or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › 'It's almost here:' Apple announces 'iPhone 5' event for Sept. 12
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

'It's almost here:' Apple announces 'iPhone 5' event for Sept. 12 - Page 6

post #201 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slang4Art View Post

If it is called iPhone 5, then even Apple is wrong. Sorry, but that is simply pandering to the lowest common denominator and ruins the intelligent naming conventions iPhone carried in the past. Apple may name it iPhone 5 to avoid confusing idiots who don't understand the product line or its history, but there is no reason to call the 6th generation, 4th form factor iPhone an iPhone 5.

 

The name of the iphone does not imply its generation number. Whatever Apple decides to name the next iphone, it's solely their decision to make. Why do people insist on Apple being "wrong" when it's THEIR products and THEIR naming scheme? The iphone 4s was the 5th generation iphone, yet it wasn't named iphone 5. That alone should answer any uncertainty about whether or not the name of the phone is an indication of its generation number. The next iphone will be named whatever Apple chooses to name it, it's their choice. Not yours or mine. Everyone else who thinks the name represents the generation number are the ones who are "wrong."

 

Most consumers don't care about the product line's history or what name it's called. They just want the new iphone that "just came out."

 

If the form factor doesn't change, then it could've very well been named iphone 4gs. Whether or not the leaked photos/videos are real will be put to rest next week.


Edited by neosum - 9/4/12 at 4:23pm
post #202 of 298

The example of the iPhone 4 and 4s works for these two reasons:

1. iPhone 4 worked because it was literally the 4th gen iPhone and a new design iteration.

2. iPhone 4s worked because the design didn't change but the internals did.  Much like the 3G and the 3GS.

 

But as I state above, the number 5 says nothing about it's generation of model or it's design iteration.

 

if you were to look at just physical design, it would be the iPhone 4, but that doesn't work.

If you look at generation, it would be the iPhone 6.

post #203 of 298

I'm kind of surprised everyone was correct on the date, I was hoping they wouldn't be and apple had more secrecy then that. But I hope this also means that IOS 6 is almost finished, but to my knowledge its not in GM form yet? I'm curious to know if they switched to smaller sim cards or not, as I'm thinking of getting an unlocked one versus at&t. Exciting times now I'm sure all the rumors will be full steam ahead until the 12th.

post #204 of 298
Originally Posted by neosum View Post

The name of the iphone does not imply its generation number.

 

iPhone 4.

 

Most consumers don't care about the product line's history or what name it's called. They just want the new iphone that "just came out."

 

"Introducing the new iPhone". Oh, hey. That's what's newest. Rather than having laymen keep track of numbers.

 

If the form factor doesn't change, then it could've very well been named iphone 4gs.

 

Where'd the G come from? The telephony? But S only comes after a new revision name's original, as it's a Speed boost on top of it.

post #205 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

That could be why they titled that with a 5 below the "year".

Exactly what I was thinking.
post #206 of 298
Why do people give a shit whether it's called iPhone 5, iPhone 6 or just iPhone. I mean seriously who cares?!?
post #207 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by StephanJobs View Post

Exactly what I was thinking.

I wasn't sure if that is what you were eluding to or not. I certainly didn't consider it until reading your post.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #208 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

iPhone 4.

 

 

"Introducing the new iPhone". Oh, hey. That's what's newest. Rather than having laymen keep track of numbers.

 

 

Where'd the G come from? The telephony? But S only comes after a new revision name's original, as it's a Speed boost on top of it.

There's no indication from apple that the name iphone 4 represented the 4th generation. That's just speculation. It could simply mean a form factor change, thus time for a new number indicator. Since the previous form factor was named 3, 4 would come next and it could be coincidental that it also happens to the the 4th generation. Every other generation says otherwise.

 

I just made up the 4GS portion as an example. G for telephony and S for siri coming out of beta. My point is, they can name it whatever they want. Apple has never said that the name implies generation. The 5 generations of iphone names prove it. People are calling them wrong or technically incorrect when to them, it makes sense. They can't be wrong because it's their choice.

 

Most people with iphones don't know which version they have other than the newest one.

post #209 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I wasn't sure if that is what you were eluding to or not. I certainly didn't consider it until reading your post.

It's cool. Maybe I shouldve been more clear in that, but I had submitted a few posts before about it being the 5th year as possibly the reason behind the number 5.

I don't get too concerned by the name really. But it's fun to think about their little hints and reasoning to their names and events. 1wink.gif
post #210 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I don't recall anyone getting into a tizzy over the jump from iPhone to iPhone 3G.

 

 

... because the '3G' clearly referred to the 3G capability, not to a version number. (Which you know, but you're being deliberately obtuse.)

post #211 of 298
Originally Posted by neosum View Post
There's no indication from apple that the name iphone 4 represented the 4th generation. That's just speculation.

 

How can you possibly say that it being the 4th iPhone was a coincidence? 4th iPhone, running iOS 4 with an A4 chip. So ignore the first. Now you're saying the 6th iPhone running iOS 6 with an A6 (if Solipsism's right, and I hope he is) chip will be called the iPhone 5?

 

…the previous form factor was named 3…

 

No, the previous (and then current) telephony generation was called "3".

 

G for telephony and S for siri coming out of beta.

 

That's not what S has ever stood for. Makes less sense than the arguments of ours that people try to denounce.

 

Most people with iphones don't know which version they have other than the newest one.

 

So what was wrong with "the new iPhone" with "iPhone" being the name?

post #212 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

My additional logic was based off of the fact that they never released an iPhone 2, just called it 3GS

I think your mistake is that you are using logic of numbers instead of logic of marketing.

 

The original iPhone - (introduction)

iPhone  3G - (has 3G naturally)

iPhone 3GS - (looks identical to the 3G just a spec bump)

iPhone 4 - (brand new design nothing trendy to name it after as so just call it 4)

iPhone 4S - (looks exactly like iPhone 4 but with a spec bump)

iPhone 5 - (brand new design but nothing particularly name worthy happening except LTE however that is problematic in Australia and UK so play it safe)

iPhone 5S - ( looks identical with a spec boost)

iPhone 6 - (brand new design etc, etc)

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #213 of 298
Originally Posted by mstone View Post
iPhone 5 - (brand new design but nothing particularly name worthy happening except LTE however that is problematic in Australia and UK so play it safe)

 

But then LTE's wrong to begin with. Apple hasn't named devices based on branches of telephony, only the telephony itself. LTE's only one type of 4G. Apple didn't call the iPhone 3G "iPhone HSPA". It would've been 4G, but then you hit the old marketing thing where G is "less than" S. And it's hardly a brand new design. 

post #214 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

But then LTE's wrong to begin with. Apple hasn't named devices based on branches of telephony, only the telephony itself. LTE's only one type of 4G. Apple didn't call the iPhone 3G "iPhone HSPA". It would've been 4G, but then you hit the old marketing thing where G is "less than" S. And it's hardly a brand new design. 

We already know Apple likes the name LTE better than 4G, one, because 4G is also HSPA+ which is nowhere as fast as LTE and, two, they already named the iPad with LTE  so clearly their preference is LTE, and three, to name the next iPhone 4 (anything) is a marketing fopaux since it is a brand new design and there were already two previous models called 4. Even now they are critized for not making any significant design updates. They really had no other choice except iPhone 5 in my opinion.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #215 of 298
Originally Posted by stone View Post
…to name the next iPhone 4 (anything) is a marketing fopaux since it is a brand new design and there were already two previous models called 4.

 

I'll turn the argument I've been getting all day back around and say that Apple has no pattern whatsoever, they can call it whatever they want, regardless of how many models were previously called "4", and that it's not a brand new design.


They really had no other choice except iPhone 5 in my opinion.

 

So the new iPhone is just right out, then. Or the proper number. Just right out.

post #216 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

How can you possibly say that it being the 4th iPhone was a coincidence? 4th iPhone, running iOS 4 with an A4 chip. So ignore the first. Now you're saying the 6th iPhone running iOS 6 with an A6 (if Solipsism's right, and I hope he is) chip will be called the iPhone 5?

 

 

No, the previous (and then current) telephony generation was called "3".

 

 

That's not what S has ever stood for. Makes less sense than the arguments of ours that people try to denounce.

 

 

So what was wrong with "the new iPhone" with "iPhone" being the name?


Yes, I'm saying the iphone 4 being the 4th generation was coincidental and the next iphone could very well be called iphone 5 or whatever Apple wants to call it.

 

The two iphones before the iphone 4 was named 3 (for whatever reasons I'm not debating). The 4 came after 3 with a new form factor. 5 could come after 4 with a new form factor. It just makes sense if Apple decided to go that path. If they do, then they do. If they don't, then they don't. It doesn't make them right or wrong when it's their product. It just means they picked a name that works for them.

 

I never said S stood for siri. If you read the entire post rather than skimming through for keywords, you would see that I said I made up the name and gave my reasons for making up that name as an example. They can call it whatever they want to, I could care less of the name. I'm also not insisting on what the next name will be and calling others wrong for disagreeing with me. All I'm saying is, whatever they call it, they'll have their own reasons. There's nothing wrong with calling it the new iphone or just iphone and I never implied that there was.

post #217 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

I'll turn the argument I've been getting all day back around and say that Apple has no pattern whatsoever, they can call it whatever they want, regardless of how many models were previously called "4", and that it's not a brand new design.

 

So the new iPhone is just right out, then. Or the proper number. Just right out.

They were probably looking ahead to the next model which more than likely will look identical to iPhone 5 and what would they name it if they chose the other alternatives?

 

The New iPhone S

iPhone 4GS

iPhone LTES

None of the above

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #218 of 298

You are all wrong. The 12 with the 5 trailing away clearly means 12-5 = 7 = iPad Mini.

 

It's all there people, just look!

post #219 of 298

I'm sorry; this is all ridiculous noise. I love the Apple products that I own but you all should be ashamed of the amount of time and energy you've wasting discussing this.

 

For a sample size of five, there is absolutely no credible pattern. Whatsoever. And to any reasonable consumer or potential customer, there will be no change in incentive or marketing power between calling it the iPhone 5, the iPhone 6, or the new iPhone. Please — there is a lot of nice discussion about the announcement that is probably being completely drowned out because of this silliness.

 

Step back. Take a breath. Grab a cookie. Move on.

post #220 of 298
Originally Posted by neosum View Post
Yes, I'm saying the iPhone 4 being the 4th generation was coincidental…

 

Do you have a rebuttal or some way to discredit what I've said about the iPhone 4 and the forthcoming model of device, thereby discrediting my logic?

 

The two iphones before the iphone 4 was named 3 (for whatever reasons I'm not debating).

 

Oh, there's no debate. The first was named after the version of telephony it introduced and the second after the increased speed of said telephony therein.

 

5 could come after 4 with a new form factor.

 

Sure. If there had been one step in between. There have been two.


I never said S stood for siri.

 

You explicitly stated that:


G for telephony and S for siri coming out of beta.

 

Not as fact, no, but as a potential operator, and my only purpose in calling that out was to inform that "S" had never before been used in any capacity other than "speed".

 

Originally Posted by mstone View Post
…what would they name it if they chose the other alternatives?

 

The New iPhone S

 

Now you're just taking the mickey out. You can't be serious about what you're saying here.

post #221 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by heimdall View Post

I'm sorry; this is all ridiculous noise. I love the Apple products that I own but you all should be ashamed of the amount of time and energy you've wasting discussing this.

 

For a sample size of five, there is absolutely no credible pattern. Whatsoever. And to any reasonable consumer or potential customer, there will be no change in incentive or marketing power between calling it the iPhone 5, the iPhone 6, or the new iPhone. Please — there is a lot of nice discussion about the announcement that is probably being completely drowned out because of this silliness.

 

Step back. Take a breath. Grab a cookie. Move on.

I would have say that the discussion we have here regarding what the "proper" name should be is most likely only a small fraction of the effort that Apple themselves put into the decision making process and they undoubtedly visited some of the same lines of reasoning mentioned here. Fortunately, they arrived at the correct decision and named it iPhone 5 (or so we are lead to believe).

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #222 of 298
Originally Posted by mstone View Post
Fortunately, they arrived at the correct decision and named it iPhone 5 (or so we are lead to believe).

 

The decision to name the 6th device running iOS 6 on an A6 processor "5" was correct?

post #223 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Now you're just taking the mickey out. You can't be serious about what you're saying here.

Clearly not. Just pointing out the absurdity of naming it The New iPhone. Now of course you could say that they did that with the iPad but they also suffixed it with "with LTE" and nowhere on the outer packing does it say The New iPad. Also the iPad market differs from the iPhone market in that Apple has a substantial market share advantage where as the phone market they do not. In the phone market they need to keep the incremental releases much more prominent hence the expected 5 badging as that is what both the consumers and ALL the tech pundits have been identifying the new release as.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #224 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

The decision to name the 6th device running iOS 6 on an A6 processor "5" was correct?

Indeed it was because if you asked the average iPhone user they would not know how many iPhones proceed theirs, what number of OS was installed or what processor was in it. 5 makes sense to them and 6 does not because all they know is that they currently have an iPhone 4.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #225 of 298
Originally Posted by mstone View Post
Clearly not.

 

Then I'll simply inform you that the new iPhone (iPhone) becomes advertised iPhone (iPhone) when the new iPhone (iPhone model from next year) is released. Apple has very handy charts on their website (always have) to show differences between models for those so inclined as to not be buying what is most obviously the newest model.

 

Just pointing out the absurdity of naming it The New iPhone.

 

The lack thereof, you mean.

 

In the phone market they need to keep the incremental releases much more prominent hence the expected 5 badging as that is what both the consumers and ALL the tech pundits have been identifying the new release as.
 

Who cares? Both the consumers and "all" the tech pundits identified the 2nd gen as "iPhone 2". Also, "much more prominent" = "iPhone" and "new iPhone". No numbers or "S" to memorize. It's the simplest possible thing imaginable. Either new or not. If people can't understand that, they'll never understand model numbers.

post #226 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Then I'll simply inform you that the new iPhone (iPhone) becomes advertised iPhone (iPhone) when the new iPhone (iPhone model from next year) is released. Apple has very handy charts on their website (always have) to show differences between models for those so inclined as to not be buying what is most obviously the newest model.

 

 

The lack thereof, you mean.

 

Who cares? Both the consumers and "all" the tech pundits identified the 2nd gen as "iPhone 2". Also, "much more prominent" = "iPhone" and "new iPhone". No numbers or "S" to memorize. It's the simplest possible thing imaginable. Either new or not. If people can't understand that, they'll never understand model numbers.

Clearly you have very little experience in marketing.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #227 of 298
Originally Posted by mstone View Post
Clearly you have very little experience in marketing.

 

I guess next year's iPad is "iPad 3" because if they still sell "iPad 2", people will know it's better. iPad 2 cheapest, iPad more expensive, iPad 3 most expensive. That's not confusing at all.

post #228 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

I guess next year's iPad is "iPad 3" because if they still sell "iPad 2", people will know it's better. iPad 2 cheapest, iPad more expensive, iPad 3 most expensive. That's not confusing at all.

No comment. I'm off to a previous obligation, have fun!

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #229 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

I think your mistake is that you are using logic of numbers instead of logic of marketing.

The original iPhone - (introduction)
iPhone  3G - (has 3G naturally)
iPhone 3GS - (looks identical to the 3G just a spec bump)
iPhone 4 - (brand new design nothing trendy to name it after as so just call it 4)
iPhone 4S - (looks exactly like iPhone 4 but with a spec bump)
iPhone 5 - (brand new design but nothing particularly name worthy happening except LTE however that is problematic in Australia and UK so play it safe)
iPhone 5S - ( looks identical with a spec boost)
iPhone 6 - (brand new design etc, etc)

Thats the way i understand Apple naming logic too. If the number change, its going to be +1 regardless of what generation it is. There is no relation between the phone generation and the naming convention.
post #230 of 298
If iPhone 3g came out describing that its 3g capable, shouldn't the new iPhone be iPhone 4g?
post #231 of 298
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post
If the number change, its going to be +1 regardless of what generation it is.

 

iPhone. iPhone 3G.

post #232 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Originally Posted by herbapou View Post
If the number change, its going to be +1 regardless of what generation it is.

 

iPhone. iPhone 3G.

 

The problem with arguing by generation is that it is hard to define a unique meaning of generation. Model interation, shape, connectivity? The only definitive "5" that I can see about the next iPhone is that it will be the 5th processor which is what Apple's internal (x,y) numbering appears to have been based on, but that clearly hasn't been the scheme for any previous iPhone.

post #233 of 298
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post
The only definitive "5" that I can see about the next iPhone is that it will be the 5th processor which is what Apple's internal (x,y) numbering appears to have been based on, but that clearly hasn't been the scheme for any previous iPhone.

 

Yep! Exactly. That's definitely the only thing "5" about it. 

Generation, thus far, has been defined as "the iPhone we're releasing this year, plus the ones we've released each year previously". That's why the iPhone 4, despite being iPhone3,1 internally, was the "iPhone 4".

post #234 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

iPhone. iPhone 3G.

Yep but the 3 was for 3g. Unless we see another wireless tech with numbers in it, it wont happen again.
post #235 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

iPhone. iPhone 3G.

Yep but the 3 was for 3g. Unless we see another wireless tech with numbers in it, it wont happen again.

 

We did: 4G, but that number is off the menu.

post #236 of 298
I could care less if it is iPhone 5 or 6 but I don't like the strategy they used with the iPad this year. I think it needs something to identify it. The MacBook and iPods don't need an identifier because Apple discontinues the previous generation when a new generstion is released. Not so with iPhone or iPad. The previous generations live on at discounted prices. Hence some modifier is neccessary.

I think they left the naming of the new iPad very uncertain and the press seemed unsure of what to call it for a day or two. It didn't hurt sells but it seemed a bit awkward.
post #237 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I can't think of any generational designation for a shipping HW product that was referred to as the Zero Generation. ...

Technically, it would be the 0th generation, but, to be fair, he did challenge us that there was no way we could twist it.
post #238 of 298
Originally Posted by rednival View Post
I think they left the naming of the new iPad very uncertain…

 

Next year when the 4th one is released, it'll be the new iPad. Called iPad. The 3rd iPad should be discounted as the iPad. Available on the Apple Store as the new iPad and iPad. 4th and 3rd, respectively. And then the year after, the same. 5th and 4th, respectively.

post #239 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL View Post

I guess Tallest Skill is eating some humble pie about now. 1smile.gif

Why? We haven't heard anyone at Apple call it the iPhone 5.

The 5 could be about something else.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #240 of 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Next year when the 4th one is released, it'll be the new iPad. Called iPad. The 3rd iPad should be discounted as the iPad. Available on the Apple Store as the new iPad and iPad. 4th and 3rd, respectively. And then the year after, the same. 5th and 4th, respectively.

When they get to that point, I think it's more likely that they'd use the dates - just as is usually done to differentiate MBA, MBP, iMac, and Mac Pro versions. That is, "iMac late 2011".
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › 'It's almost here:' Apple announces 'iPhone 5' event for Sept. 12