MacTel iMac and names
I'm sorry as I'm sure much of this will have been covered before. However, I've seen a couple of posts suggesting that the Intel iMac may get a new form factor. Do we think this is likely? I have an iMac G5 (first version) which I love - best Mac I've ever owned. I'd like an Intel Mac (preferably iMac) but would hate to lose the all-in-one form factor, particulalry one as good as this.
Secondly, the iBook and Powerbook are all branded 'iBook G4' 'Powerbook G4', what will the branding be for the MacTels do you think? 'iBook Intel' doesn't have quite the same ring to it ...
Secondly, the iBook and Powerbook are all branded 'iBook G4' 'Powerbook G4', what will the branding be for the MacTels do you think? 'iBook Intel' doesn't have quite the same ring to it ...
Comments
1) Branding - Apple has already invested so much into the names of its computers, and with such a small marketshare that it has, it is critical that it retains its names for the rest of the general population to be aware of them, (and their reputation).
2) Jobs wants to keep this intel switch as low profile in terms of what it means to the consumer as possible.
Joe 6-Pack has to know which software he can buy that will work. If he buys Unreal Tournament for Mac and it doesn't work well on his new shiny box, he isn't going to be happy.
So, Steve will tell him to look for the "Intel" logo on the software box. The front of the computer will remind him. Not a sticker - embossed and proudly displayed right on the front. Maybe right in the middle of the Apple logo. Think about it.
Originally posted by cubist
I think "Intel" has to be in the name somewhere, probably in the form of the new Intel logo, for a very simple reason: Preventing consumer confusion.
Joe 6-Pack has to know which software he can buy that will work. If he buys Unreal Tournament for Mac and it doesn't work well on his new shiny box, he isn't going to be happy.
So, Steve will tell him to look for the "Intel" logo on the software box. The front of the computer will remind him. Not a sticker - embossed and proudly displayed right on the front. Maybe right in the middle of the Apple logo. Think about it.
I just did, and I think you shouldn't start drinking so early Joe 6-Pack.
People will be aware of is compatibility because of the OS compatibility mentions on the box. Like works with WIn 98 - Win XP and higher. There is no mistaking that said software is not going to work with Win 95. Just like works with Mac OS 9, and Mac OS X. It's all on the box. If you neglect to read what your software works with it before you make the purchase that's your own fault. They wont need it to say intel on it anywhere. And it certainly wont say Macintel, or Mac Tel. That would just be plain stupid for ruining great brand name recognition that Apple has.
the "iMac G5" will simply be "iMac (w/special feature)"
the "iBook G4" will simply be "iBook (w/special feature)"
the "Mac mini" will simply be "Mac mini (w/special feature)"
the "Powerbook G4" will simply be "Powerbook (w/special feature)"
the "Power Mac G5" will simply be "Power Mac (w/special feature)"
The "iMac (release date)" with Intel processors will be the same sort of form factor but thinner. I think they want it 1" thin and maybe even a reduced chin. The chin looks like it is part of the brand though, so maybe not.
Originally posted by onlooker
...And it certainly wont say Macintel, or Mac Tel. That would just be plain stupid for ruining great brand name recognition that Apple has.
I agree, the iMac will be an iMac, the Mac Mini a Mac Mini, and iBook an iBook. There is too much investment in their names and consumer recognition to change them now just becouse of a processor change. I'm not sure about the PowerMac and PowerBook. I heard there may be some legal problems using the name that is tied to the PowerPC processor, and since the name was adopted with the 601 processor it is sort of tied to the processor. Apple might decide to change this somehow to differentiate the new computers from legacy PowerPC models, possibly going with XMac (like the Xserve) for their pro line, go for something new or if needed go through any potential legal fights for the continued use of the Power title to keep the well established brand recognition.
Correction: The PowerBook 100 was released in 1991 with a 16 MHz 68HC000 CPU so it predates the PowerPC archetecture and there probably wouldn't be any legal problems with Apple continuing to use the name.
PowerPC Software: Any G3, G4 or G5 Computer (tho with rosetta, G3 or above)
Intel: G6 or above
Universal Binary: G3/G4 or above.
stu
Originally posted by stustanley
i think it would be good if they just started the intel macs off at G6, then it would be easy for people to see which software they could use etc:
PowerPC Software: Any G3, G4 or G5 Computer (tho with rosetta, G3 or above)
Intel: G6 or above
Universal Binary: G3/G4 or above.
stu
are there going to be any intel-only apps? i thought the idea was that any app brought to the intel side would retain it's PPC compatibility and any new app created would already be a univeral binary?
Originally posted by speed_the_collapse
are there going to be any intel-only apps? i thought the idea was that any app brought to the intel side would retain it's PPC compatibility and any new app created would already be a univeral binary?
Developers who don't play by the rules could release Intel-only binaries...I've already seen a few people do that on tiny shareware/freeware projects. But you are correct...developers who aren't lazy or misinformed will release Universal Binary projects. This is the cleanest way to handle the transition so that users don't need to worry if some new piece of software is x86 or PPC compatible.
Until WWDC 2009 or so when Steve Jobs does what he did with OS 9 and shows a tombstone stating "PPC - Rest in peace...", developers and users both should expect that software designed properly will always be a Universal Binary.
-- Ensoniq
Originally posted by stustanley
i think it would be good if they just started the intel macs off at G6, then it would be easy for people to see which software they could use etc:
PowerPC Software: Any G3, G4 or G5 Computer (tho with rosetta, G3 or above)
Intel: G6 or above
Universal Binary: G3/G4 or above.
stu
Originally posted by THT
Apple will try to maintain the brand names. So, I prognosticate:
the "iMac G5" will simply be "iMac (w/special feature)"
the "iBook G4" will simply be "iBook (w/special feature)"
the "Mac mini" will simply be "Mac mini (w/special feature)"
the "Powerbook G4" will simply be "Powerbook (w/special feature)"
the "Power Mac G5" will simply be "Power Mac (w/special feature)"
The "iMac (release date)" with Intel processors will be the same sort of form factor but thinner. I think they want it 1" thin and maybe even a reduced chin. The chin looks like it is part of the brand though, so maybe not.
If Apple was designing a custom chip with intel they could get away with calling it the G6, or whatever, for instance. The probably wouldn't call it the G-anything tho because of the switch.
Does anyone here think that when OS 11 come out, they're going to call it OS XI? I don't see that happening, as Jobs would probably loathe that weird looking I screwing up the X's symmetry.
No, X is going to become a brand identity, and lose it's old ties to the fact it was the 10th iteration of the Mac OS. No reason the G can't do the same thing.
2005 - 10.4
2006 - 10.5
2008 - 10.6
2009 - 10.7
2011 - 10.8
2012 - 10.9
After that it would be very anti-climactic to call the next OS, OS 11. It will have some name.
But I am a little befuddled as to what by then could be added to opperating systems. Most improvements I see are hardware, or software directly related to hardware outside of the next 3-5 years.
Originally posted by Ensoniq
...Until WWDC 2009 or so when Steve Jobs does what he did with OS 9 and shows a tombstone stating "PPC - Rest in peace...", developers and users both should expect that software designed properly will always be a Universal Binary.
A smart developer would continue writing as closly to Apple's standards even after that, this may not be the last processor change and the more Options that Apple has the better deal they will get on their hardware. I don't know what will come, how long Apple's deal is with Intel, or anything else. I do remember Jobs saying that once the transition to OS X was complete then they would have options, and now we see the results of those options. OS X is and was origianally (early developers) billed as a "mobile" OS that could easily move to processors other than the PowerPC. Intel was one of the originally supported chips. I wouldn't doubt that Apple has other versions in one degree of completion or another for other chips as well. I aslo wouldnt be suprised if Apple keeps the PowerPC running along side of the Intel version. These "Internal" builds may not be full blown consumer level builds, but rather "proof of concept" builds that gives Apple "Options" in the future.
And any new entertainment device would not be called a Mac.
As for iMac G6:
Admittedly, "G6" would not work as a reference to the chip itself anymore, because Intel and Centrino are such strong brands. But it would still be functional as a way to refer to a *generation* of iMacs.
This generation would still be defined by the the chip it runs on, but that is not what should be going to matter the average consumer most. To us, "G6" would rather be an indication of how up-to-date a computer is and what software runs on it.
A negative side effect of referring to Intel in the naming, could be that some people think that Macs run PC software, which they won't out of the box. That would lead to needless disappointments.
Originally posted by Doxxic
...Admittedly, "G6" would not work as a reference to the chip itself anymore, because Intel and Centrino are such strong brands. But it would still be functional as a way to refer to a *generation* of iMacs. ...
You've convinced me. G6 is the way to go, no question. We can reinvent G6 to mean "6th Generation Mac": G1=68K, G2=PPC601/604, G3=PPC750, G4=Altivec, G5=970, G6=Intel x86.