Originally Posted by monstrosity
Oh good god, you're not still going on about that are you! [sic] It makes perfect sense to pretty much everyone other than you.
Blame the article for bringing it up. Apple messed up bad with iPhone naming, as I'll point out below. Match the colors and bold, italicized (and both) wording for their corresponding information.
Let's take a quick look, by generation and name:
1st) iPhone - original
2nd) iPhone 3G - second iPhone - named for 3G network capability (2nd iteration by design)
3rd) iPhone 3GS - [S]peedier version of the 3G
4th) iPhone 4 - 4th Generation (3rd iteration by design) The ONLY iPhone named for its generation.
5th) iPhone 4S - [S]peedier version of the iPhone 4. Incorrect leaks from Asia kept calling this release the "iPhone 5" - the media got this ball rolling, and caused all kinds of hell when it turned out to be the "4S" model.
6th) iPhone 5 - (4th iteration by design) makes zero sense as the 6th generation iPhone, especially when you consider there was NEVER an iPhone 2 or 3 BY NAME. Argue all you want, but that's a fact. See above. In fact, it isn't even the 5th design iteration (it's the 4th). There's absolutely no reason for a 5 to be in the name, other than to feed the illiterate media and their following of zombies who can't use simple logic.
Apple clearly didn't think this naming thing through when they named the 2nd Generation iPhone (iPhone 3G). The ONLY iPhone named for its generation was the 4.
To say "it makes perfect sense to pretty much everyone other than you" only shows you're one of the media zombies. You listen to the media instead of using simple logic. Apple named it "iPhone 5" because of the media. Since there were so many disappointed people when Apple released the 4S instead of the 5 (based on incorrect leaks from Asia, noted above), they had to "give them what they wanted." Again, how does this make sense?
Apple had a chance to set this whole naming thing to rest with the 6th generation iPhone (AKA iPhone 5), as they did with the 3rd generation iPad, but they felt the need to feed the media engine. They could've quite simply just named it iPhone - 6th generation (following iPod/iPad naming), or iPhone - fall 2012 (following Mac naming). If you say that naming could confuse people if they continue selling a previous generation, well, look at what they did with the iPod Touch. They're selling generations 4 and 5 side-by-side. Everyone knows the 5th generation is the newest and most expensive. They have the option to save some money by buying one a generation (or two - in the case of the iPhones) older.
As much as I hate Samesung, at least they're doing the name thing correctly with the Galaxy S line. The S4 isn't much more than a revamp of the S3, but they're being consistent with the naming.