New iPad adopts simple product naming Steve Jobs brought to Apple in 1997

24567

Comments

  • ijoynerijoyner Posts: 135member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tundraboy View Post


    Geeks love complexity. You know that a company is run by geeks when they have 137 different smartphone models listed on their website. The thing is, when you have 137 different models, or even just 10 for that matter, the names you pick for them will not matter anymore. Consumers will not bother to distinguish between your 137 different models, they'll just say "let me see the Samsung". So if you think a snazzy name for your 46th smartphone model is going to help sell it, forget it.



    Just one more reason why Apple is just running circles around their competitors.



    Not only geeks love complexity, but marketing idiots as well - divide and conquer, sell junk by confusing the marketplace.



    Apple does not sell junk ('we don't do cheap') so the natural outcome of that is a simplified product range and naming scheme.



    One thing I teach computing students is that much of computing is about handling complexity and thus bringing about the KISS principle. Paradoxically, simplicity might look easy to bring about, but in fact it is more difficult to come up with a simple product. Often a simple product has more functionality than a complex counterpart, but people are attracted to the complex product thinking it must be more functional. Windows has got away with this thinking for years, but now the computer marketplace is becoming smarter and the message of complexity vs simplicity and functionality is better understood.



    As Steve Jobs (of NeXT) noted in 1996: ?Design is a funny word. Some people think design means how it looks. But of course, if you dig deeper, it?s really how it works.?



    Geeks and marketing people think design is giving products fancy names and making them complex to confuse the consumer. See my letter to the editor in Communications of the ACM Feb 12 Vol 55, no 2, on the legacy of Steve Jobs, which says he basically broke down the geek factor.



    This did not start with Jobs though. In 1963, Bob Barton wrote a paper "A new approach the the functional design of a digital computer" where he said computers should not be designed by circuit designers, the geeks, but by the software developers, who were then the users of the machines. The result was the Burroughs B5000 computer which is a machine still ahead of the times in 2012, as opposed to IBM's circuit designer approach which found it difficult to implement virtual memory, timesharing, etc.
  • emoelleremoeller Posts: 226member
    I think there is also a very solid business reason for limiting the naming conventions. In the case of the iPad just released apparently only Samsung is able to produce the screens (two other vendors are having problems ramping production - see this Wired article http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/...splay-outlook/ ). Apple has traditionally swapped parts around, as long as they met the specifications, but if you have a name that has a specific component list then customers could cry foul when parts are swapped. If Apple swapped out Sharp's IGZO screens in the "new iPad" in place of the Samsung screens I could see all kinds of folks wanting this or that screen.



    Apple was smart to just have an iPad and iPhone and MacBook Pro, etc.. The brands become iconic (like Porsche's 911 cars), yet allow manufacturing changes between major updates without fanfare. In the end this is classic Apple - produce the best products. If Apple continues with this approach as a customer and I purchase an Apple product it will be the best available. It may get upgraded sometime but the new ones don't scream out that it is much different than what I have - mitigating the "poor sap who just bought the "Old" model issue.
  • drax7drax7 Posts: 38member
    Brilliant marketing move. Steve has successfully transferred his DNA. They get it.
  • rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    Er, so how come the iPhone is called iPhone 4S? Apparently Steve's brilliant naming strategy introduced 15 years ago hasn't made it to the iPhone yet.
  • euphoniouseuphonious Posts: 303member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by EmperorsNewClothes View Post


    It's a stupid and short-sighted name. What will they call the next one? The even newer iPad?



    Rubbish. The short-sighted thing would be to keep on incrementing the number year after year.



    The numbering has to be abandoned at some point, before the numbers get so high that it starts to sound stupid. Anyone for an iPad 13 or an iPhone 11?
  • isheldonisheldon Posts: 570member
    Fact check : The graphite iMac was called the iMac DV SE - I should know, I owned one. Therefore this AI claim has exceptions. The box had it named such as well.

    I expect the next iPhone to be called the new iPhone- enough w the suffixes across the board. IMO.
  • misamisa Posts: 663member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Apple's latest iPad, originally anticipated to be named iPad 3 or iPad HD, was simply called "the new iPad" during its introduction.



    I think the error that was made was that the iPad 2 was called "iPad 2" in marketing materials, thus having to backtrack from calling the next model "iPad 3" even now if you look at the Apple website, it shows them as "iPad 2" and "the new iPad"



    What we'll probably see next year is "the new iPad" and the existing model just gets called "third generation iPad" or "2012 iPad" like cars.



    One of the reasons all the android phones are not appealing at all is that you can't tell one model from another. It would be much better of all the competitors cut their choices down to "cheap, larger screen, and luxury" models eg Samsung Galaxy Talk (competes with iPhone,) Galaxy Notepad (competes with iPod touch,) Galaxy Canvas (competes with iPad.) Then stick with it.



    Off the top of my head all I know is that Samsung, Motorola, LG and HTC make Android devices, RIM makes their own devices, and Nokia makes Symbian and Microsoft devices. Change the model name when it's purpose significantly changes. Right now you look at AT&T, T-Mobile, any MVNO's website and you're just thrown a list of largely identical devices at difference price points, and the average Joe just wants something that works that does X,Y,Z, but the device says it has feature A,B,C,D,G,U,R,Z which the Z may not even be the same thing (see GPS,GNSS,A-GPS, and how people confuse GPS with GSM.)
  • michael scripmichael scrip Posts: 1,894member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mrr View Post


    The thing about simple product names is that it is indeed confusing when you go to buy or compare prices.



    Are they selling this year or last year's model?



    A major problem with simple names for products like MacPro or MacBook Pro or now iPad is that when you try to buy a used one it is often impossible to know what you are really buying!



    You have to rely on unofficial names like Mac Pro (8 core) or Mac Pro (Early 2009) or Mac Pro (Mid 2010) all of which might have 8 cores in them. Confusing.



    Even worse is when you have to track down the model identifier like MacBookPro8.3



    I rather know straight off that it is a iPhone 4GS, or iPad2.



    This is a pain and NOT a good thing.



    Apple calls it the "MacBook Air" and not the "MacBook Air 5"



    Surely they've thought of that while pondering future iPad names...



    Besides... laptops are infinitely more confusing with the range of options available. (processor speeds, RAM, storage, etc)



    If they can eschew all that and still simply call it "MacBook Air"... then naming iPads shouldn't be a problem at all.
  • macjellomacjello Posts: 38member
    I think calling it the iPad 3 would have been a perfectly simple and elegant choice. One of the problems the non-numbered name creates is that Apple now sells an iPad and an iPad 2, but the iPad 2 is older! Anyone who is completely new to the iPad or Apple products is going to find this odd, if not thoroughly confusing
  • rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    You know it would have bed less confusing if Apple had explained the change in naming convention. Since they called the second generation iPad "iPad 2" people naturally expected this one to be called "iPad 3" or "iPad 2S" if it was an incremental update. But referring to it as "the new iPad" in the keynote was confusing, even if the word "new" wasn't capitalized. Why not just call it iPad (3rd generation). That's what they show in the Apple store
  • rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacJello View Post


    I think calling it the iPad 3 would have been a perfectly simple and elegant choice. One of the problems the non-numbered name creates is that Apple now sells an iPad and an iPad 2, but the iPad 2 is older! Anyone who is completely new to the iPad or Apple products is going to find this odd, if not thoroughly confusing



    They should have dropped 2 from iPad 2 and just have iPad (2nd generation) and iPad (3rd generation).
  • jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by drax7 View Post


    brilliant marketing move. Steve has successfully transferred his dna. They get it.



    +1,000
  • rufworkrufwork Posts: 110member
    This year, Apple has continued to sell a single iPad 2 while offering a "new iPad," positing the device somewhere between the naming convention of iPhone and its iPod touch and Macs, which don't get new names and typically don't overlap in sales.



    Strangely, the story seems to have gotten as close as you can without actually hitting the mark.



    They're going to leave numbers behind entirely, and simply start calling things the "New iPad" and the "Previous iPad". Same for the iPhone, probably before they hit iPhone 14 and things seem ludicrous.



    You either have to go with years (Office, Madden, cars) or relativity (Old and Previous), and the second deemphasizes age.
  • apple inside herapple inside her Posts: 21member
    I can't wait when the 4th iPad comes out I can sell my 3rd gen on E-bay as a "New iPad".
  • asciiascii Posts: 5,363member
    It is a bit confusing sometimes, having iMac (late 2010) and iMac (mid 2011), but it's better than all those embarrassing high-tech sounding names that the other manufacturers use (Bionic, Skyrocket, ...).
  • shaun, ukshaun, uk Posts: 1,050member
    The 2013 iPad announcement is going to be interesting. I can just see Apple's line up now...



    The New iPad

    The Old iPad

    The iPad 2



    As the article states this policy only makes sense if you have just one model on sale at any one time as they do with the iMac, MBA, MBP, iPod Touch, etc, etc.



    If you have old and new models on sale together it just gets confusing. They only way they could get around that is to add the year or generation number to the product as such:



    iPad (4th Generation or 2013)

    iPad (3rd Generation or 2012)

    etc



    Those details would have to appear alongside the pricing information on the inventory system and online checkout.



    Frankly I don't care either way but I certainly wouldn't stoop to insulting people who prefer one system over the other as some have done above.
  • solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    That's a big difference between Apple and other smartphone vendors producing new brand names every few months (such as HTC's latest ThunderBolt, Incredible, Rhyme, Rezound among the 51 current models listed on its website; Motorola's Droid 4, Droid Bionic, Droid RAZR among 27 models on its website; and Samsung's Illusion, Stratosphere, Fascinate, Continuum, Galaxy S, Galaxy S II Skyrocket and Galaxy Nexus, just to name a few of the 137 it offers.)



    I have to post this SNL faux commercial again:
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    Now it's time to kill completely the MacBook Air and MacBook Pro names and product lines.



    And release an entirely new simplified notebook product line this year in 11, 13 and 15" sizes named "AirBook"



    (no 17" version)



    I don't see any of those things happening. The Mac is an important brand to Apple. Now before you say they dropped Mac from OS X for Mountain Lion note they also dropped iPhone from iPhone OS and made it IOS yet I doubt anyone would say the iPhone isn't important to Apple.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by EmperorsNewClothes View Post


    It's a stupid and short-sighted name. What will they call the next one? The even newer iPad?



    Everyone will call it the iPad 3. Nobody will call it "the new iPad" other than those paid by Apple to call it that.



    What will you call today tomorrow? I assume you will call it yesterday because a new today has taken it's place. It's relative and won't be difficult a year from now to determine which is the new and which is the old iPad.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple Inside Her View Post


    I can't wait when the 4th iPad comes out I can sell my 3rd gen on E-bay as a "New iPad".



    It's the new iPad because it's new. I would doubt it's labeled as such on the back of the device or on the box.
  • absolutedesignzabsolutedesignz Posts: 1,930member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ascii View Post


    It is a bit confusing sometimes, having iMac (late 2010) and iMac (mid 2011), but it's better than all those embarrassing high-tech sounding names that the other manufacturers use (Bionic, Skyrocket, ...).



    agreed



    I still cannot get over the Sprint Samsung Galaxy S II Epic Touch 4G
  • isaidsoisaidso Posts: 750member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacJello View Post


    I think calling it the iPad 3 would have been a perfectly simple and elegant choice. One of the problems the non-numbered name creates is that Apple now sells an iPad and an iPad 2, but the iPad 2 is older! Anyone who is completely new to the iPad or Apple products is going to find this odd, if not thoroughly confusing



    This will all quickly fade into the past and nobody will care.

    sheesh! ...The new antennagate.
  • solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by isaidso View Post


    This will all quickly fade into the past and nobody will care.

    sheesh! ...The new antennagate.



    NameGate? Will there be one about the Retina Display on the iPad? PixelGate?
Sign In or Register to comment.