I don't see Apple changing a thing with its naming schemes. iTunes, iPod, PowerBooks, Power Macs. C'mon...they want to make the transition as seamless as possible. Just because the perception of some Mac loyalists that "i" and "Power" are the exclusivity of PowerPC products is not a reason that Apple will come out with something completely different.
I think it's extremely unlikely. Of course the name "Macintosh" disappeared some time ago from the official names of products. They are "PowerMac", "iMac", "Mac mini", and "Mac OS X".
I came up with that same thought in here a while ago, but I never saw it transcend past the ProMac. ProBook just doesn't have the same ring a ProMac.
ProBook and ProMac is maybe the most stupid name change I could imagine, firstly they sound plain stupid and cheap, and secondly naming something like that divides the line up, you could rename the iBook and iMac as idiotMac and idiotBook then as well cause thats how they would sound anyways. I think this Power line discreetly describes how you get that extra kick with your money. If they should change the name it should be something similary discreet.
Apple computers haven't always been called Macs and they won't continue to be called Macs forever.
Everyone could still refer to them loosly as Macs in the same way that windows computers are called PCs. The "PC" was technically discontinued decades ago.
While I don't predict that a name change will accompany the intel transition, it wouldn't surprise me one bit. Imagine the publicity and buzz a new moniker would generate.
Apple computers haven't always been called Macs and they won't continue to be called Macs forever.
Huh? Apple's first computer was the Apple I. It had nothing to do with the Macintosh. Apple's second computer was the Apple ][. It also had nothing to do with the Macintosh. Apple also built the Apple /// and the eMate. These had nothing to do with the Macintosh. The Apple Macintosh began a line that continues to this day with the Power Mac G5. Presumeably, there will come a day when Apple will introduce a new line of computers that are not called "Macs." However, that line, like the Apple I, ][, ///, and eMate, will have nothing to do with the Macintosh.
Quote:
Originally posted by dfiler
Everyone could still refer to them loosly as Macs in the same way that windows computers are called PCs. The "PC" was technically discontinued decades ago.
PC means personal computer. The IBM PC was just one brand of PC. Others included the Apple line, including the Macintosh, the AT&T Unix PC, and too many others to count. Contrary to your assertion, the PC will technically go on for years to come. And if you take the position that the "PC" is the IBM PC, then rest assured that the IBM PC lives. It is now manufactured and sold by Lenovo.
Quote:
Originally posted by dfiler
While I don't predict that a name change will accompany the intel transition, it wouldn't surprise me one bit. Imagine the publicity and buzz a new moniker would generate.
Whatever the name, you can rest assured that its name will clearly indicate that the Intel-based Macintosh is a Macintosh.
It seems strange that people have such an emotional reaction to merely considering the likelihood of a name change.
I mean, that was a pretty emotionally involved rebuttal considering that I flat out said a name change isn't likely. It's almost like some of the above posters got in a huff and blew-up at the idea. As if simply weighing the possibilities was somehow an attack on Mac users.
Why would I not be surprised by a name change even though I consider it unlikely? Check out the PowerBook page on apple.com. Notice that it doesn't say macintosh anywhere. On top of that, the word Mac only appears twice on the page, in a side bar, and not in reference to an apple computer. The same is true of the iBook page. The word Macintosh doesn't appear on even the PowerMac page. Also, there used to be Quadras and Performas.
It is naive to think that a name change is impossible.
And for the record, there was a computer called the "PC". The code name for the project it stemmed from was "Project Chess". Granted, when released to the public, the official stance was that PC stood for "Personal Computer". It was discontinued long ago but yet people still refer to computers as PCs.
And for the record, there was a computer called the "PC". The code name for the project it stemmed from was "Project Chess". Granted, when released to the public, the official stance was that PC stood for "Personal Computer". It was discontinued long ago but yet people still refer to computers as PCs.
The term personal computer and its accompanying abbreviation, PC, were already in popular and commercial use when Project Chess started. The term PC cannot be credited in any way to the IBM/Microsoft venture. To the contrary, I would bet dollars to donuts that Project Chess was chosen as the name of IBM's personal computer project because it had the desired initials.
Here in Sweden the term "PC" stands for x86 based computers capable of running DOS/Windows. In the 80s the term was "PC compatible" and referred directly to the IBM PC, and computers that was 100% compatible with it, ie x86 based, running DOS. After the platform was standardized the "compatible" part was dropped. A Macintosh, Amiga, Atari and so forth was never considered a PC, they were "hemdatorer", "home computers" in English.
The wider meaning of PC in English is a source of some confusion in Sweden since Americans can say call a Mac a PC and be perfectly correct but a Swede can not.
Here in Sweden the term "PC" stands for x86 based computers capable of running DOS/Windows. In the 80s the term was "PC compatible" and referred directly to the IBM PC, and computers that was 100% compatible with it, ie x86 based, running DOS. After the platform was standardized the "compatible" part was dropped. A Macintosh, Amiga, Atari and so forth was never considered a PC, they were "hemdatorer", "home computers" in English.
The wider meaning of PC in English is a source of some confusion in Sweden since Americans can say call a Mac a PC and be perfectly correct but a Swede can not.
This is how I understand the term pc, too. I know some folks refer to any personal computer as a pc. I do call my Apple Macs computers. I just associate pc with things wintel.
The Macintosh name has become so closely attached to Apple over the past twenty years that it would be unwise to give it up. However, MacIntel seems to have gotten some currency. We will see what Apple calls their new machines.
But the important point is that speaking of destops, Apple still use the word mac.
Perhaps in the future we will have :
- emac, imac, intelmac, intelbook and ibook.
I think not.
Apple are going out of their way to minimize the consequences of the Intel switch. Their message is that the transition is seamless, you won't feel it, all the vendors will be ready in time, it's a simple recompile, and even if the developers mess up, Rosetta will take care of you. Trust us! You won't feel a thing.
I'm now saying anything about whether this is true or not, but that is the message that Apple is sending, and rightly so - they don't want to scare their userbase.
When they introduce the new Macs, they want to show that these are the same machines, maybe slightly upgraded, with some chip replacement - yet another incremental upgrade.
You do not send this message by changing the name of the machine to a name based on the changed technology. Also, you always want to be open to getting chips from other manufacturers like AMD. You do not call your mac an IntelMac.
Comments
It's just a CPU switch, like the one we experimented with the PPC switch.
Compared to the Apple 2 or 3, the Macintosh was a broad new experience, introducing a new interface based on a graphic interface and the mice.
The next Intel mac will be based on mac OS X, like the current macs.
We can even say that there will be less difference between an intel and a G5 mac than a mac on os 9 and a mac on os X.
MacIntel.
I know it sounds like poo but maybe they will be creative and drop the baseline of the 'e'.
Originally posted by AquaMac
Sorry to disappoint you but Apple already filled for protection on the name...
MacIntel.
I know it sounds like poo but maybe they will be creative and drop the baseline of the 'e'.
Apple do not use anymore the name mac intosh :
you have :
- emac
- imac
- powermac G5
- powerbook
- ibook
But the important point is that speaking of destops, Apple still use the word mac.
Perhaps in the future we will have :
- emac, imac, intelmac, intelbook and ibook.
Originally posted by AquaMac
Sorry to disappoint you but Apple already filled for protection on the name...
MacIntel.
I really think that move was to protect Apple from idiots caching in on such an obvious brand. I don't think Apple intend to use it themselves.
For one.. Doesn't Intel have their brand to protect?
Originally posted by jimbo123
I think they will change he name power mac to pro mac.
I came up with that same thought in here a while ago, but I never saw it transcend past the ProMac. ProBook just doesn't have the same ring a ProMac.
Originally posted by Henriok
I really think that move was to protect Apple from idiots caching in on such an obvious brand. I don't think Apple intend to use it themselves.
that was my assumption as well. just blocking the namespace to avoid third-party-induced consumer confusion down the road.
Originally posted by cubist
I think it's extremely unlikely. Of course the name "Macintosh" disappeared some time ago from the official names of products. They are "PowerMac", "iMac", "Mac mini", and "Mac OS X".
i wouldn't say that macintosh has disappered
Originally posted by onlooker
I came up with that same thought in here a while ago, but I never saw it transcend past the ProMac. ProBook just doesn't have the same ring a ProMac.
ProBook and ProMac is maybe the most stupid name change I could imagine, firstly they sound plain stupid and cheap, and secondly naming something like that divides the line up, you could rename the iBook and iMac as idiotMac and idiotBook then as well cause thats how they would sound anyways. I think this Power line discreetly describes how you get that extra kick with your money. If they should change the name it should be something similary discreet.
Everyone could still refer to them loosly as Macs in the same way that windows computers are called PCs. The "PC" was technically discontinued decades ago.
While I don't predict that a name change will accompany the intel transition, it wouldn't surprise me one bit. Imagine the publicity and buzz a new moniker would generate.
Originally posted by dfiler
Apple computers haven't always been called Macs and they won't continue to be called Macs forever.
Huh? Apple's first computer was the Apple I. It had nothing to do with the Macintosh. Apple's second computer was the Apple ][. It also had nothing to do with the Macintosh. Apple also built the Apple /// and the eMate. These had nothing to do with the Macintosh. The Apple Macintosh began a line that continues to this day with the Power Mac G5. Presumeably, there will come a day when Apple will introduce a new line of computers that are not called "Macs." However, that line, like the Apple I, ][, ///, and eMate, will have nothing to do with the Macintosh.
Originally posted by dfiler
Everyone could still refer to them loosly as Macs in the same way that windows computers are called PCs. The "PC" was technically discontinued decades ago.
PC means personal computer. The IBM PC was just one brand of PC. Others included the Apple line, including the Macintosh, the AT&T Unix PC, and too many others to count. Contrary to your assertion, the PC will technically go on for years to come. And if you take the position that the "PC" is the IBM PC, then rest assured that the IBM PC lives. It is now manufactured and sold by Lenovo.
Originally posted by dfiler
While I don't predict that a name change will accompany the intel transition, it wouldn't surprise me one bit. Imagine the publicity and buzz a new moniker would generate.
Whatever the name, you can rest assured that its name will clearly indicate that the Intel-based Macintosh is a Macintosh.
I mean, that was a pretty emotionally involved rebuttal considering that I flat out said a name change isn't likely. It's almost like some of the above posters got in a huff and blew-up at the idea. As if simply weighing the possibilities was somehow an attack on Mac users.
Why would I not be surprised by a name change even though I consider it unlikely? Check out the PowerBook page on apple.com. Notice that it doesn't say macintosh anywhere. On top of that, the word Mac only appears twice on the page, in a side bar, and not in reference to an apple computer. The same is true of the iBook page. The word Macintosh doesn't appear on even the PowerMac page. Also, there used to be Quadras and Performas.
It is naive to think that a name change is impossible.
And for the record, there was a computer called the "PC". The code name for the project it stemmed from was "Project Chess". Granted, when released to the public, the official stance was that PC stood for "Personal Computer". It was discontinued long ago but yet people still refer to computers as PCs.
Originally posted by dfiler
....
And for the record, there was a computer called the "PC". The code name for the project it stemmed from was "Project Chess". Granted, when released to the public, the official stance was that PC stood for "Personal Computer". It was discontinued long ago but yet people still refer to computers as PCs.
The term personal computer and its accompanying abbreviation, PC, were already in popular and commercial use when Project Chess started. The term PC cannot be credited in any way to the IBM/Microsoft venture. To the contrary, I would bet dollars to donuts that Project Chess was chosen as the name of IBM's personal computer project because it had the desired initials.
The wider meaning of PC in English is a source of some confusion in Sweden since Americans can say call a Mac a PC and be perfectly correct but a Swede can not.
Originally posted by Henriok
Here in Sweden the term "PC" stands for x86 based computers capable of running DOS/Windows. In the 80s the term was "PC compatible" and referred directly to the IBM PC, and computers that was 100% compatible with it, ie x86 based, running DOS. After the platform was standardized the "compatible" part was dropped. A Macintosh, Amiga, Atari and so forth was never considered a PC, they were "hemdatorer", "home computers" in English.
The wider meaning of PC in English is a source of some confusion in Sweden since Americans can say call a Mac a PC and be perfectly correct but a Swede can not.
This is how I understand the term pc, too. I know some folks refer to any personal computer as a pc. I do call my Apple Macs computers. I just associate pc with things wintel.
The Macintosh name has become so closely attached to Apple over the past twenty years that it would be unwise to give it up. However, MacIntel seems to have gotten some currency. We will see what Apple calls their new machines.
Glad to hear about Mac users in the old country.
Originally posted by Powerdoc
But the important point is that speaking of destops, Apple still use the word mac.
Perhaps in the future we will have :
- emac, imac, intelmac, intelbook and ibook.
I think not.
Apple are going out of their way to minimize the consequences of the Intel switch. Their message is that the transition is seamless, you won't feel it, all the vendors will be ready in time, it's a simple recompile, and even if the developers mess up, Rosetta will take care of you. Trust us! You won't feel a thing.
I'm now saying anything about whether this is true or not, but that is the message that Apple is sending, and rightly so - they don't want to scare their userbase.
When they introduce the new Macs, they want to show that these are the same machines, maybe slightly upgraded, with some chip replacement - yet another incremental upgrade.
You do not send this message by changing the name of the machine to a name based on the changed technology. Also, you always want to be open to getting chips from other manufacturers like AMD. You do not call your mac an IntelMac.
Originally posted by synp
You do not send this message by changing the name of the machine to a name based on the changed technology.
Like they did with the POWER Mac which was based on the POWER PC chip?