The New Macintosh Naming Scheme?

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 74
    fahlmanfahlman Posts: 696member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by cubist

    The "PowerPC" name came from IBM to show that the processors were a derivative of the PowerRISC used in the RS6000 and similar machines. I think it's possibly an acronym. Apple probably has a license to use it from IBM in accord with their membership in the erstwhile AIM Group.



    Altho the notebooks were called PowerBooks before they had PowerPCs in them, the PowerPC conversion was in progress at the time, so the use of "Power" on such un-powerful units was an instance of what Gerald Weinberg calls "the Bolden Rule", an intentional altho deceptive use of the "halo effect". Much like one might call the Mac Mini the "iPod Mac" even though it is not an iPod.



    So inasmuch as the "Power" name does definitely indicate the processor architecture, for them to continue using it on new products would be bad in two ways: (1) deceptive to those who intended to purchase a PowerPC product, and (2) a "reverse halo effect" by associating the new machines with the old architecture. It would be similar to Apple calling a 7100, say, a "Quadra". They did not do so then, nor will they now, if they have any sense (or good legal advice).




    The PowerBook 100 was released in 1991. Three years before the Power Macintosh 6100/7100/8100 line of desktops were released using the PowerPC 601, the G1 if you will.
  • Reply 22 of 74
    cubistcubist Posts: 954member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by CosmoNut

    Cubist, with all due respect, I can imagine the Apple engineers making the same arguments to Phil Schiller and Steve Jobs and getting a reply of, "Yeah, well who cares? It's a brand and we're going to keep it."...



    You're probably right. Apple has no ethics anymore. This whole transition is all about Apple being just like everyone else.
  • Reply 23 of 74
    cosmonutcosmonut Posts: 4,872member
    I can't see Apple giving up such a widely engrained brand just because it's *technically* not accurate. Of course, using that argument they could just keep the Gx names going.
  • Reply 24 of 74
    reidreid Posts: 190member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by CosmoNut

    I can't see Apple giving up such a widely engrained brand just because it's *technically* not accurate. Of course, using that argument they could just keep the Gx names going.



    Right. The G3, G4, G5 processors were only called that by Apple. To the manufacturers, they were the PowerPC 740/750, 74xx, and 970, respectively. And really, the Gn just ended up referring to the generation of the system as a whole. And as several people have pointed out, the PowerBook was called the PowerBook before anything had a PowerPC processor in it. (Does the ThinkBook have a ThinkPC processor in it?)



    Apple has always struggled with product names to separate different SKUs within a model line. The old Quadra 630, 700, 800, 900 numbers were essentially meaningless, except to differentiate their supposed place within the lineup at the time.



    Right now, they've got a pretty cohesive naming scheme in place. Power___ for the professional users and i___ for the consumers. To smooth the transition, they'll either need to come up with some other way of indicating the generation of hardware, or just stick with the same: PowerMac G6 featuring Intel Pentium IV or whatever.



    Then again, Apple did recently file a trademark registration for "Mactel" didn't they...
  • Reply 25 of 74
    Quote:

    Originally posted by cubist

    I think [PowerPC is] possibly an acronym.



    POWER was originally Performance Optimization With Enhanced RISC - an acronym, albeit a clumsy one.
  • Reply 26 of 74
    benroethigbenroethig Posts: 2,782member
    So, to answer his question PowerPC could be an acronym for Performance Optimization With Enhanced RISC (for) Personal Computers
  • Reply 27 of 74
    maddanmaddan Posts: 75member
    The names Powerbook and iMac are too valuable for Apple to give up. I wouldn't be too surprised if Power Mac was replaced with something else.
  • Reply 28 of 74
    cubistcubist Posts: 954member
    Thanks, Clem Dickey, for tracking down that acronym.



    Maddan's probably right, I can't see them changing PowerBook until they come up with something a lot better, but the Power Mac could be changed. How about Tower Mac?
  • Reply 29 of 74
    I think if Apple registered "Mactel" (read this on a different thread I think), they may use that somehow.

    Their naming scheme (I believe) is all going to depend on how many chipsets/motherboards they plan on implementing into their product line. For example if they plan on introducing many of Intel's products, they may use methods such as "i955" for the iMac w/ Intel 955 or "p955" for the PowerMac w/ Intel 955 - an easy transition from the IBM configuration to the Intel configuration. Frankly however this reminds me of Dell and other PC manufacturers, so this most likely won't happen, and could get them into legal difficulties.

    I'm going to assume that Apple will stick with a minimal amount of boards/chipsets that they only need, rid themselves of the "power" prefix and come up with a creative one to describe the new boards. They've been using "power" for how long now? More than a decade right? They've changed a lot since then, to me it seems logical that they would drop the "power" brand during this revolution if you will, even though it has a sense of value to it.
  • Reply 30 of 74
    cosmonutcosmonut Posts: 4,872member
    How would they effectively use the word "Mactel" in a name?



    Power Mactel

    iMactel

    Apple Mactel 3.0Ghz



    I don't like those and can't think of anything better.
  • Reply 31 of 74
    aquamacaquamac Posts: 585member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by CosmoNut

    How would they effectively use the word "Mactel" in a name?

    Power Mactel

    iMactel

    Apple Mactel 3.0Ghz

    I don't like those and can't think of anything better.




    Maybe the Mac Intensity
  • Reply 32 of 74
    Quote:

    Originally posted by svin

    Since Apple now is leaving PowerPC processors and going Intel, what are they going to do with the names PowerMac and PowerBook?



    The current names were launched with the shift from the motorola 68k CISC processors to PowerPC RISC processors.



    With the new shift back to CISC, will Apple invent a new naming scheme?




    Yes, the first Intel-based Macs will be named...



    PowerMac 6100i

    PowerMac 7100i

    PowerMac 8100i



    and will be available in your choice of Beige, Platinum, and Desert Sand Mica. For only $399 extra you will be able to get a "Mac Compatible" PowerPC add-in card.







    Welcome to the future...



  • Reply 33 of 74
    cubistcubist Posts: 954member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by concentricity

    ...For only $399 extra you will be able to get a "Mac Compatible" PowerPC add-in card. ...



    That's great! With the $399 card you can run Altivec and Classic apps!



    I don't like "Mactel" either. But I sure hope we don't see "iMac Extreme" :-P
  • Reply 34 of 74
    andersanders Posts: 6,523member
    The new PowerMac:



    Pretty Overdue Well Evident Replacement.
  • Reply 35 of 74
    svinsvin Posts: 30member
    what about:



    Xmac , Xbook and Xserve



    of course a bit close to microsofts X-box....



  • Reply 36 of 74
    mjteixmjteix Posts: 563member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by svin

    what about:



    Xmac , Xbook and Xserve



    of course a bit close to microsofts X-box....




    yes maybe too close,



    But, how about just changing the G in G4/G5 for another letter, that could be X:



    PowerBook X1 (march '06)

    iBook X1 (june '06)

    Mac mini X1 (june '06)

    PowerMac X1 (sept '06)

    iMac X1 (jan '07)

    iCube X1 (headless iMac) (jan '07)

    XServe 01 (too many X for this one...) (june '07)



    ?
  • Reply 37 of 74
    Quote:

    Originally posted by mjteix

    yes maybe too close,



    But, how about just changing the G in G4/G5 for another letter, that could be X:



    PowerBook X1 (march '06)

    iBook X1 (june '06)

    Mac mini X1 (june '06)

    PowerMac X1 (sept '06)

    iMac X1 (jan '07)

    iCube X1 (headless iMac) (jan '07)

    XServe 01 (too many X for this one...) (june '07)



    ?




    I posted the exact same thing a month or two ago and a couple of people disliked the idea. I do think that is the way to go though.
  • Reply 38 of 74
    I think they will keep the standard brand names of iMac, PowerMac, iBook and PowerBook. They are definitely too well established - it would be foolish to destroy all their branding efforts. (And a waste of money )



    As for the G naming convention, they've stuck with that for years now. One can only hope they keep it - it's classy.
  • Reply 39 of 74
    fosmanfosman Posts: 15member
    I'm sure they won't... but I hope that they start putting dumbo numbers after their computers.



    Its still about the swtich... Apple seem very aware that they need the simpliest product line to allow intial intrigue and thus considering for switching. Its all well and good an Apple geek comparing ram's gb's and chipsets... but the normal world doesn' t really care. For apple, it's been simple.



    i = entry level/students

    power = pros



    Then its just a case of generations and sizes. Its like ordering from a Mc Donalds Menu... and its the same world over!!!!



    I'd imagine they'd want to keep a generation name as they have now... Maybe they'd tie it to the operating system?



    Powerbook Tiger

    Powerbook Leopard



    etc



    All part of the software hardware convergence! might put people off putting OSX on non apple machines to!!!



    f x
  • Reply 40 of 74
    algolalgol Posts: 833member
    Keeping the "power" and "i" names makes sense, but I have no idea what to do about the "G" naming structure. Doesn't seem like apple can really keep it and replacing it seems difficult. Perhaps they'll just use the names of the intel chips. Not sure what intel's marketing names are going to be but for ex. PowerMac P5. Can't think of any better way to do it...
Sign In or Register to comment.