G 3, 4 (n) Marketing scheme is poor nonsence nowadays
Back to late 90s that scheme made perfect sence. It supposed to touch intels scheme. Custumers thought there'd be competition between these processor types. Indeed it was, but the numbers never tell the truth.
But now it just confuses custumers. Custumers simply think that, eg, G4 is plain old, at least, late 90's tech. But thats WRONG.
If you buy an actual G4 set up you buy the latest tech available (accept that ddr issue;-)
IMO Apple should drop that "Gxxx" marketing scheme.
Than nobody would have unreasonable desires for G5.
Now I'm stretching ?
Perhaps that "marketing numberola" prevent best and fastest apple machines to be produced, if G3 is that (rumored) far beyond G4 development. But apple can not offer high end G3 systems over so called G4 systems. Because "4" implies better and faster than "3". Thats what custumers learned over the years.
Just my 2 cents
But now it just confuses custumers. Custumers simply think that, eg, G4 is plain old, at least, late 90's tech. But thats WRONG.
If you buy an actual G4 set up you buy the latest tech available (accept that ddr issue;-)
IMO Apple should drop that "Gxxx" marketing scheme.
Than nobody would have unreasonable desires for G5.
Now I'm stretching ?
Perhaps that "marketing numberola" prevent best and fastest apple machines to be produced, if G3 is that (rumored) far beyond G4 development. But apple can not offer high end G3 systems over so called G4 systems. Because "4" implies better and faster than "3". Thats what custumers learned over the years.
Just my 2 cents