Does Apple advertise "Announcing the iPhone 5 4G with iOS 6.0?" I don't think so.
Of course because they are entirely separate components with their own roadmaps. It's convenient when the numbers all line up but there's no reason they would go out of their way to confuse people to keep the numbers matched.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Would the carriers be happy with that? I certainly don't feel okay with other people hopping off of my iPhone.
If it's done intelligently yes, as it could help balance the network load and it would artificially boost a carrier's coverage (AT&T sorely need it). The hopping would be transparent and encrypted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Whoa, whoa, whoa, "had"? "Had"? According to whom?
Every major product revision gets a major revision number increment because that's what those numbers represent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Other then them having released a new version of iOS every year prior, sure.
That happened with OS X up until 10.3 and then they switched to every 2nd year. Once an OS reaches a feature-rich state, it's better to go for stability and give developers a solid platform to work on. I feel iOS 5 has reached that feature-rich state such that iOS 6 can wait until 2013 when the iPhone 5S arrives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
It was the third redesign. So it should have been called the "iPhone 3" by that logic.
The name needed to be an increment of the previous one, iPhone 3 would have been a decrement by removing 'GS'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
WHAT numbering sequence?! You've already said that the "3G" in the name "isn't a number" and "can't be construed as a number" even though these people's argument is that "people assume that 'after 4S comes 5', despite that making ABSOLUTELY NO FREAKING SENSE WHATSOEVER
The sequence beyond the first phone follows the rule that the newer revision name is a single increment higher than the last whether that increment is the addition of a letter or the increment of a digit. 4S -> 6 increments two digits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
So it should be iPhone 4G to you, not iPhone 5.
I meant the CPU/GPU chipset not the data standard but if it used 4G, I'd expect them to use iPhone 4GS as it doesn't decrement the label and only if it had the same design as the iPhone 4.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I just feel it prudent to step away and scream at some squirrels.
Let's say you scream at 4 squirrels and a 5th squirrel comes along holding 6 nuts and sporting a 6" tail. If you were to give that squirrel an identifier such that it could be distinguished among the group of squirrels, realising that nobody readily identifies squirrels by the length of their tail nor the number of nuts they hold, what number would you assign?
The sequence beyond the first phone follows the rule that the newer revision name is a single increment higher than the last whether that increment is the addition of a letter or the increment of a digit. 4S -> 6 increments two digits.
Other than the first new model. That jumped by two digits.
Oh, I'm sorry, it's not the "iPhone 1". So it jumped by THREE digits, since it's the iPhone 0, apparently.
Quote:
?I'd expect them to use iPhone 4GS?
You're actually perfectly fine with that, aren't you? You're just completely ignoring your original argument, that of people complaining, "Where's the iPhone 5?" when you say this, you know. People will be saying, "Where's the iPhone 4G? We expected iPhone 4G and then 4GS." You're just grasping at straws now, but since you work at McDonald's and aren't a customer, you can't take as many straws as you want and now you're fired*.
Quote:
Let's say you scream at 4 squirrels and a 5th squirrel comes along holding 6 nuts and sporting a 6" tail. If you were to give that squirrel an identifier such that it could be distinguished among the group of squirrels, realising that nobody readily identifies squirrels by the length of their tail nor the number of nuts they hold, what number would you assign?
Get it through your heads: THIS IS NOT THE FIFTH SQUIRREL. THIS HAS NEVER BEEN THE FIFTH SQUIRREL. ONLY A COMPLETE LUNATIC OR AN ANTI-APPLE TROLL WOULD CONSIDER THE IPHONE THAT IS GOING TO BE RELEASED THIS YEAR TO BE THE FIFTH IPHONE.
We've had five years. We've had five models. It's time for a sixth squirrel.
*Obscure reference to when an old friend worked at McDonald's; he related to me the tale of how customers can't be stopped from taking all the straws in the dispenser but employees can't take more than one.
Oh, I'm sorry, it's not the "iPhone 1". So it jumped by THREE digits, since it's the iPhone 0, apparently.
The original iPhone didn't really count because they only called it iPhone. After the first one, they had to think of ways to identify the new one from the old one.
first one is just iPhone (maybe they didn't think they'd have to make any improvements)
the biggest change in the next one was the addition of 3G so append '3G'
the next one was much faster so speed was the differentiating factor so append 'S' to get 3GS
the next one was a complete redesign with a retina display so what you would refer to as a different generation - different tooling - so iPhone 4
the next one was just faster really so append 'S'
To get to the next one, you only have to follow the same sequence - find out what features will differentiate the next iPhone from the 4S. I think it will be a generation jump with a new design so both 5 and 6 qualify but while 6 matches the internals and its position in the timeline, I don't think it will work for consumers.
At the end of the day, we're not talking about technical revision numbers here, it's a marketing label. You're honestly telling me that an average consumer wouldn't be confused if the number jumped from 4 to 6?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
People will be saying, "Where's the iPhone 4G? We expected iPhone 4G and then 4GS."
I don't think so because 4G is a decrement of 4S. To increment, you have to append to the defining features of the 4S:
4S + 4G = 4GS
4G = 4S - S + G
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
ONLY A COMPLETE LUNATIC OR AN ANTI-APPLE TROLL WOULD CONSIDER THE IPHONE THAT IS GOING TO BE RELEASED THIS YEAR TO BE THE FIFTH IPHONE.
We've had five years. We've had five models. It's time for a sixth squirrel.
The iPhone 5 is anti-Apple now? Ok, it's not the 5th phone (just the 5th revision of the original) but I think in the group of other phones, it would look like there's a gap. There's nothing wrong with this sort of lineup:
If you put 6 at the end instead while the 4S and 4, possibly even 3GS are on sale, when buyers look at the numbers, they will see a gap between the 4S and 6 because they're not going to remember that there has been 6 models. The next Galaxy will be the S3, the next Playstation will be Playstation 4. Consecutive numbers just make sense. I'm personally waiting for the XBox 361.
I don't think so because 4G is a decrement of 4S. To increment, you have to append to the defining features of the 4S:
4S + 4G = 4GS
4G = 4S - S + G
You and others are claiming if 5 doesn't come after 4S but 4G is fine? How many letters less than S is that? By the rationale most are using it should be called iPhone 4T or iPhone 5T because if we don't increment up then it's confusing¡
Personally I think iPhone 4G makes sense from a marketing standpoint even though many markets won't get access to the LTE chips. TS made a good argument why Apple won't do that. For that reason I think iPhone LTE is off the table, but think iPhone 4G could still happen.
the next one was a complete redesign with a retina display so what you would refer to as a different generation - different tooling - so iPhone 4
No. This isn't an explanation. This is worming around an explanation nebulously, coming to a vague mish-mash of stuff and then writing the actual name next to it.
I want your REAL explanation for why the 4th generation iPhone with an A4 chip running iOS 4 was called the 'iPhone 4'.
Everything else about your naming stuff? Absolutely correct.
Quote:
To get to the next one, you only have to follow the same sequenceÂ?
Exactly. So six. Next step?
Quote:
Â?find out what features will differentiate the next iPhone from the 4S.
The A6 chip, iOS 6, and it being the 6th generation of device. Okay, got that. Now what?
Note that I didn't read your post before hitting reply. I'm reading it as I go along so that my reactions can be as immediate and pure as possible.
And that was my reaction to reading that.
Quote:
The iPhone 5 is anti-Apple now?
Oh, you missed my reference. I was referring to the people who claim the iPhone 4S isn't a new phone because the case looks the same. Or how the 3GS wasn't a new phone because the case looked the same. To think 'iPhone 5' for the 6th iPhone, you'd have to believe that about one of those devices, and since only anti-Apple folk actually spew that nonsense, I brought it back around.
Quote:
Ok, it's not the 5th phone (just the 5th revision of the original)
Because, as we all know, people start counting at two and not one.
What other blatantly wrong reasons will people come up with? We now have "5th revision of the original design" as an explanation for the name, but when the rational of us try to rebut that "logic" by saying that the next iPhone will be called the iPhone 4 because it's the 4th case design, they laugh it off as being nonsensical.
What's next, in three more years we'll have the iPhone 4 released again because it's the 4th time we've changed cellular telephony generations (2G, 3G, 4G, and then 5G). Oh, no, I'm sorry, excuse me, the 8th iPhone will be called the iPhone 3, because it will have been the "3rd revision of the original cellular telephony".
Quote:
Â?in the group of other phones, it would look like there's a gap.
Gap, gapÂ? HmmÂ? Oh, speaking of which:
Quote:
If you put 6 at the end instead while the 4S and 4, possibly even 3GS are on saleÂ?
So, what, Apple's going to be paying people to take the 3GS off their hands? There's no way a FOUR year old phone (that won't be able to run iOS 6, I might add) will still be sold.
Quote:
when buyers look at the numbers, they will see a gap between the 4S and 6 because they're not going to remember that there has been 6 models.
Never seemed to bother iPhone 3G buyers.
"But they weren't sold at the same timeÂ?"
IT ADDED A THREE. You can't selectively use that as your argument.
By the rationale most are using it should be called iPhone 4T or iPhone 5T because if we don't increment up then it's confusing
Almost but 5 on its own is an increment of 4S.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Explain to me how "5" qualifies for the 6th generation iPhone. Explain.
For the same reason that 4S qualified for the 5th generation iPhone running iOS 5 and A5.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
it didn't happen when they went from iPhone to iPhone 3G, I have 100% historic proof to back what I'm saying.
But why do you think consumers refer to the original as the iPhone 2G? Apple didn't assign this label, consumers did to avoid confusion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I was referring to the people who claim the iPhone 4S isn't a new phone because the case looks the same. Or how the 3GS wasn't a new phone because the case looked the same. To think 'iPhone 5' for the 6th iPhone, you'd have to believe that about one of those devices.
I don't see how you reach that conclusion. The 3GS and 4S didn't have new case designs so didn't merit a major name change. If you put the 4S and 4 side by side, there would be no reason to call the 4S the iPhone 5 because that name doesn't describe why it's different, the name 4S does.
Under the assumption that the next phone has a new case design, it only needs to be called iPhone 5 to describe why it differs from the 4S. The name doesn't have to match any specification, it just needs to let you know it's newer and what's different.
What will be your reaction if Tim Cook introduces the next one as the iPhone 5?
For the same reason that 4S qualified for the 5th generation iPhone running iOS 5 and A5.
"If we don't make any sense at all or even so much as try to follow any past conventions, we can do whatever we want."
Fine, the next iPhone will be the "iPhone Dead Baby".
Quote:
But why do you think consumers refer to the original as the iPhone 2G? Apple didn't assign this label, consumers did to avoid confusion.
Consumers don't. Tech people do. Consumers don't know or care that the original had 2G telephony. You don't see that unless it's from someone who knows what he's talking about. People just say iPhone. I also fail to see how that's a rebuttal to the point I made. Unless you want to pretend that people were saying "2G" because it was the "second generation" iPhone.
Quote:
The name doesn't have to match any specification
Again, iPhone Dead Baby. Because there's zero reason for it to be called that, absolutely no one with any actual grasp of the situation would think to call it that, and because what the frick does it matter anyway.
Quote:
What will be your reaction if Tim Cook introduces the next one as the iPhone 5?
when buyers look at the numbers, they will see a gap between the 4S and 6 because they're not going to remember that there has been 6 models.
Never seemed to bother iPhone 3G buyers.
"But they weren't sold at the same time?"
IT ADDED A THREE. You can't selectively use that as your argument.
I think the point of the iPhone and the iPhone 3G not being sold at the same time is valid. The original iPhone is the only one that wasn't sold at the same time as its successor.
This is why I think it'll be iPhone 5. Apple will sell the new phone along with the 4S (8 GB, $99) and 4 (8 GB, $0). On Apple's site http://www.apple.com/iphone/compare-iphones/ they let you compare currently selling models. So they will likely go from this:
...to this:
I think that will be better than this:
Of course they can go either way with this. They can name it iPhone SJ. They can name it iPhone TC (Tim's first as CEO). They can name it iPhone 4G, iPhone LTE, iPhone 12, iPhone EOW (End of World). But from a marketing standpoint when selling multiple items at the same time it'll be easier for people to see that 5 comes after 4 rather than 6 comes after 4.
Whatever they name it people are going to buy it. That's the only thing that really matters.
What will be your reaction if Tim Cook introduces the next one as the iPhone 5?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
What will be YOUR reaction when he doesn't?
Whatever it'll be called, the statements and reasoning that are being made still make sense, are founded. I cannot understand why not everyone sees that...
Forget that 2 comes after 1, the picture is larger than that.
I did give my reasons. Because they will be selling the new phone at the same time as the predecessor with a revision change. So going from 4 to 5 is better than going from 4 to 6 from a marketing standpoint.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
So you're saying 6 doesn't come after 4? I'm confused.
Of course it does. So does 10 and 100. But usually you increase the number of your named device by 1. With the revision from original to 3G no they did not increase by one. But they weren't selling them at the same time. I think that's the biggest caveat. Plus they were highlighting the 3G tech. With the revision from the 3GS to the 4 they did increase the number by 1 and they were sold concurrently. If the new one is a revision change being sold with its predecessor recent history is that they will increase the number by 1 and go from 4S to 5.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Also, explain why the iPhone 4 was called the iPhone 4.
Nobody knows and no one outside of Apple's walls will ever know. In their marketing video, specifically, and their marketing materials, generally, they didn't highlight that it was the 4th phone using the A4 chip using iOS4. They highlighted Facetime, Retina Display, and HD Video Recording before their mention of the A4. With the 4S they didn't highlight that it was the 5th phone using the A5 chip using iOS5. They highlighted increased speed, better camera, and Siri. They didn't call it the 5, either.
The competing opinions are whether the successive phone will go with a generation-chip-iOS naming scheme (done once out of four chances):
iPhone - original
iPhone 3G - no "A2" chip name but iPhone OS 2 and 2nd Generation - 2 out of 3
iPhone 3GS - no "A3" chip name but iPhone OS 3 and 3rd Generation - 2 out of 3
iPhone 4 - "A4" chip, iOS4, 4th Generation - 3 out of 3 - called iPhone 4
iPhone 4S - "A5" chip, iOS5, 5th Generation - 0 out of 3 - not called iPhone 5
..or a revision-increase-to-next-number naming scheme (done once out of two chances):
iPhone to iPhone 3G - no number increase as original didn't have a number..new wasn't even called iPhone 2
iPhone 3GS to iPhone 4 - number increase from 3 to 4 to signify revision
iPhone 4S to ?
Skil you're banking on it not being iPhone 5 based on your opinion that they'll either name it after the generation/chip/iOS or name it iPhone 4G or iPhone LTE.
I'm banking on it being iPhone 5 based on my opinion that they'll either increase the number by 1 to signify the revision change or name it iPhone 4G or iPhone LTE.
That's all it is. At the end of the day Apple picked the name well before we even knew there was anything to disagree on. And we won't know until Tim Cook says it. And then no one will care anymore.
That is until the next day where everyone wonders whether the 2013 phone will be named iPhone 5/6/4GS/5S/6S
So what could it possibly be? It could be generation. Easy as pie. We KNOW that is going to change. It could be telephony. We expect 4G telephony. But NOOOO, marketers can't have a letter EARLIER in the alphabet, so "iPhone 4G" is out. iPhone LTE doesn't conform to any previous naming convention and LTE's not available everywhere the iPhone will be sold, so that's false advertising. It could also be speed. If it gets an A6 chip, it's going to be faster. But as we've seen, generation names and telephony names supersede "speed" suffixes.
Quote:
I'm banking on it being iPhone 5 based on my opinion that they'll either increase the number by 1 to signify the revision change
Explain what about the 6th generation iPhone will make it be the "iPhone 5".
People. Aren't. Idiots. We've had five iPhones already.
I want your REAL explanation for why the 4th generation iPhone with an A4 chip running iOS 4 was called the 'iPhone 4'.
i already gave that explanation. It was a marketing term. It had nothing to do with it being the 4th "generation" of the device, or the OS, or any other rot. By your incredibly idiosyncratic view the iPhones should have been called.
iPhone
iPhone 2
iPhone 3
iPhone 4
iPhone 5
and we would not be awaiting iPhone 6, because - in the view you hold with yourself and nobody else on the internet - Apple is counting it's hardware releases. Well, if that were the naming scheme nobody would disagree with you. However it isn't.
Now to explain an even simpler remedial point to you.
Quote:
iPhone 3G -this isn't a numbering sequence, it's a telephony, that's why no iPhone 2 makes sense
iPhone 3GS -this is a numbering sequence, it has nothing to do with telephony
iPhone 3 -after the third redesign of the case, because that's all that matters
The iPhone 4 was not called the iPhone 3 because the iPhone 3G ( and 3GS) already had 3 in their names, even though neither was a count. So - as good marketing people - Apple decided to move to 4 for the big case design, rather than 3 - 3 would seem like the same phone. Thats obvious. It was obvious at the time that the next phone would be a 4.
And then Apple moved to the 4S ( not the 5) when the design did not change. And next to the iPhone 5 ( or 4G). But definitely NOT the iPhone 6. When the design changes.
The only thing you have going for your utterly ridiculous argument is that the iPhone 4 was - happend to be - the 4th phone. It could have been the 5th phone had there been 3 iterations of the iPhone 3G design. ( Quoting this and being appalled is not an answer).
You are the only person on the internet who believes in their clearly non-existant counting system. There is only so much remedialism we can help you with though - but look at the list above. No counting. None at all. IPhone 4 is a fluke the rest are clearly not counts.
i already gave that explanation. It was a marketing term. It had nothing to do with it being the 4th "generation" of the device
I'm sure. Just like how iLife '11 was a marketing term for the version of iLife that came out in 1999. And how
Quote:
in the view you hold with yourself and nobody else on the internet - Apple is counting it's hardware releases.
I wish I could tell people to just stop being wrong. Sadly, that power isn't transferred at any level.
Quote:
It was obvious at the time that the next phone would be a 4.
No it wasn't. 4 is a "marketing term". It had nothing to do with any sort of common sense or obviousness about anything.
Quote:
The only thing you have going for your utterly ridiculous argument is that the iPhone 4 was - happend to be - the 4th phone.
THERE IT IS. The "coincidence" argument again. So according to you, the first iPhone was called "iPhone" out of coincidence. And iLife '06 was called that out of COINCIDENCE.
Quote:
It could have been the 5th phone had there been 3 iterations of the iPhone 3G design.
But guess what? In the physical universe that we occupy, on the 5-dimensional strand of probability that we both sit, right now, on this date, looking back at the history that we both know, THAT WAS NOT THE CASE. Therefore the argument is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT.
Yes. It "could have been". But, again, guess what? IT. WASN'T. You can't change history because it's convenient for your argument. You can't ignore the truth because you want a certain outcome.
Quote:
You are the only person on the internet who believes in their clearly non-existant counting system.
Again, sure I am.
Quote:
iPhone 4 is a fluke the rest are clearly not counts.
If you were a scientist, you'd be fired for that. If you were an accountant, you'd be fired for that. If you were in product testing, you'd be fired for that. Getting the picture?
Quote:
Give it up. Its getting embarrassing for ya.
I'd imagine that to a third party, the group of people who can't figure out how to count look a little more embarrassing than the one who can.
Only tech people would know that "we've had five iPhones already".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
What will be YOUR reaction when he doesn't?
If Tim Cook introduces the iPhone 6, I would be concerned about his leadership in the company and I would assume that Phil had gone a bit cuckoo (in all fairness, the early warning signs about Phil have already shown up).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
So, again, no real reason, then.
How is the fact that the current one is called '4', '5' comes directly after '4' and the next iPhone will follow a phone called '4' not a real reason?
I left this thread because it was getting just a bit too wonky. I can't believe people are still arguing these same issues!
I'm surprised, as well. There's no issue to argue, really. iPhone 5 makes absolutely no sense, and therefore it shouldn't ever have been put in the running, even back when the rumor of "two phones" was going around.
iPhone 6, while possibly not the next name, at least makes sense.
I'm surprised, as well. There's no issue to argue, really. iPhone 5 makes absolutely no sense, and therefore it shouldn't ever have been put in the running, even back when the rumor of "two phones" was going around.
iPhone 6, while possibly not the next name, at least makes sense.
Comments
Does Apple advertise "Announcing the iPhone 5 4G with iOS 6.0?" I don't think so.
Of course because they are entirely separate components with their own roadmaps. It's convenient when the numbers all line up but there's no reason they would go out of their way to confuse people to keep the numbers matched.
Would the carriers be happy with that? I certainly don't feel okay with other people hopping off of my iPhone.
If it's done intelligently yes, as it could help balance the network load and it would artificially boost a carrier's coverage (AT&T sorely need it). The hopping would be transparent and encrypted.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, "had"? "Had"? According to whom?
Every major product revision gets a major revision number increment because that's what those numbers represent.
Other then them having released a new version of iOS every year prior, sure.
That happened with OS X up until 10.3 and then they switched to every 2nd year. Once an OS reaches a feature-rich state, it's better to go for stability and give developers a solid platform to work on. I feel iOS 5 has reached that feature-rich state such that iOS 6 can wait until 2013 when the iPhone 5S arrives.
It was the third redesign. So it should have been called the "iPhone 3" by that logic.
The name needed to be an increment of the previous one, iPhone 3 would have been a decrement by removing 'GS'.
WHAT numbering sequence?! You've already said that the "3G" in the name "isn't a number" and "can't be construed as a number" even though these people's argument is that "people assume that 'after 4S comes 5', despite that making ABSOLUTELY NO FREAKING SENSE WHATSOEVER
The sequence beyond the first phone follows the rule that the newer revision name is a single increment higher than the last whether that increment is the addition of a letter or the increment of a digit. 4S -> 6 increments two digits.
So it should be iPhone 4G to you, not iPhone 5.
I meant the CPU/GPU chipset not the data standard but if it used 4G, I'd expect them to use iPhone 4GS as it doesn't decrement the label and only if it had the same design as the iPhone 4.
I just feel it prudent to step away and scream at some squirrels.
Let's say you scream at 4 squirrels and a 5th squirrel comes along holding 6 nuts and sporting a 6" tail. If you were to give that squirrel an identifier such that it could be distinguished among the group of squirrels, realising that nobody readily identifies squirrels by the length of their tail nor the number of nuts they hold, what number would you assign?
Squirrel number _?
The sequence beyond the first phone follows the rule that the newer revision name is a single increment higher than the last whether that increment is the addition of a letter or the increment of a digit. 4S -> 6 increments two digits.
Other than the first new model. That jumped by two digits.
Oh, I'm sorry, it's not the "iPhone 1". So it jumped by THREE digits, since it's the iPhone 0, apparently.
?I'd expect them to use iPhone 4GS?
You're actually perfectly fine with that, aren't you? You're just completely ignoring your original argument, that of people complaining, "Where's the iPhone 5?" when you say this, you know. People will be saying, "Where's the iPhone 4G? We expected iPhone 4G and then 4GS." You're just grasping at straws now, but since you work at McDonald's and aren't a customer, you can't take as many straws as you want and now you're fired*.
Let's say you scream at 4 squirrels and a 5th squirrel comes along holding 6 nuts and sporting a 6" tail. If you were to give that squirrel an identifier such that it could be distinguished among the group of squirrels, realising that nobody readily identifies squirrels by the length of their tail nor the number of nuts they hold, what number would you assign?
Get it through your heads: THIS IS NOT THE FIFTH SQUIRREL. THIS HAS NEVER BEEN THE FIFTH SQUIRREL. ONLY A COMPLETE LUNATIC OR AN ANTI-APPLE TROLL WOULD CONSIDER THE IPHONE THAT IS GOING TO BE RELEASED THIS YEAR TO BE THE FIFTH IPHONE.
We've had five years. We've had five models. It's time for a sixth squirrel.
*Obscure reference to when an old friend worked at McDonald's; he related to me the tale of how customers can't be stopped from taking all the straws in the dispenser but employees can't take more than one.
Oh, I'm sorry, it's not the "iPhone 1". So it jumped by THREE digits, since it's the iPhone 0, apparently.
The original iPhone didn't really count because they only called it iPhone. After the first one, they had to think of ways to identify the new one from the old one.
first one is just iPhone (maybe they didn't think they'd have to make any improvements)
the biggest change in the next one was the addition of 3G so append '3G'
the next one was much faster so speed was the differentiating factor so append 'S' to get 3GS
the next one was a complete redesign with a retina display so what you would refer to as a different generation - different tooling - so iPhone 4
the next one was just faster really so append 'S'
To get to the next one, you only have to follow the same sequence - find out what features will differentiate the next iPhone from the 4S. I think it will be a generation jump with a new design so both 5 and 6 qualify but while 6 matches the internals and its position in the timeline, I don't think it will work for consumers.
At the end of the day, we're not talking about technical revision numbers here, it's a marketing label. You're honestly telling me that an average consumer wouldn't be confused if the number jumped from 4 to 6?
People will be saying, "Where's the iPhone 4G? We expected iPhone 4G and then 4GS."
I don't think so because 4G is a decrement of 4S. To increment, you have to append to the defining features of the 4S:
4S + 4G = 4GS
4G = 4S - S + G
ONLY A COMPLETE LUNATIC OR AN ANTI-APPLE TROLL WOULD CONSIDER THE IPHONE THAT IS GOING TO BE RELEASED THIS YEAR TO BE THE FIFTH IPHONE.
We've had five years. We've had five models. It's time for a sixth squirrel.
If you put 6 at the end instead while the 4S and 4, possibly even 3GS are on sale, when buyers look at the numbers, they will see a gap between the 4S and 6 because they're not going to remember that there has been 6 models. The next Galaxy will be the S3, the next Playstation will be Playstation 4. Consecutive numbers just make sense. I'm personally waiting for the XBox 361.
I don't think so because 4G is a decrement of 4S. To increment, you have to append to the defining features of the 4S:
4S + 4G = 4GS
4G = 4S - S + G
You and others are claiming if 5 doesn't come after 4S but 4G is fine? How many letters less than S is that? By the rationale most are using it should be called iPhone 4T or iPhone 5T because if we don't increment up then it's confusing¡
Personally I think iPhone 4G makes sense from a marketing standpoint even though many markets won't get access to the LTE chips. TS made a good argument why Apple won't do that. For that reason I think iPhone LTE is off the table, but think iPhone 4G could still happen.
There's nothing wrong with this sort of lineup:
image: http://i41.tinypic.com/mt8p4x.jpg
But there is nothing right or logical about it either since it doesn't follow previously used patterns.
the next one was a complete redesign with a retina display so what you would refer to as a different generation - different tooling - so iPhone 4
No. This isn't an explanation. This is worming around an explanation nebulously, coming to a vague mish-mash of stuff and then writing the actual name next to it.
I want your REAL explanation for why the 4th generation iPhone with an A4 chip running iOS 4 was called the 'iPhone 4'.
Everything else about your naming stuff? Absolutely correct.
To get to the next one, you only have to follow the same sequenceÂ?
Exactly. So six. Next step?
Â?find out what features will differentiate the next iPhone from the 4S.
The A6 chip, iOS 6, and it being the 6th generation of device. Okay, got that. Now what?
I think it will be a generation jumpÂ?
Okay, we're getting there, we're getting there� almost there� now we culminate in the pièce de résistance�
Â?so both 5 and 6 qualifyÂ?
NO.
Explain to me how "5" qualifies for the 6th generation iPhone. Explain.
You're honestly telling me that an average consumer wouldn't be confused if the number jumped from 4 to 6?
That's exactly what I'm saying. Since it didn't happen when they went from iPhone to iPhone 3G, I have 100% historic proof to back what I'm saying.
I don't think so because 4G is a decrement of 4S.
I agree.
To increment, you have to append to the defining features of the 4S:
4S + 4G = 4GS
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAÂ ?
Note that I didn't read your post before hitting reply. I'm reading it as I go along so that my reactions can be as immediate and pure as possible.
And that was my reaction to reading that.
The iPhone 5 is anti-Apple now?
Oh, you missed my reference. I was referring to the people who claim the iPhone 4S isn't a new phone because the case looks the same. Or how the 3GS wasn't a new phone because the case looked the same. To think 'iPhone 5' for the 6th iPhone, you'd have to believe that about one of those devices, and since only anti-Apple folk actually spew that nonsense, I brought it back around.
Ok, it's not the 5th phone (just the 5th revision of the original)
Because, as we all know, people start counting at two and not one.
What other blatantly wrong reasons will people come up with? We now have "5th revision of the original design" as an explanation for the name, but when the rational of us try to rebut that "logic" by saying that the next iPhone will be called the iPhone 4 because it's the 4th case design, they laugh it off as being nonsensical.
What's next, in three more years we'll have the iPhone 4 released again because it's the 4th time we've changed cellular telephony generations (2G, 3G, 4G, and then 5G). Oh, no, I'm sorry, excuse me, the 8th iPhone will be called the iPhone 3, because it will have been the "3rd revision of the original cellular telephony".
Â?in the group of other phones, it would look like there's a gap.
Gap, gapÂ? HmmÂ? Oh, speaking of which:
If you put 6 at the end instead while the 4S and 4, possibly even 3GS are on saleÂ?
So, what, Apple's going to be paying people to take the 3GS off their hands? There's no way a FOUR year old phone (that won't be able to run iOS 6, I might add) will still be sold.
when buyers look at the numbers, they will see a gap between the 4S and 6 because they're not going to remember that there has been 6 models.
Never seemed to bother iPhone 3G buyers.
"But they weren't sold at the same timeÂ?"
IT ADDED A THREE. You can't selectively use that as your argument.
I'm personally waiting for the XBox 361.
Now you're just mocking me.
By the rationale most are using it should be called iPhone 4T or iPhone 5T because if we don't increment up then it's confusing
Almost but 5 on its own is an increment of 4S.
Explain to me how "5" qualifies for the 6th generation iPhone. Explain.
For the same reason that 4S qualified for the 5th generation iPhone running iOS 5 and A5.
it didn't happen when they went from iPhone to iPhone 3G, I have 100% historic proof to back what I'm saying.
But why do you think consumers refer to the original as the iPhone 2G? Apple didn't assign this label, consumers did to avoid confusion.
I was referring to the people who claim the iPhone 4S isn't a new phone because the case looks the same. Or how the 3GS wasn't a new phone because the case looked the same. To think 'iPhone 5' for the 6th iPhone, you'd have to believe that about one of those devices.
I don't see how you reach that conclusion. The 3GS and 4S didn't have new case designs so didn't merit a major name change. If you put the 4S and 4 side by side, there would be no reason to call the 4S the iPhone 5 because that name doesn't describe why it's different, the name 4S does.
Under the assumption that the next phone has a new case design, it only needs to be called iPhone 5 to describe why it differs from the 4S. The name doesn't have to match any specification, it just needs to let you know it's newer and what's different.
What will be your reaction if Tim Cook introduces the next one as the iPhone 5?
For the same reason that 4S qualified for the 5th generation iPhone running iOS 5 and A5.
"If we don't make any sense at all or even so much as try to follow any past conventions, we can do whatever we want."
Fine, the next iPhone will be the "iPhone Dead Baby".
But why do you think consumers refer to the original as the iPhone 2G? Apple didn't assign this label, consumers did to avoid confusion.
Consumers don't. Tech people do. Consumers don't know or care that the original had 2G telephony. You don't see that unless it's from someone who knows what he's talking about. People just say iPhone. I also fail to see how that's a rebuttal to the point I made. Unless you want to pretend that people were saying "2G" because it was the "second generation" iPhone.
The name doesn't have to match any specification
Again, iPhone Dead Baby. Because there's zero reason for it to be called that, absolutely no one with any actual grasp of the situation would think to call it that, and because what the frick does it matter anyway.
What will be your reaction if Tim Cook introduces the next one as the iPhone 5?
What will be YOUR reaction when he doesn't?
when buyers look at the numbers, they will see a gap between the 4S and 6 because they're not going to remember that there has been 6 models.
Never seemed to bother iPhone 3G buyers.
"But they weren't sold at the same time?"
IT ADDED A THREE. You can't selectively use that as your argument.
I think the point of the iPhone and the iPhone 3G not being sold at the same time is valid. The original iPhone is the only one that wasn't sold at the same time as its successor.
This is why I think it'll be iPhone 5. Apple will sell the new phone along with the 4S (8 GB, $99) and 4 (8 GB, $0). On Apple's site http://www.apple.com/iphone/compare-iphones/ they let you compare currently selling models. So they will likely go from this:
...to this:
I think that will be better than this:
Of course they can go either way with this. They can name it iPhone SJ. They can name it iPhone TC (Tim's first as CEO). They can name it iPhone 4G, iPhone LTE, iPhone 12, iPhone EOW (End of World). But from a marketing standpoint when selling multiple items at the same time it'll be easier for people to see that 5 comes after 4 rather than 6 comes after 4.
Whatever they name it people are going to buy it. That's the only thing that really matters.
This is why I think it'll be iPhone 5.
So, again, no real reason, then.
?it'll be easier for people to see that 5 comes after 4 rather than 6 comes after 4.
So you're saying 6 doesn't come after 4? I'm confused.
Also, explain why the iPhone 4 was called the iPhone 4.
What will be your reaction if Tim Cook introduces the next one as the iPhone 5?
What will be YOUR reaction when he doesn't?
Whatever it'll be called, the statements and reasoning that are being made still make sense, are founded. I cannot understand why not everyone sees that...
Forget that 2 comes after 1, the picture is larger than that.
So, again, no real reason, then.
I did give my reasons. Because they will be selling the new phone at the same time as the predecessor with a revision change. So going from 4 to 5 is better than going from 4 to 6 from a marketing standpoint.
So you're saying 6 doesn't come after 4? I'm confused.
Of course it does. So does 10 and 100. But usually you increase the number of your named device by 1. With the revision from original to 3G no they did not increase by one. But they weren't selling them at the same time. I think that's the biggest caveat. Plus they were highlighting the 3G tech. With the revision from the 3GS to the 4 they did increase the number by 1 and they were sold concurrently. If the new one is a revision change being sold with its predecessor recent history is that they will increase the number by 1 and go from 4S to 5.
Also, explain why the iPhone 4 was called the iPhone 4.
Nobody knows and no one outside of Apple's walls will ever know. In their marketing video, specifically, and their marketing materials, generally, they didn't highlight that it was the 4th phone using the A4 chip using iOS4. They highlighted Facetime, Retina Display, and HD Video Recording before their mention of the A4. With the 4S they didn't highlight that it was the 5th phone using the A5 chip using iOS5. They highlighted increased speed, better camera, and Siri. They didn't call it the 5, either.
The competing opinions are whether the successive phone will go with a generation-chip-iOS naming scheme (done once out of four chances): ..or a revision-increase-to-next-number naming scheme (done once out of two chances): Skil you're banking on it not being iPhone 5 based on your opinion that they'll either name it after the generation/chip/iOS or name it iPhone 4G or iPhone LTE.
I'm banking on it being iPhone 5 based on my opinion that they'll either increase the number by 1 to signify the revision change or name it iPhone 4G or iPhone LTE.
That's all it is. At the end of the day Apple picked the name well before we even knew there was anything to disagree on. And we won't know until Tim Cook says it. And then no one will care anymore.
That is until the next day where everyone wonders whether the 2013 phone will be named iPhone 5/6/4GS/5S/6S
So going from 4 to 5 is better than going from 4 to 6 from a marketing standpoint.
More is better. That's the marketing standpoint.
?from the 3GS to the 4 they did increase the number by 1?
Telephony generation + 1 ≠ hardware generation.
If the new one is a revision change being sold with its predecessor recent history is that they will increase the number by 1 and go from 4S to 5.
Explain. To. Me. Why. They. Named. The. iPhone. 4. The. iPhone. 4.
Nobody knows and no one outside of Apple's walls will ever know.
They didn't call it the 5, either.
Then guess what? That ship has sailed. Its time has passed. They had their chance.
As for your chart, So what could it possibly be? It could be generation. Easy as pie. We KNOW that is going to change. It could be telephony. We expect 4G telephony. But NOOOO, marketers can't have a letter EARLIER in the alphabet, so "iPhone 4G" is out. iPhone LTE doesn't conform to any previous naming convention and LTE's not available everywhere the iPhone will be sold, so that's false advertising. It could also be speed. If it gets an A6 chip, it's going to be faster. But as we've seen, generation names and telephony names supersede "speed" suffixes.
I'm banking on it being iPhone 5 based on my opinion that they'll either increase the number by 1 to signify the revision change
Explain what about the 6th generation iPhone will make it be the "iPhone 5".
People. Aren't. Idiots. We've had five iPhones already.
I want your REAL explanation for why the 4th generation iPhone with an A4 chip running iOS 4 was called the 'iPhone 4'.
i already gave that explanation. It was a marketing term. It had nothing to do with it being the 4th "generation" of the device, or the OS, or any other rot. By your incredibly idiosyncratic view the iPhones should have been called.
iPhone
iPhone 2
iPhone 3
iPhone 4
iPhone 5
and we would not be awaiting iPhone 6, because - in the view you hold with yourself and nobody else on the internet - Apple is counting it's hardware releases. Well, if that were the naming scheme nobody would disagree with you. However it isn't.
Now to explain an even simpler remedial point to you.
iPhone 3G -this isn't a numbering sequence, it's a telephony, that's why no iPhone 2 makes sense
iPhone 3GS -this is a numbering sequence, it has nothing to do with telephony
iPhone 3 -after the third redesign of the case, because that's all that matters
The iPhone 4 was not called the iPhone 3 because the iPhone 3G ( and 3GS) already had 3 in their names, even though neither was a count. So - as good marketing people - Apple decided to move to 4 for the big case design, rather than 3 - 3 would seem like the same phone. Thats obvious. It was obvious at the time that the next phone would be a 4.
And then Apple moved to the 4S ( not the 5) when the design did not change. And next to the iPhone 5 ( or 4G). But definitely NOT the iPhone 6. When the design changes.
The only thing you have going for your utterly ridiculous argument is that the iPhone 4 was - happend to be - the 4th phone. It could have been the 5th phone had there been 3 iterations of the iPhone 3G design. ( Quoting this and being appalled is not an answer).
You are the only person on the internet who believes in their clearly non-existant counting system. There is only so much remedialism we can help you with though - but look at the list above. No counting. None at all. IPhone 4 is a fluke the rest are clearly not counts.
Give it up. Its getting embarrassing for ya.
i already gave that explanation. It was a marketing term. It had nothing to do with it being the 4th "generation" of the device
I'm sure. Just like how iLife '11 was a marketing term for the version of iLife that came out in 1999. And how
in the view you hold with yourself and nobody else on the internet - Apple is counting it's hardware releases.
I wish I could tell people to just stop being wrong. Sadly, that power isn't transferred at any level.
It was obvious at the time that the next phone would be a 4.
No it wasn't. 4 is a "marketing term". It had nothing to do with any sort of common sense or obviousness about anything.
The only thing you have going for your utterly ridiculous argument is that the iPhone 4 was - happend to be - the 4th phone.
THERE IT IS. The "coincidence" argument again. So according to you, the first iPhone was called "iPhone" out of coincidence. And iLife '06 was called that out of COINCIDENCE.
It could have been the 5th phone had there been 3 iterations of the iPhone 3G design.
But guess what? In the physical universe that we occupy, on the 5-dimensional strand of probability that we both sit, right now, on this date, looking back at the history that we both know, THAT WAS NOT THE CASE. Therefore the argument is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT.
Yes. It "could have been". But, again, guess what? IT. WASN'T. You can't change history because it's convenient for your argument. You can't ignore the truth because you want a certain outcome.
You are the only person on the internet who believes in their clearly non-existant counting system.
Again, sure I am.
iPhone 4 is a fluke the rest are clearly not counts.
If you were a scientist, you'd be fired for that. If you were an accountant, you'd be fired for that. If you were in product testing, you'd be fired for that. Getting the picture?
Give it up. Its getting embarrassing for ya.
I'd imagine that to a third party, the group of people who can't figure out how to count look a little more embarrassing than the one who can.
"If we don't make any sense at all or even so much as try to follow any past conventions, we can do whatever we want."
You are assuming here that your suggestion is following a convention because of a single data point?
Going by this convention that only 1 out of the past 5 devices follows, what would the next again phone be called? iPhone 7? iPhone 6S?
Fine, the next iPhone will be the "iPhone Dead Baby".
iPhone Abortion surely:
Sandra: Hey I got a new iPhone, it's a 4S.
Jean: So did I, I got an Abortion though.
Sandra: You got a what? That's terrible.
Jean: No, the new iPhone Abortion, I got one of the red ones from Bono. It has an updated Siri where they don't censor where you can get an abortion.
I wonder why they don't make red iPhones.
Consumers don't. Tech people do.
Consumers call it 2G among other things:
http://www.ebay.com/ctg/Apple-iPhone...ction=1&_sop=1
Only tech people would know that "we've had five iPhones already".
What will be YOUR reaction when he doesn't?
If Tim Cook introduces the iPhone 6, I would be concerned about his leadership in the company and I would assume that Phil had gone a bit cuckoo (in all fairness, the early warning signs about Phil have already shown up).
So, again, no real reason, then.
How is the fact that the current one is called '4', '5' comes directly after '4' and the next iPhone will follow a phone called '4' not a real reason?
Going by this convention that only 1 out of the past 5 devices follows, what would the next again phone be called? iPhone 7? iPhone 6S?
'Next again' meaning the one after the one coming out this year, yeah?
Then yes, either iPhone 7 or iPhone 6S. If the latter, the one after that would be iPhone 8.
How is the fact that the current one is called '4'
Not the case.
'5' comes directly after '4'
And they've already blown their chance to call an iPhone "5".
I left this thread because it was getting just a bit too wonky. I can't believe people are still arguing these same issues!
I'm surprised, as well. There's no issue to argue, really. iPhone 5 makes absolutely no sense, and therefore it shouldn't ever have been put in the running, even back when the rumor of "two phones" was going around.
iPhone 6, while possibly not the next name, at least makes sense.
I'm surprised, as well. There's no issue to argue, really. iPhone 5 makes absolutely no sense, and therefore it shouldn't ever have been put in the running, even back when the rumor of "two phones" was going around.
iPhone 6, while possibly not the next name, at least makes sense.
Ha! You really can't let go!
Ha! You really can't let go!
Just trying to breath a little sanity back into the world. I know I'm right. I refuse to let go of that. My signature summarizes it best.