Like they did with the POWER Mac which was based on the POWER PC chip?
When they made up that name (probably leveraging the success of the powerbook whose moniker predates the PPC) they did want to emphasize the great powerful chip they were using.
These days, they don't. They're going to use the exact same chip that Dell, Lenovo and HP are using in their computers. They have no bragging rights here. The message they want to send is "we pick the parts, you just get the computer and you don't need to care what's in it."
i can see them changing or dropping "power" from the pro models. given that power is a common noun, there's no need to. but obviously the name directly relates to the PPC architecture.
Does it? As Henriok pointed out (slightly wrong), there were Powerbooks before PowerPC. A lot of them, in fact. I count eighteen separate models using 68000-family processors (not including monochome/color display variations). And of course, there are the current PPC-equipped Macs. Neither the iMac, Mac Mini nor iBook use the prefix "Power-" despite the fact that they do all have PowerPC CPUs. Which pretty much blows away the contention that Power- automatically means PowerPC-equipped.
IBM developed their own RISC cpu architecture, called POWER (Power Optimisation With Enhanced RISC) for use in its servers and mainframes. To move in to other markets, it teamed up with Motorola and Apple to produce a derivation of this, called PowerPC, or PPC. These were to be used in Apple computers, and for embedded use, as Motorola has done, and in IBM workstations.
This is where the PowerPC came from, about which time Apple adopted the PowerMac name.
If the Macintosh name, which I think originated with Jef Raskin were to be superceded, then perhaps if Jonathan Ive has his fingerprint upon a new design, it should be called a Power Jonathan.
This is where the PowerPC came from, about which time Apple adopted the PowerMac name.
"About which time"? Perhaps the mighty historian knows of a 680x0-based PowerMac or a PowerPC-based (non-Power) Macintosh from that era? Offhand, I'd say it was exactly the time Apple introduced the Power Macintosh name. March 1994 to be precise, when the 6100, 7100 and 8100 were unveiled to the public. I remember it well. Which still doesn't change the fact that four of today's PowerPC-based product lines (iBook, iMac, Mac Mini and XServe) don't carry the Power label. So PowerMac remains perfectly acceptable regardless of what processor is inside. It's easy to spell, easy to remember and gives an impression of, well, power. I don't think Apple's marketing department is anywhere near dumb enough to dump it and replace it with some silly, coined name like Inspiron, Presario, Qosmio, Tecra, XPS or even Vaio or a generically meaningless name like Dimension or Pavilion.
[B]"About which time"? Perhaps the mighty historian knows of a 680x0-based PowerMac or a PowerPC-based (non-Power) Macintosh from that era? Offhand, I'd say it was exactly the time Apple introduced the Power Macintosh name. March 1994 to be precise, when the 6100, 7100 and 8100 were unveiled to the public. I remember it well.
Thank you, mighty nightstalker for your exactitude, I remember it now better. But,
I was thinking about the Macs then, and trying to remember the various models, and if there were a PowerMac other than the PPC. I was thinking about the 6400 and 6500, and thinking that there was a Performa that was virtually the same, which then was called a PowerMac, and the Quadra 900, which case was used for the 9500, I think, and trying to remember the models.
I also was referring to the fact that not long after this joint venture between IBM, Motorola, and Apple came to be, that that was the time when they started to call PowerMacs by the name.
There seems to be some confusion. Fact: the only "Power" machines that weren't PPCs were the original "PowerBooks", which had 68K processors in them. Murky opinion: I *think* the PPC transition was already underway, and the naming of these machines was done in accord with what Gerald Weinberg calls the "Bolden Rule". (Such as treeless real estate developments named "Rustling Pines").
None of which has anything to do with the "Mac" moniker going away, and the majority of us agree it won't.
Then why do so many people tell me "I though Apple went out of business, or just made those music things"
APPLE = iPod : SAD BUT TRUE.
Good observation. The Apple Stores have helped a great deal, though, for people to see Macs.
It has been quite a while since Apple put the Macintosh line of computers, however their particular name is, more in to the public eye than in print, that is, on to a few televised ads.. I wish Apple would advertise their Macs to the culture at large in a more visible way.
For non-Americans, a "lemon" is used to denote products which are defective.
How about an Apple bundled with an email reader which is not elm ... a PineApple?
(edit) That kind of pun translates poorly. In French, you could sell an Apple of the Earth; in German, you could sell an Apple-sine or Orange (Apfelsine).
Comments
-Most of Apples offerings today (the best selling ones) don´t have the "Power" suffix and have PPC chips in them.
"Power" today has as much to do with PPC as the "i" in iPod has to do with the internet.
Originally posted by Messiah
Like they did with the POWER Mac which was based on the POWER PC chip?
When they made up that name (probably leveraging the success of the powerbook whose moniker predates the PPC) they did want to emphasize the great powerful chip they were using.
These days, they don't. They're going to use the exact same chip that Dell, Lenovo and HP are using in their computers. They have no bragging rights here. The message they want to send is "we pick the parts, you just get the computer and you don't need to care what's in it."
Originally posted by imiloa
i can see them changing or dropping "power" from the pro models. given that power is a common noun, there's no need to. but obviously the name directly relates to the PPC architecture.
Does it? As Henriok pointed out (slightly wrong), there were Powerbooks before PowerPC. A lot of them, in fact. I count eighteen separate models using 68000-family processors (not including monochome/color display variations). And of course, there are the current PPC-equipped Macs. Neither the iMac, Mac Mini nor iBook use the prefix "Power-" despite the fact that they do all have PowerPC CPUs. Which pretty much blows away the contention that Power- automatically means PowerPC-equipped.
This is where the PowerPC came from, about which time Apple adopted the PowerMac name.
If the Macintosh name, which I think originated with Jef Raskin were to be superceded, then perhaps if Jonathan Ive has his fingerprint upon a new design, it should be called a Power Jonathan.
I like the name Macintosh, may it live long.
Originally posted by NordicMan
This is where the PowerPC came from, about which time Apple adopted the PowerMac name.
"About which time"? Perhaps the mighty historian knows of a 680x0-based PowerMac or a PowerPC-based (non-Power) Macintosh from that era? Offhand, I'd say it was exactly the time Apple introduced the Power Macintosh name. March 1994 to be precise, when the 6100, 7100 and 8100 were unveiled to the public. I remember it well. Which still doesn't change the fact that four of today's PowerPC-based product lines (iBook, iMac, Mac Mini and XServe) don't carry the Power label. So PowerMac remains perfectly acceptable regardless of what processor is inside. It's easy to spell, easy to remember and gives an impression of, well, power. I don't think Apple's marketing department is anywhere near dumb enough to dump it and replace it with some silly, coined name like Inspiron, Presario, Qosmio, Tecra, XPS or even Vaio or a generically meaningless name like Dimension or Pavilion.
Originally posted by bobo28
Come On! APPLE = MACINTOSH : GET IT ? Apple, Steve Jobs, One of the greatest marketing successes in history .
Then why do so many people tell me "I though Apple went out of business, or just made those music things"
APPLE = iPod : SAD BUT TRUE.
[B]"About which time"? Perhaps the mighty historian knows of a 680x0-based PowerMac or a PowerPC-based (non-Power) Macintosh from that era? Offhand, I'd say it was exactly the time Apple introduced the Power Macintosh name. March 1994 to be precise, when the 6100, 7100 and 8100 were unveiled to the public. I remember it well.
Thank you, mighty nightstalker for your exactitude, I remember it now better. But,
I was thinking about the Macs then, and trying to remember the various models, and if there were a PowerMac other than the PPC. I was thinking about the 6400 and 6500, and thinking that there was a Performa that was virtually the same, which then was called a PowerMac, and the Quadra 900, which case was used for the 9500, I think, and trying to remember the models.
I also was referring to the fact that not long after this joint venture between IBM, Motorola, and Apple came to be, that that was the time when they started to call PowerMacs by the name.
Macintosh or Power Mac are both fine names.
None of which has anything to do with the "Mac" moniker going away, and the majority of us agree it won't.
Originally posted by kresh
Then why do so many people tell me "I though Apple went out of business, or just made those music things"
APPLE = iPod : SAD BUT TRUE.
Good observation. The Apple Stores have helped a great deal, though, for people to see Macs.
It has been quite a while since Apple put the Macintosh line of computers, however their particular name is, more in to the public eye than in print, that is, on to a few televised ads.. I wish Apple would advertise their Macs to the culture at large in a more visible way.
OR, IPOD GINORMO!
Originally posted by kresh
Then why do so many people tell me "I though Apple went out of business, or just made those music things"
Then you should see some more informed people.
Its...
Originally posted by TednDi
just call it iPOD MAC.
OR, IPOD GINORMO!
LOL
Yeah i've got a 2ghz 20" IPOD GINORMO on my desk right now!
Originally posted by ecking
LOL
Yeah i've got a 2ghz 20" IPOD GINORMO on my desk right now!
Was bedeudet GINORMO?
Introducing the Apple Granny Smith etc. etc.
Or they might go with 'Bad Apple'.
A cluster of Xserves could be referred to as an Orchard...
First generation Intels: Lemons
Originally posted by Anders
Why not go with different fruits, like they go with different cats with the OS.
First generation Intels: Lemons
Apple is a great name for a computer company. It's the fruit of knowledge.
How about an Apple bundled with an email reader which is not elm ... a PineApple?
(edit) That kind of pun translates poorly. In French, you could sell an Apple of the Earth; in German, you could sell an Apple-sine or Orange (Apfelsine).