Kind of hilarious their naming conventions generate 4 pages of comments. Maybe they need to do a focus group on what sounds to the coolest. Much like many sports teams tried to incorporate darker colors into their logo because they found they sold better (granted that is a product that sells on looks and function versus primarily function) maybe there is a better name to use. Ignoring the quality of the product I actually think the S version sounds better. I doubt it would make much of an impact on sales, but when you are dealing with numbers over 100 million over the course of a year even a tiny percentage is worth exploring.
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.
Mea culpa. I realized whilst I was halfway to sleep that it wasn't until the 2nd gen iPad that Apple started keeping an older model.
Note: Starting off with the word incorrect (or wrong) in all caps doesn't help make your post more readable or more correct.
But let's say it's only a minor upgrade from the iPhone 5.
Hmm… a LOT of taffy hypotheticals here.
Otherwise, you'll hear, "Apple came out with totally new iPhone model today that has little new in it except for the name"
You hear that now. Of every single model. The trick is to punch the idiots in the face, not give them chocolates.
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.
That's why absolutely no one whatsoever has any trouble with knowing the generation (hey look, they want to know how many came before) of the iPod they're buying.
Ask anyone with an iPod (any kind). They know what generation it is.
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"?
"The new iPad." And the subsequent one? "The new iPad." And the subsequent one? "The new iPad." And the subsequent one? "The new iPad."
I don't really see how that's difficult. But there's also no need for it when you can just call the device "iPad" in marketing, regardless of the iteration.
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?
Again, if you're not doing this by default, you deserve whatever you buy. The claim that "people do absolutely no research whatsoever before purchasing a product and simply look at its name" is absolutely ludicrous. And yet a lot of people in this thread want to perpetuate it.
Internally, Apple gives them dates: "late 2011", etc. Maybe those kinds of designations should be used in the model names as well…
Why, when it's blindingly obvious that's completely unnecessary?
CALL THE PRODUCT "iPhone". CALL THE PRODUCT "iPad". It has worked for a DECADE for the entire iPod family. It has worked for FIFTEEN YEARS for the iMac, and for as long as their existence with every other respective Mac model.
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.
You're right on the nose with all of this, though. Spot on.
For 99.9% of potential customers the nuances of a name won't affect their buying decision. But even 0.1% of a market this size is worth having.
...
Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner. This is exactly right.
A brand consultant's job is to do the best he or she can do with that 0.1% (for many classes of product it's a much, much higher figure). Is the iPhone naming convention the best possible system that anyone could dream up? Almost certainly not. Whew, glad we settled that.
Why, when it's blindingly obvious that's completely unnecessary?
CALL THE PRODUCT "iPhone". CALL THE PRODUCT "iPad". It has worked for a DECADE for the entire iPod family. It has worked for FIFTEEN YEARS for the iMac, and for as long as their existence with every other respective Mac model.
If you are going to argue this point you need successfully argue why it's not an issue when, unlike the Mac lines, Apple offers old iDevice models alongside the better iDevice models as cheaper models that are still being produced as new.
If you are going to argue this point you need successfully argue why it's not an issue when, unlike the Mac lines, Apple offers old iDevice models alongside the better iDevice models as cheaper models that are still being produced as new.
I should think that resolves itself. The iPod touch has been doing it numberless since the first time that happened. No one complained. The iPad does it with a HIGHER number being WORSE and has done so for almost two years. No one complained.
Is there something I'm missing? I realize that I often achieve final solutions where others fail to find the first step on the way to that solution, so if I'm considering too much information to be "common knowledge", let me know.
Logic says this consultant is not completely off base. Those who follow the iPhone releases regularly may rationally prefer the numbering to match the year since 2007. But sales figures suggest neither logic nor rationalization stopped Apple to grow its iPhone base. Sure, we will never know how many more Apple could have sold if they were more purist in numbering the iPhone. But does it matter.
It's presumptuous to believe Apple chose the numbering scheme haphazardly. It's also silly to write off this consultant who is a professional in this field, and there is logic in what he had to say.
For sure, there is no reason to be so disdainful of rationalization one way or the other.
I should think that resolves itself. The iPod touch has been doing it numberless since the first time that happened. No one complained. The iPad does it with a HIGHER number being WORSE and has done so for almost two years. No one complained.
Is there something I'm missing? I realize that I often achieve final solutions where others fail to find the first step on the way to that solution, so if I'm considering too much information to be "common knowledge", let me know.
I see what you're getting at and as I've previously stated I personally don't think it would be an issue to follow the iPod Touch's marketing designation but there are some clear differences between the iPhone and iPad which are the two most popular product categories from Apple and the iPod Touch which is in a product category that is becoming less important to Apple.
On top of that, the iPod Touch 4th generation and iPod Touch 5th generation look very different as one is considerably smaller than the other, and whilst both have a Retina display the older model has a TN panel, worse color, lower backlight, no in-cell touch panel, and thicker GG which makes the display look worse compared to the newer one even if the customer doesn't understand why.
I mention these disparities because if the next generation iPod Touch is dropped and the only visual differences are subtle (e.g.: same display tech, size, and case design) will they still go with iPod Touch 5th generation as the older and iPod Touch 6th generation?
So Apple simply dont lie to its customers (at least on that important point), which is perhapa why satisfaction rates are tru the roof.
You make an important point here that hasn't been addressed. If e iPhone 3GS and the iPhone 4S had been the next number of e series, it could be perceived as misleading to the customer, since they 3GS and 4S share the same body and chassis to their predecessors.
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.
I didn't say I wanted animated wallpapers.
However, since you bring them up, correctly written ones should only use from a few seconds to a few minutes of CPU time a day.
That's because most shouldn't be active unless you're looking at a homescreen, which is not something most people do for very long unless they're bored or playing with the wallpaper itself. If someone notices that a certain wallpaper is using up battery for no reason, they should dump it, or stop playing with it all day
Quote:
NFC, maybe. I'm sure there could be some useful features built upon it.
Agreed.
Quote:
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.
Again, it all depends on what the widget does.
If it's just a static settings widget (Bluetooth, WiFi, screen brightness, etc) then of course it takes up no extra CPU time unless touched.
If it's a once a day update widget (Moon Phase is one I use), then again, almost no CPU time is taken up.
The only widgets that would use up noticeable battery would be ones that have to be active quite often. Say, a widget that constantly shows amount of data being used, or nearby WiFi hotspots, or your location on a map, or perhaps a weather radar widget.
Fortunately, the user can pick and choose which ones are worthwhile to them, so it's a win-win situation. Don't like them? Don't use them. Do like them? They're available.
Really, it's all no different than the way some iOS apps constantly ping the GPS in the background and use up battery. If that happens, and you don't want it, don't use that app. Easy peasy.
This article would make perfect sense if made in a vacuum, yet there is a method to the numbering madness.
It just happens that Apple gets a hearty subsidy from the carriers, who in turn make it up by keeping most of their subscribers tied to 2-year contracts on the same phone.
As it is now, a lot of them subscribers bitch and moan for the latest and greatest every year, creating pressure on the carriers to concede and lose some potential profit in the process, then in turn bringing pressure to Apple regarding the amount of those subsidies.
The current naming simply keeps users on 24-month contracts from feeling as if they "skipped" a model number, and more willing to wait out their contracts.
Platform loyalty (as in brand name, quality, ecosystem and content) takes care of the competition.
The current naming simply keeps users on 24-month contracts from feeling as if they "skipped" a model number, and more willing to wait out their contracts.
Just going by history and rumors the likelihood at this point in time at least seems to suggest 5S will win out as the next iPhone name. iOS 7 will be available for not only this phone but for ones likely at least as far back as the 4S if not 4 as well. It is possible some iOS 7 features might be gimped from older phones that lack the CPU/GPU muscle or other hardware to handle those features. We already know several aspects of the next iPhone. It will likely double if not more the CPU/GPU speeds of the 5. The camera will also be far better, likely better than the one on the Samsung S4 as well. The missing piece is what new feature will it bring lacking on prior models. It could be a fingerprint reader, it could be multiple colors, or something no one has thought of but it will have to be pretty compelling.
Wall street analysts will likely continue their attack campaign on Apple. They smell blood and that is what they seem to like to do at the moment. The only way to circumvent their inevitable hostility is for the next iPhone to be a phenomenal success not only in terms of sales but with social media buzz and the public as a whole. Public adulation would drown out the critics and make them sound foolish. The S4 was greeted with just a meh type of enthusiasm. Many called it just an S type release since they find it so similar to the S3. But chances are it will sell far better than the S3 once their marketing hype kicks into high gear. Apple will also face stiffer competition this year with the HTC One soon to be released. Since it is unlikely Apple would only produce their 4" model for only one year there is probably a 95% chance or better they will at least stick with the same size and resolution this year and if they decide to make a larger iPhone the current size would likely remain as an additional option and not replace the 4" version. I am hoping against hope they release a larger iPhone alongside the next iPhone. I am on the fence if if a cheaper iPhone with lightning makes sense but leaning towards it being a good idea. Older iPhones like the 4S are still pricey at around $450 - $500 in countries like China, Brazil, India, and even here in the U.S. for pre-paid plans lacking any subsidy. I seriously doubt there would be too much cannibalization since Apple would likely make very clear differentiation for example 3.5", 4", and 4.8". The cheaper model would also likely have far lesser specs while the other two would be their premium brands with all the bells and whistles. All 3 would at least share lightning to move them once and for all away from 30 pin connectors on their phone line with the iPad and iPod line soon to follow. iPhone 6 mini, iPhone 6, and iPhone 6+ has a nice ring to it. Then they could skip the S versions forever and just increase the number every year and avoid any possible confusion.
Poor TS. He's been clean now for almost 6 months, then along comes an article like this and it knocks him right off the wagon.
Come the heck right off it. You've never had a valid argument in this regard.
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
…will they still go with iPod Touch 5th generation as the older and iPod Touch 6th generation?
I should think they'd be fools not to. Visual differentiation isn't that important, given the 2, 3, and 4 looked the same and they still underwent this same sales pitch.
Come the heck right off it. You've never had a valid argument in this regard.
I should think they'd be fools not to. Visual differentiation isn't that important, given the 2, 3, and 4 looked the same and they still underwent this same sales pitch.
But did they sell the 2nd and 3rd or 3rd and 4th generation iPod Touches alongside each other, or did they discontinue them the day the others went on sale? I seem to recall it was the latter.
Comments
Kind of hilarious their naming conventions generate 4 pages of comments. Maybe they need to do a focus group on what sounds to the coolest. Much like many sports teams tried to incorporate darker colors into their logo because they found they sold better (granted that is a product that sells on looks and function versus primarily function) maybe there is a better name to use. Ignoring the quality of the product I actually think the S version sounds better. I doubt it would make much of an impact on sales, but when you are dealing with numbers over 100 million over the course of a year even a tiny percentage is worth exploring.
Mea culpa. I realized whilst I was halfway to sleep that it wasn't until the 2nd gen iPad that Apple started keeping an older model.
Note: Starting off with the word incorrect (or wrong) in all caps doesn't help make your post more readable or more correct.
Take Porsche, they make 911 Carrera 4 and Carrera 4S, everyone knows the S stands for aweSome.
Originally Posted by zoetmb
But let's say it's only a minor upgrade from the iPhone 5.
Hmm… a LOT of taffy hypotheticals here.
Otherwise, you'll hear, "Apple came out with totally new iPhone model today that has little new in it except for the name"
You hear that now. Of every single model. The trick is to punch the idiots in the face, not give them chocolates.
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.
That's why absolutely no one whatsoever has any trouble with knowing the generation (hey look, they want to know how many came before) of the iPod they're buying.
Ask anyone with an iPod (any kind). They know what generation it is.
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"?
"The new iPad." And the subsequent one? "The new iPad." And the subsequent one? "The new iPad." And the subsequent one? "The new iPad."
I don't really see how that's difficult. But there's also no need for it when you can just call the device "iPad" in marketing, regardless of the iteration.
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?
Again, if you're not doing this by default, you deserve whatever you buy. The claim that "people do absolutely no research whatsoever before purchasing a product and simply look at its name" is absolutely ludicrous. And yet a lot of people in this thread want to perpetuate it.
Internally, Apple gives them dates: "late 2011", etc. Maybe those kinds of designations should be used in the model names as well…
Why, when it's blindingly obvious that's completely unnecessary?
CALL THE PRODUCT "iPhone". CALL THE PRODUCT "iPad". It has worked for a DECADE for the entire iPod family. It has worked for FIFTEEN YEARS for the iMac, and for as long as their existence with every other respective Mac model.
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.
You're right on the nose with all of this, though. Spot on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Brother 84
...
For 99.9% of potential customers the nuances of a name won't affect their buying decision. But even 0.1% of a market this size is worth having.
...
Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner. This is exactly right.
A brand consultant's job is to do the best he or she can do with that 0.1% (for many classes of product it's a much, much higher figure). Is the iPhone naming convention the best possible system that anyone could dream up? Almost certainly not. Whew, glad we settled that.
If you are going to argue this point you need successfully argue why it's not an issue when, unlike the Mac lines, Apple offers old iDevice models alongside the better iDevice models as cheaper models that are still being produced as new.
Hint: http://www.apple.com/ipod/compare-ipod-models/
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
If you are going to argue this point you need successfully argue why it's not an issue when, unlike the Mac lines, Apple offers old iDevice models alongside the better iDevice models as cheaper models that are still being produced as new.
I should think that resolves itself. The iPod touch has been doing it numberless since the first time that happened. No one complained. The iPad does it with a HIGHER number being WORSE and has done so for almost two years. No one complained.
Is there something I'm missing? I realize that I often achieve final solutions where others fail to find the first step on the way to that solution, so if I'm considering too much information to be "common knowledge", let me know.
Poor TS. He's been clean now for almost 6 months, then along comes an article like this and it knocks him right off the wagon.
Logic says this consultant is not completely off base. Those who follow the iPhone releases regularly may rationally prefer the numbering to match the year since 2007. But sales figures suggest neither logic nor rationalization stopped Apple to grow its iPhone base. Sure, we will never know how many more Apple could have sold if they were more purist in numbering the iPhone. But does it matter.
It's presumptuous to believe Apple chose the numbering scheme haphazardly. It's also silly to write off this consultant who is a professional in this field, and there is logic in what he had to say.
For sure, there is no reason to be so disdainful of rationalization one way or the other.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast
Quick question. Did you type this on your iMac 7?
I typed it on my Core i7 3770-based computer which is somehow different from first Core i7 from three product cycles ago.
I see what you're getting at and as I've previously stated I personally don't think it would be an issue to follow the iPod Touch's marketing designation but there are some clear differences between the iPhone and iPad which are the two most popular product categories from Apple and the iPod Touch which is in a product category that is becoming less important to Apple.
On top of that, the iPod Touch 4th generation and iPod Touch 5th generation look very different as one is considerably smaller than the other, and whilst both have a Retina display the older model has a TN panel, worse color, lower backlight, no in-cell touch panel, and thicker GG which makes the display look worse compared to the newer one even if the customer doesn't understand why.
I mention these disparities because if the next generation iPod Touch is dropped and the only visual differences are subtle (e.g.: same display tech, size, and case design) will they still go with iPod Touch 5th generation as the older and iPod Touch 6th generation?
You make an important point here that hasn't been addressed. If e iPhone 3GS and the iPhone 4S had been the next number of e series, it could be perceived as misleading to the customer, since they 3GS and 4S share the same body and chassis to their predecessors.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedGeminiPA
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.
I didn't say I wanted animated wallpapers.
However, since you bring them up, correctly written ones should only use from a few seconds to a few minutes of CPU time a day.
That's because most shouldn't be active unless you're looking at a homescreen, which is not something most people do for very long unless they're bored or playing with the wallpaper itself. If someone notices that a certain wallpaper is using up battery for no reason, they should dump it, or stop playing with it all day
Quote:
NFC, maybe. I'm sure there could be some useful features built upon it.
Agreed.
Quote:
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.
Again, it all depends on what the widget does.
If it's just a static settings widget (Bluetooth, WiFi, screen brightness, etc) then of course it takes up no extra CPU time unless touched.
If it's a once a day update widget (Moon Phase is one I use), then again, almost no CPU time is taken up.
The only widgets that would use up noticeable battery would be ones that have to be active quite often. Say, a widget that constantly shows amount of data being used, or nearby WiFi hotspots, or your location on a map, or perhaps a weather radar widget.
Fortunately, the user can pick and choose which ones are worthwhile to them, so it's a win-win situation. Don't like them? Don't use them. Do like them? They're available.
Really, it's all no different than the way some iOS apps constantly ping the GPS in the background and use up battery. If that happens, and you don't want it, don't use that app. Easy peasy.
This article would make perfect sense if made in a vacuum, yet there is a method to the numbering madness.
It just happens that Apple gets a hearty subsidy from the carriers, who in turn make it up by keeping most of their subscribers tied to 2-year contracts on the same phone.
As it is now, a lot of them subscribers bitch and moan for the latest and greatest every year, creating pressure on the carriers to concede and lose some potential profit in the process, then in turn bringing pressure to Apple regarding the amount of those subsidies.
The current naming simply keeps users on 24-month contracts from feeling as if they "skipped" a model number, and more willing to wait out their contracts.
Platform loyalty (as in brand name, quality, ecosystem and content) takes care of the competition.
That sounds like a plausible argument.
Just going by history and rumors the likelihood at this point in time at least seems to suggest 5S will win out as the next iPhone name. iOS 7 will be available for not only this phone but for ones likely at least as far back as the 4S if not 4 as well. It is possible some iOS 7 features might be gimped from older phones that lack the CPU/GPU muscle or other hardware to handle those features. We already know several aspects of the next iPhone. It will likely double if not more the CPU/GPU speeds of the 5. The camera will also be far better, likely better than the one on the Samsung S4 as well. The missing piece is what new feature will it bring lacking on prior models. It could be a fingerprint reader, it could be multiple colors, or something no one has thought of but it will have to be pretty compelling.
Wall street analysts will likely continue their attack campaign on Apple. They smell blood and that is what they seem to like to do at the moment. The only way to circumvent their inevitable hostility is for the next iPhone to be a phenomenal success not only in terms of sales but with social media buzz and the public as a whole. Public adulation would drown out the critics and make them sound foolish. The S4 was greeted with just a meh type of enthusiasm. Many called it just an S type release since they find it so similar to the S3. But chances are it will sell far better than the S3 once their marketing hype kicks into high gear. Apple will also face stiffer competition this year with the HTC One soon to be released. Since it is unlikely Apple would only produce their 4" model for only one year there is probably a 95% chance or better they will at least stick with the same size and resolution this year and if they decide to make a larger iPhone the current size would likely remain as an additional option and not replace the 4" version. I am hoping against hope they release a larger iPhone alongside the next iPhone. I am on the fence if if a cheaper iPhone with lightning makes sense but leaning towards it being a good idea. Older iPhones like the 4S are still pricey at around $450 - $500 in countries like China, Brazil, India, and even here in the U.S. for pre-paid plans lacking any subsidy. I seriously doubt there would be too much cannibalization since Apple would likely make very clear differentiation for example 3.5", 4", and 4.8". The cheaper model would also likely have far lesser specs while the other two would be their premium brands with all the bells and whistles. All 3 would at least share lightning to move them once and for all away from 30 pin connectors on their phone line with the iPad and iPod line soon to follow. iPhone 6 mini, iPhone 6, and iPhone 6+ has a nice ring to it. Then they could skip the S versions forever and just increase the number every year and avoid any possible confusion.
A lot of long threads on fairly 'blah' topics on AI, lately.
God, I am ready for something new from Apple. Even rumors of something new (other than a cheap iPhone).
Originally Posted by mstone
Poor TS. He's been clean now for almost 6 months, then along comes an article like this and it knocks him right off the wagon.
Come the heck right off it. You've never had a valid argument in this regard.
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
…will they still go with iPod Touch 5th generation as the older and iPod Touch 6th generation?
I should think they'd be fools not to. Visual differentiation isn't that important, given the 2, 3, and 4 looked the same and they still underwent this same sales pitch.
But did they sell the 2nd and 3rd or 3rd and 4th generation iPod Touches alongside each other, or did they discontinue them the day the others went on sale? I seem to recall it was the latter.