From a performance and marketing standpoint, the 64-bit 970 ostensibly represents a leap forward in computing power, not just relative to Apple's previous models, but for computing in general (again, at least from a marketing standpoint, even if not all consumer apps greatly benefit from the chip itself).
A "Quantum Leap" in physics is a transition from a system with one discrete energy level to another (from 32-bit to 64-bit) with accompanying absorption or emmission of radiation (computing power/throughput) having energy equal to the difference betwen the two levels. A "quantum" is a qauntity of something.
How about the "Apple Quantum" or some variation thereof? It would signify the "quantum leap" in computing power, and the chip number could be used to define and identify incremental increases in power (or to continue the analaogy, the quantity) - i.e. Quantum970, Quantum97x, Quantum9XX. This would maintain the "generational" character of the G3/G4 naming convention, and provide the consumer a relative indicator of processing power.
I dunno. My lack of marketing acumen is obvious...this has probably been done before.
What do you mean next time? Unless Apple plans on making widly different Power Macs, there shouldn't be any new names for a while.
I see iMac, eMac, PowerBook, iBook, Power Mac, Power Mac 64. Apple will probably drop the G4 moniker from the next revision since practically every current Mac uses a G4 anyway.
I voted for the "They will rename both" but when I think about it the Name Powermac has been around for a good time just like Powerbook. So I am thinking they will change the second part. I dont think it will be G5, i think it will be something more contemporary!
What do you mean next time? Unless Apple plans on making widly different Power Macs, there shouldn't be any new names for a while.
I see iMac, eMac, PowerBook, iBook, Power Mac, Power Mac 64. Apple will probably drop the G4 moniker from the next revision since practically every current Mac uses a G4 anyway.
I think that's the point. Apple *DOES* need to remake the image of the line. PowerMac=slow these days. There will be no eMac. They've dropped it. The iMac line is still going strong in at least name recognition (I can't count the number of times my PowerBooks been referred to as an "iMac"). PowerBook will be there. PowerMac? That's the one that I think they should change.
You know what? I'm retarded. I looked. I thought that's what I heard, but maybe they've just dropped the 15" CRT? I thought something happened recently with it...
I think that's the point. Apple *DOES* need to remake the image of the line. PowerMac=slow these days. There will be no eMac. They've dropped it. The iMac line is still going strong in at least name recognition (I can't count the number of times my PowerBooks been referred to as an "iMac"). PowerBook will be there. PowerMac? That's the one that I think they should change.
I don't welcome unnecessary and confusing name changes. Spindler era Performa 6116/CDs and such really messed Apple up bigtime. The reason why we had the "Power Mac G3" was because 604 and 603 based Macs with nonsense numerical product names were being sold concurrently. The G3 set it apart. When the G4 came out, Apple was forced to change the product name again. When the 970 comes out, Apple will again be forced to change the name, but they shouldn't go out of their way to rename the product. It's still a PowerPC-based Mac.
The G4 will probably be common to all the other Macs in the line-up, so there's no reason to tout it anymore for the budget G4 towers which I'm sure will still be sold alongside the PPC970 Macs.
ok, we have a problem with GHz - they have 4,we have 2, which is less (please comment this line - thank u).
so, probably, we can "confuse" this dumb consumer by making up a new front: " ? ja, ja, lot of nice GHz - but is your computer old 32 or new 64 something?"
i think, the guys at the marketing dept have to fumble with this question. is it possible to give a "powerful" name (computers have allways to be "powerful") to the new g5 AND implement the "bigger=better" factor of 32 vs 64; no consumer has to know, what this means - it's twice of 32, so it's twice.... better.
You know what? I'm retarded. I looked. I thought that's what I heard, but maybe they've just dropped the 15" CRT? I thought something happened recently with it...
Thats the iiiiiiMac, and yes, it has been dropped.
Why don't they just skip a number and call it the PowerMac G6.
Suddenly they'd leave thousands of PowerMac users a couple of generations behind.
"Boss, I really need that new PowerMac. Last year I couldn't have the G5, and now the G6 has come out. It's sooo much better than my old machine. Can I pleeease have one. Pleeeeease!!"
I'm thinking it will still be called the PowerMac. The G4 will, however, be replaced. Something simple and cool sounding abviously. The only problem is that the old macs will still be called G4s. So it would fit the line up as a whole better if they called the new PowerMacs the PowerMac G5. Who knows.
PowerMac X1 is about the best name I can think of.
I really thought there for a while that the X1 was going to take off.
If the "G5" name never happens, this would be OK, because the processor is something very new, 64-bit has never been seen on the desktop computers. We've had the 32-bit for about 10 years now, so completely changing names wouldn't be a bad idea.
-walloo.
p.s. at least when the G4 Mirrored towers come out, the X1 name was going around, because these G4's were being released, it could have mean't that the 970 project had already been started, thus the name.
It will be called Powermac G5, I'm almost certain. Although Xstation is a cool name.
Normal people don't know or care that the Powermacs are underpowered right now. Powermac is a great, simple name that has served Apple well. The only thing I can think of them changing it to is....Macintosh G5. Of course, that would be too confusing!
Xstation is a very clever name too. But it looks like our friends at IBM have already laid claim to that name:
Comments
A "Quantum Leap" in physics is a transition from a system with one discrete energy level to another (from 32-bit to 64-bit) with accompanying absorption or emmission of radiation (computing power/throughput) having energy equal to the difference betwen the two levels. A "quantum" is a qauntity of something.
How about the "Apple Quantum" or some variation thereof? It would signify the "quantum leap" in computing power, and the chip number could be used to define and identify incremental increases in power (or to continue the analaogy, the quantity) - i.e. Quantum970, Quantum97x, Quantum9XX. This would maintain the "generational" character of the G3/G4 naming convention, and provide the consumer a relative indicator of processing power.
I dunno. My lack of marketing acumen is obvious...this has probably been done before.
Originally posted by SerpentFruit
How about the "Apple Quantum" or some variation thereof?
The Quadron? Quantia?
Maybe just XForce. It's not only a computer but can fight crime, too.
How about Performa 2.0?
Originally posted by NETROMac
And where would Apple go next time?
Power Mac 65
Wouldn't it also look almost the same as the G4?
PowerMac G4
PowerMac 64
What do you mean next time? Unless Apple plans on making widly different Power Macs, there shouldn't be any new names for a while.
I see iMac, eMac, PowerBook, iBook, Power Mac, Power Mac 64. Apple will probably drop the G4 moniker from the next revision since practically every current Mac uses a G4 anyway.
Originally posted by Eugene
What do you mean next time? Unless Apple plans on making widly different Power Macs, there shouldn't be any new names for a while.
I see iMac, eMac, PowerBook, iBook, Power Mac, Power Mac 64. Apple will probably drop the G4 moniker from the next revision since practically every current Mac uses a G4 anyway.
I think that's the point. Apple *DOES* need to remake the image of the line. PowerMac=slow these days. There will be no eMac. They've dropped it. The iMac line is still going strong in at least name recognition (I can't count the number of times my PowerBooks been referred to as an "iMac"). PowerBook will be there. PowerMac? That's the one that I think they should change.
crusin' down the street in my apple six 4!
Originally posted by k_killmore
There will be no eMac. They've dropped it.
Huh? Link please...
Originally posted by CharlesS
Huh? Link please...
You know what? I'm retarded. I looked. I thought that's what I heard, but maybe they've just dropped the 15" CRT? I thought something happened recently with it...
Originally posted by k_killmore
I think that's the point. Apple *DOES* need to remake the image of the line. PowerMac=slow these days. There will be no eMac. They've dropped it. The iMac line is still going strong in at least name recognition (I can't count the number of times my PowerBooks been referred to as an "iMac"). PowerBook will be there. PowerMac? That's the one that I think they should change.
I don't welcome unnecessary and confusing name changes. Spindler era Performa 6116/CDs and such really messed Apple up bigtime. The reason why we had the "Power Mac G3" was because 604 and 603 based Macs with nonsense numerical product names were being sold concurrently. The G3 set it apart. When the G4 came out, Apple was forced to change the product name again. When the 970 comes out, Apple will again be forced to change the name, but they shouldn't go out of their way to rename the product. It's still a PowerPC-based Mac.
The G4 will probably be common to all the other Macs in the line-up, so there's no reason to tout it anymore for the budget G4 towers which I'm sure will still be sold alongside the PPC970 Macs.
64? a commodore?! hey, welcome back, breadbox!!
ok, we have a problem with GHz - they have 4,we have 2, which is less (please comment this line - thank u).
so, probably, we can "confuse" this dumb consumer by making up a new front: " ? ja, ja, lot of nice GHz - but is your computer old 32 or new 64 something?"
i think, the guys at the marketing dept have to fumble with this question. is it possible to give a "powerful" name (computers have allways to be "powerful") to the new g5 AND implement the "bigger=better" factor of 32 vs 64; no consumer has to know, what this means - it's twice of 32, so it's twice.... better.
Originally posted by k_killmore
You know what? I'm retarded. I looked. I thought that's what I heard, but maybe they've just dropped the 15" CRT? I thought something happened recently with it...
Thats the iiiiiiMac, and yes, it has been dropped.
Ok, how about the xMac? Mmm, too corny.
The Power Max X1 does have a nice ring to it.
Originally posted by MajorMatt
The Public doesnt know the Power Mac exists. They just know Apple makes those "cute colored iMacs."
Ok, how about the xMac? Mmm, too corny.
The Power Max X1 does have a nice ring to it.
...perhaps not entirely out of the question:
eMac
iMac
xMac
Originally posted by LowB-ing
How about this for a lineup:
Portables: iBook and Powerbook
Desktops: iCube and Powercube
AIO: eMac and iMac
High End: XStation($2500 and up)
iCube and Powercube both sound stupid.
Originally posted by MajorMatt
The Public doesnt know the Power Mac exists. They just know Apple makes those "cute colored iMacs."
Ok, how about the xMac? Mmm, too corny.
The Power Max X1 does have a nice ring to it.
A person I know(I'd call him a friend, but I hate his guts) still thinks Apple only makes blueberry iMacs and iBooks, and the Pismo!
Suddenly they'd leave thousands of PowerMac users a couple of generations behind.
"Boss, I really need that new PowerMac. Last year I couldn't have the G5, and now the G6 has come out. It's sooo much better than my old machine. Can I pleeease have one. Pleeeeease!!"
PowerMac X1 is about the best name I can think of.
If the "G5" name never happens, this would be OK, because the processor is something very new, 64-bit has never been seen on the desktop computers. We've had the 32-bit for about 10 years now, so completely changing names wouldn't be a bad idea.
-walloo.
p.s. at least when the G4 Mirrored towers come out, the X1 name was going around, because these G4's were being released, it could have mean't that the 970 project had already been started, thus the name.
Normal people don't know or care that the Powermacs are underpowered right now. Powermac is a great, simple name that has served Apple well. The only thing I can think of them changing it to is....Macintosh G5. Of course, that would be too confusing!
Xstation is a very clever name too. But it looks like our friends at IBM have already laid claim to that name:
http://users.rcn.com/crfriend/museum.../Xstation.html