What is more bothersome, and not even mentioned in the name, is the myriad of provider-specific broadcast chipsets. CDMA, etc. Hopefully standards will converge, but in the mean time, producing REAL world phones, with chipsets supporting as many networks, would definitely be a sales argument wrt Samdung et al.
What is strange about the naming convention is not the S, it is having any number at all.
iMacs are iMacs, you don't have an iMac 9s.
If Apple was to truly follow its simplicity, then there would just be an iPhone and there would be three models of it, good, better, best.
Since this guy worked on the iMac branding it is a complete mystery why he didn't say this.
If you think about it... that's exactly what they do. There are always 3 iPhones on the market at any one time... good, better, best.
Right now it's the iPhone 4, iPhone 4S and iPhone 5. It just so happens that they are the 2010, 2011 and 2012 models. This year's "better" iPhone was last year's "best" iPhone. Apple didn't have to create another model to fill that midrange spot... they just kept iPhone 4S in production. It's a good way to down on costs.
And if he weren't a complete idiot, he'd realize that the "S" models are no more "identical to last year's but better" than any other product from any other company.
Of course. A marketing professional is a complete idiot because a random Apple fanboy on the internet knows it better. Every single time someone says something less than glowing about Apple, the fanboy army calls him an idiot. I like Apple, and many would call me a fanboy, but I don't blindly praise everything they do. Really people, grow up.
What is strange about the naming convention is not the S, it is having any number at all.
iMacs are iMacs, you don't have an iMac 9s.
If Apple was to truly follow its simplicity, then there would just be an iPhone and there would be three models of it, good, better, best.
Since this guy worked on the iMac branding it is a complete mystery why he didn't say this.
An interesting notion but there would still have to be some way of differentiating one model from another. I doubt people would want to go around saying 'I've got the iPhone with 4 inch screen A6 chip'
The iMac has a much longer period between redesigns and they don't sell old and new models at the same time. Even though they don't give them official labels they get them anyway... G5, Intel Polycarb, Aluminium Unibody etc (might have been easier if they HAD given them numbers!)
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.
It's true that the naming convention doesn't make sense when you consider the iterative history, but only pedants and nerds give a carp. The public doesn't care to any appreciable degree. The #, #S, # system is now established and the history is in the past. Lets move on now.
The article is right. The S thing is not awesome. Every time an "S" version comes out there are stories on the evening news about "the 'real' version X+1 will be coming out later." That affects some people's buying decisions. Just like more people would by "New Software 5!" than "New Software 4.1!"
When I see an 'S' device, I think of it as a refresh model like I would a Playstation Slim.
It might be down to marketing but probably not just Apple's. With the Galaxy S4 looking very much like the S3, it's disappointing and doesn't seem to warrant the S4 name yet it's not the same with laptops/desktops or even iPads. I think that pocket-sized mobile items are perceived more like jewellery. Fashion items tend to change year after year with very little reason just because people like the change.
Few would be disappointed this year with the Retina MBP just because it has the same design as last year's model. I reckon there will be the same disappointment expressed at a 5S as happens with every 'S' model but it will still sell really well. The 'S' on this one can be for security with the fingerprint sensor, speed with the graphics and style if there's a new UI design.
I think overall, their naming convention works well. If they only sold one model per year, they could just use iPhone on it's own but that's not the case. It would be clear enough to use a year after it but if your entry level phone has a 2 year old date on it, that's going to drive people to competing phones.
It'll be interesting to see the design they come up with for the 2014 iPhone. I got the impression they were evolving to a static unibody design like the Macs and that's where we are now.
Samsung has a 'mini' version of their Galaxy line as does Sony with the Xperia. There's no way Apple could really have an iPhone mini and iPhone like the iPad as it mandates that the mini one be smaller. If they had something like iPhone Basic, iPhone Regular, iPhone Premium, they'd have to keep renaming them every year and it would make resale quite difficult. They'll have to come up with a new convention eventually but I think the convention they've used until now has been fine.
no it makes zero sense. Do you ever hear short people say "I'm only 5 feet short?" Or if you're measuring something do you say it's x inches narrow? Or a pool is 12 feet shallow? Of course not.
I've heard people say "I'm 64 years young" - which amounts to the same thing.
It's a stupid affectation, but you can't stop people from butchering the language.
For goodness' sake, start thinking about this like a typical consumer rather than somebody who posts on an Apple enthusiast forum.
It wouldn't be mocked whether it was Apple or not, because 99% of the population doesn't know and doesn't care exactly how many phone models Apple or any other manufacturer has produced.
What would seem absurd to the general population is calling a product 'iPhone 6' when the last product was the 4S. People may have short memories, but they do know how to count to 6 without missing numbers out.
I don't believe that you can't perceive how the typical consumer would see a change from 4 to 6. Step out of the bubble.
Did it confuse people when Apple named the 2nd Generation iPhone the "3G"? Where was the iPhone 2? Ah ha! There wasn't even an iPhone "3"...
The iPad has been sold the same way since the original save for the iPad 3 which was immediately removed when the iPad 4 was introduced.
INCORRECT. The original iPad was immediately discontinued when the iPad 2 was released. The iPad 2 is still in production as the lower-cost full-size iPad option, which will probably be fazed out when the 5th Generation iPad comes, since the iPad mini is now the lowest cost iPad on the market. Apple may keep the 4th Generation to fill that void, but I have my doubts.
Weak Message? Quite the oposite? I think Apple current iPhone naming scheme actually sends an extremely honest and easy to understand message.
What does the names Lumia 800 and Lumia 920 tell you about these products?
iPhone 4 - the 4th phone Apple made iPhone 4S - a better iPhone 4 that also has Siri
On the iPad 3...
Apple called iPad 3 the New iPad because it was not a better iPad 2 but rather an re-imagined iPad 1. the New iPad was in some respects a step back from the iPad 2 but an improvement over the iPad 1 in every way, especially the screen.
Did it confuse people when Apple named the 2nd Generation iPhone the "3G"? Where was the iPhone 2? Ah ha! There wasn't even an iPhone "3"...
Is anyone confused by iPhone 5? No. So why does it matter whether they called it 5 or 6? Consumers don't care. And by now they know the 'S' version of the phone will retain the same case design as the previous model. Because it doesn't make sense for Apple to re-tool their manufacturing processes every year just because some tech junkies need their itch scratched with a new case design.
Is anyone confused by iPhone 5? No. So why does it matter whether they called it 5 or 6? Consumers don't care. And by now they know the 'S' version of the phone will retain the same case design as the previous model.
True, everyone knows that the "S" model will look the same, be faster, and include at least one feature that will compel many non-S owners to upgrade.
3G -> 3GS = S model adds multitasking, voice control, videocam, compass
It's true that the naming convention doesn't make sense when you consider the iterative history, but only pedants and nerds give a carp. The public doesn't care to any appreciable degree. The #, #S, # system is now established and the history is in the past. Lets move on now.
Here's the problem:
What happened to the iPhone 1S, 2, 2S, 3, 3S? There was never a 2 or 3, and definitely not an "S" variant of either or the 1st iPhone.
I constantly hear people mention an iPhone "3". When I ask if they're referring to a 3G or 3GS, most of them have no idea. Talk about confusion for the simple minded. I haven't encountered that issue so much when trying to distinguish between the 4 and 4S, though it still happens. I usually just ask if it has Siri, then that usually helps them figure it out if I can't physically inspect the phone.
Apple should've just used simple numbers: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6... and so on, or just simply by generation. They got off on the wrong foot when they called the 2nd iPhone the "3G" as part of its name. Most people I've talked to know the generation of the iPod they own(ed)... iPhone naming of the same nature would come easy. Just look at the iPads now. Common names follow the generation: iPad 3, iPad 4... It takes the confusion out of it. When the 2nd generation iPad mini comes out, it will most likely be referred to by the generation, or "with Retina Display (if so equipped)" to help distinguish them. Most people will refer to them by the generation, unless Apple starts throwing in useless suffixes that will eventually confuse people.
It isn't that Apple's iPhone naming sends a "weak message," it's that it eventually confuses consumers who aren't tech savvy.
For those of you talking about the simple minded, non-geek, non-techie "average" consumers, this is something to think about.
On the contrary, I named the first two things that came to mind, that I have found to be useful, and would want.
Feel free to add your own wishlist instead.
I guess you want animated wallpapers like Android has... that every Android users I know complains about it sucking the battery life out of their phone, or slows it down.
NFC, maybe. I'm sure there could be some useful features built upon it. Widgets? Not unless Apple can come up with something better that won't eat up the processes or decrease battery life, another complaint of my Android-toting friends.
Android has a ton of features that people don't know how to use, or they complain about one problem or another because of using said features. I don't want or need that with my Apple devices.
I don't give a flying frick how successful the device is. That doesn't matter. People clearly don't have a clue why the name is a problem.
I think the case can be made that if the device is successful, then the name is NOT a problem, although one can also make the case that if a name is confusing enough so that the user isn't sure what they're getting, then that can defer a purchase decision. However, I don't think that's the case with the iPhone.
Furthermore, let's assume the consultant is correct - that the "S" sends a weak message. Let's say instead that the next iPhone is called the iPhone 6 (or I guess as you desire, the iPhone 7). But let's say it's only a minor upgrade from the iPhone 5. Which sends the weaker message: giving a phone a totally new name when it barely has anything new in it or being honest and saying up front that it's an incremental upgrade by giving it the "s" designation? I think the former sends the weaker message. Otherwise, you'll hear, "Apple came out with totally new iPhone model today that has little new in it except for the name" even though other companies do this all the time.
As far as your complaint is concerned, no one cares how many models have come before. They only care about whether they're buying the latest model. So claiming that there's a big problem because the iPhone 5 is actually the sixth model is creating an issue that's not really there, IMO and seems to me to be more of an anal-retentive complaint.
For me, it's not the iPhones that have a naming problem, it's everything else. What do you call the iPad that comes after "the new iPad", the "even newer iPad"? How do I know whether I'm buying a previous model or a new model of the MacBook Pro unless I'm sophisticated enough to check if it has a retina screen and/or the thickness of the body? Internally, Apple gives them dates: "late 2011", etc. When you have a service issue and look up a model on the Apple website, that's the nomenclature that's given. Maybe those kinds of designations should be used in the model names as well, which actually may help increase upgrade sales. My MacBook Pro works fine and I don't feel like it's an "old" model until I realize just how old it actually is. If every time I used it, instead of seeing "MacBook Pro" at the bottom of the display, I saw "MacBook Pro 2008", I might think, "geez this is old - time for a new computer".
Having said that, I would not want Apple to start doing what the car companies do: start calling anything that comes after June 2013 a 2014 model. It used to be September before models would have the following year's designation. It seems like every year it drops back a month. And most years, they don't do much more than perhaps change the paint color options and maybe slightly change the shape of the fender or the door handles, yet they still call it a new model.
Comments
Hopefully standards will converge, but in the mean time, producing REAL world phones, with chipsets supporting as many networks, would definitely be a sales argument wrt Samdung et al.
If you think about it... that's exactly what they do. There are always 3 iPhones on the market at any one time... good, better, best.
Right now it's the iPhone 4, iPhone 4S and iPhone 5. It just so happens that they are the 2010, 2011 and 2012 models. This year's "better" iPhone was last year's "best" iPhone. Apple didn't have to create another model to fill that midrange spot... they just kept iPhone 4S in production. It's a good way to down on costs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
And if he weren't a complete idiot, he'd realize that the "S" models are no more "identical to last year's but better" than any other product from any other company.
Of course. A marketing professional is a complete idiot because a random Apple fanboy on the internet knows it better. Every single time someone says something less than glowing about Apple, the fanboy army calls him an idiot. I like Apple, and many would call me a fanboy, but I don't blindly praise everything they do. Really people, grow up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cy_starkman
What is strange about the naming convention is not the S, it is having any number at all.
iMacs are iMacs, you don't have an iMac 9s.
If Apple was to truly follow its simplicity, then there would just be an iPhone and there would be three models of it, good, better, best.
Since this guy worked on the iMac branding it is a complete mystery why he didn't say this.
An interesting notion but there would still have to be some way of differentiating one model from another. I doubt people would want to go around saying 'I've got the iPhone with 4 inch screen A6 chip'
The iMac has a much longer period between redesigns and they don't sell old and new models at the same time. Even though they don't give them official labels they get them anyway... G5, Intel Polycarb, Aluminium Unibody etc (might have been easier if they HAD given them numbers!)
Quote:
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.
When I see an 'S' device, I think of it as a refresh model like I would a Playstation Slim.
It might be down to marketing but probably not just Apple's. With the Galaxy S4 looking very much like the S3, it's disappointing and doesn't seem to warrant the S4 name yet it's not the same with laptops/desktops or even iPads. I think that pocket-sized mobile items are perceived more like jewellery. Fashion items tend to change year after year with very little reason just because people like the change.
Few would be disappointed this year with the Retina MBP just because it has the same design as last year's model. I reckon there will be the same disappointment expressed at a 5S as happens with every 'S' model but it will still sell really well. The 'S' on this one can be for security with the fingerprint sensor, speed with the graphics and style if there's a new UI design.
I think overall, their naming convention works well. If they only sold one model per year, they could just use iPhone on it's own but that's not the case. It would be clear enough to use a year after it but if your entry level phone has a 2 year old date on it, that's going to drive people to competing phones.
It'll be interesting to see the design they come up with for the 2014 iPhone. I got the impression they were evolving to a static unibody design like the Macs and that's where we are now.
Samsung has a 'mini' version of their Galaxy line as does Sony with the Xperia. There's no way Apple could really have an iPhone mini and iPhone like the iPad as it mandates that the mini one be smaller. If they had something like iPhone Basic, iPhone Regular, iPhone Premium, they'd have to keep renaming them every year and it would make resale quite difficult. They'll have to come up with a new convention eventually but I think the convention they've used until now has been fine.
I've heard people say "I'm 64 years young" - which amounts to the same thing.
It's a stupid affectation, but you can't stop people from butchering the language.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious
For goodness' sake, start thinking about this like a typical consumer rather than somebody who posts on an Apple enthusiast forum.
It wouldn't be mocked whether it was Apple or not, because 99% of the population doesn't know and doesn't care exactly how many phone models Apple or any other manufacturer has produced.
What would seem absurd to the general population is calling a product 'iPhone 6' when the last product was the 4S. People may have short memories, but they do know how to count to 6 without missing numbers out.
I don't believe that you can't perceive how the typical consumer would see a change from 4 to 6. Step out of the bubble.
Did it confuse people when Apple named the 2nd Generation iPhone the "3G"? Where was the iPhone 2? Ah ha! There wasn't even an iPhone "3"...
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
The iPad has been sold the same way since the original save for the iPad 3 which was immediately removed when the iPad 4 was introduced.
INCORRECT. The original iPad was immediately discontinued when the iPad 2 was released. The iPad 2 is still in production as the lower-cost full-size iPad option, which will probably be fazed out when the 5th Generation iPad comes, since the iPad mini is now the lowest cost iPad on the market. Apple may keep the 4th Generation to fill that void, but I have my doubts.
Quite the oposite? I think Apple current iPhone naming scheme actually sends an extremely honest and easy to understand message.
What does the names Lumia 800 and Lumia 920 tell you about these products?
iPhone 4 - the 4th phone Apple made
iPhone 4S - a better iPhone 4 that also has Siri
On the iPad 3...
Apple called iPad 3 the New iPad because it was not a better iPad 2 but rather an re-imagined iPad 1. the New iPad was in some respects a step back from the iPad 2 but an improvement over the iPad 1 in every way, especially the screen.
Guess I need to remind myself that Apple did come up with Think Different. Hmm....wonder if Ken Segall was involved in that?
Originally Posted by cy_starkman
Since this guy worked on the iMac branding it is a complete mystery why he didn't say this.
He doesn't care about being right. He only cares about Apple being wrong. Because that's what sells right now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
Is anyone confused by iPhone 5? No. So why does it matter whether they called it 5 or 6? Consumers don't care. And by now they know the 'S' version of the phone will retain the same case design as the previous model.
True, everyone knows that the "S" model will look the same, be faster, and include at least one feature that will compel many non-S owners to upgrade.
3G -> 3GS = S model adds multitasking, voice control, videocam, compass
4 -> 4S = S model adds Siri
5 -> 5S = S model adds (widgets?? NFC??)
Originally Posted by KDarling
5 -> 5S = S model adds (widgets?? NFC??)
Yep, let's name the two most worthless possible additions in a subtle attempt at preemptively saying "that's it?" to Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Yep, let's name the two most worthless possible additions in a subtle attempt at preemptively saying "that's it?" to Apple.
On the contrary, I named the first two things that came to mind, that I have found to be useful, and would want.
Feel free to add your own wishlist instead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley
It's true that the naming convention doesn't make sense when you consider the iterative history, but only pedants and nerds give a carp. The public doesn't care to any appreciable degree. The #, #S, # system is now established and the history is in the past. Lets move on now.
Here's the problem:
What happened to the iPhone 1S, 2, 2S, 3, 3S? There was never a 2 or 3, and definitely not an "S" variant of either or the 1st iPhone.
I constantly hear people mention an iPhone "3". When I ask if they're referring to a 3G or 3GS, most of them have no idea. Talk about confusion for the simple minded. I haven't encountered that issue so much when trying to distinguish between the 4 and 4S, though it still happens. I usually just ask if it has Siri, then that usually helps them figure it out if I can't physically inspect the phone.
Apple should've just used simple numbers: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6... and so on, or just simply by generation. They got off on the wrong foot when they called the 2nd iPhone the "3G" as part of its name. Most people I've talked to know the generation of the iPod they own(ed)... iPhone naming of the same nature would come easy. Just look at the iPads now. Common names follow the generation: iPad 3, iPad 4... It takes the confusion out of it. When the 2nd generation iPad mini comes out, it will most likely be referred to by the generation, or "with Retina Display (if so equipped)" to help distinguish them. Most people will refer to them by the generation, unless Apple starts throwing in useless suffixes that will eventually confuse people.
It isn't that Apple's iPhone naming sends a "weak message," it's that it eventually confuses consumers who aren't tech savvy.
For those of you talking about the simple minded, non-geek, non-techie "average" consumers, this is something to think about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
On the contrary, I named the first two things that came to mind, that I have found to be useful, and would want.
Feel free to add your own wishlist instead.
I guess you want animated wallpapers like Android has... that every Android users I know complains about it sucking the battery life out of their phone, or slows it down.
NFC, maybe. I'm sure there could be some useful features built upon it. Widgets? Not unless Apple can come up with something better that won't eat up the processes or decrease battery life, another complaint of my Android-toting friends.
Android has a ton of features that people don't know how to use, or they complain about one problem or another because of using said features. I don't want or need that with my Apple devices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I don't give a flying frick how successful the device is. That doesn't matter. People clearly don't have a clue why the name is a problem.
I think the case can be made that if the device is successful, then the name is NOT a problem, although one can also make the case that if a name is confusing enough so that the user isn't sure what they're getting, then that can defer a purchase decision. However, I don't think that's the case with the iPhone.
Furthermore, let's assume the consultant is correct - that the "S" sends a weak message. Let's say instead that the next iPhone is called the iPhone 6 (or I guess as you desire, the iPhone 7). But let's say it's only a minor upgrade from the iPhone 5. Which sends the weaker message: giving a phone a totally new name when it barely has anything new in it or being honest and saying up front that it's an incremental upgrade by giving it the "s" designation? I think the former sends the weaker message. Otherwise, you'll hear, "Apple came out with totally new iPhone model today that has little new in it except for the name" even though other companies do this all the time.
As far as your complaint is concerned, no one cares how many models have come before. They only care about whether they're buying the latest model. So claiming that there's a big problem because the iPhone 5 is actually the sixth model is creating an issue that's not really there, IMO and seems to me to be more of an anal-retentive complaint.
For me, it's not the iPhones that have a naming problem, it's everything else. What do you call the iPad that comes after "the new iPad", the "even newer iPad"? How do I know whether I'm buying a previous model or a new model of the MacBook Pro unless I'm sophisticated enough to check if it has a retina screen and/or the thickness of the body? Internally, Apple gives them dates: "late 2011", etc. When you have a service issue and look up a model on the Apple website, that's the nomenclature that's given. Maybe those kinds of designations should be used in the model names as well, which actually may help increase upgrade sales. My MacBook Pro works fine and I don't feel like it's an "old" model until I realize just how old it actually is. If every time I used it, instead of seeing "MacBook Pro" at the bottom of the display, I saw "MacBook Pro 2008", I might think, "geez this is old - time for a new computer".
Having said that, I would not want Apple to start doing what the car companies do: start calling anything that comes after June 2013 a 2014 model. It used to be September before models would have the following year's designation. It seems like every year it drops back a month. And most years, they don't do much more than perhaps change the paint color options and maybe slightly change the shape of the fender or the door handles, yet they still call it a new model.