dialogue-free commercials that merely depicted the magical things the iPad could do for you. This made some people buy an iPad, and others know what they would want when they finally got a tablet from another manufacturer. Either way, Apple dominated by controlling the expectations the user had about what needs the iPad would fulfill.
這正是蘋果公司用於銷售iPad的銷售策略，無對話商業模式，讓iPad給你提供意想不到的幫助。這樣使得很多人都想擁有iPad，其他人就會想他們從其他製造商中獲得什麼。不管怎樣，蘋果公司之所以引領風尚，就是因爲它能夠滿足用戶所需。

The watch experience will be harder to illustrate than the iPad's, to be sure, but I suspect Apple's not done creating this experience. The smartwatch is the spearhead to a broader wearable experience, populated with a phone, a watch, an earpiece, health monitors, and more things that, deep down, you know you need.
手錶的銷售歷程將會比iPad的銷售歷程更難以概括，說真的，筆者對蘋果公司是否完成這一歷程存在疑問。而智能手錶則是衡量其耐用性的標準，它能充當手機，手錶，耳機，健康監測，還有更多功能，你所需要的功能。