On thing you may notice is that the "Macintosh" name has been dropped all but completely. If you click on the Apple Logo in the OS, you get "About this Mac" as an option. It used to be "About this Macintosh." The only place where "Macintosh" pops up is the default name of the hard disk.
MacShelf Pro. Return of the DuoDock. Opposite the opening door it has a slot to slide your MacBook Pro, which it connects via firewire and boots into firewire target mode. Optionally it synchronizes user data between the two workspaces?remember when we had that nifty feature?
A fully integrated solution. Not only do they make the books, they also make the shelves.
(I'm joking there. While I liked my Duo and I'd buy into that concept done well, I'm not sure it'd fly as a mass market product).
I'm not sure I see Apple distancing the Pro Tower from being the "Macintosh" by adding a moniker. I suspect it'll just be a Mac Pro or Macintosh Pro, if anything. Or maybe they'll call it a MAC so the uninformed won't continually miscapitalize it. I could almost see Mac Tower Pro, especially since Tower is a moniker Apple's used in the past to describe them, but then again those were the days when you could buy a desktop model as well, making the distinction one of value. I would see MacStation Pro (as in workstation) as more desirable, though, since there aren't any hard consonants to trip it up into 3 words when said.
But, yeah. My vote's for Mac Mini?iMac?Mac Pro.
The iBook has me perplexed though, since it has strong brand recognition, is linked strongly to the iPod which sells quite well, but then you have Steve telling us he wants Mac in his computer names. So while MacBook makes sense, I think they'd lose more than they gained marketing wise. And iMacBook, well, no. But we do have MacBook Pro, abortion that it is, so who knows.
So I'm 50/50 MacBook?MacBook Pro and iBook/MacBook Pro.
before the powerPC they had names like "Quadra" or "IISE" or "9500". Then for some reason they stopped overtly naming the powerMacs. There were nicknames, like Quicksilver or Sawtooth, but not official names. Just G4 Powermac and g5 Powermac. They let the user figure out the differences.
THis discussion is mostly premised on the later style naming convention. Maybe they will name it the "Mac I2-06". Or better yet the "Canyonrado"!
I still use the term Mac, but I got tired of the way it became used, too. For example, "What about Mac? Is there no software for Mac?" It sounds like a person, like Mack, someone we know. That does show a closeness of heart to the platform, I realised, and so how can one quibble with that? And so the awkwardness of it passed. But is it nice to hear the original term, which Raskin coined. It relates back to Apple, so I find it refreshing.
Well native English speakers would say "What about Macs? Is there no software for Macs?" which makes perfect sense.
Well native English speakers would say "What about Macs? Is there no software for Macs?" which makes perfect sense.
I agree entirely. I call Apple's computers Macs a great deal of the time. I also like to call a Mac a Macintosh at times. It will not hurt us to use the term Macintosh. How can it possibly be old hat? Raskin used the term as it was an apple, but he knowingly spelled it a little differently. To me Macintosh is no more outdated than the apple it refers to. Even if Apple did call a new computer a Macintosh, it still would be called a Mac, too, probably more than it would be called a Macintosh.
Mac Tower is a description not a name. That's totally lame.
And yet, it would be completely descriptive of the line (except the Cube). Every proper Power Mac since the G3 has been a tower. What do you think the MacBook Pro is? Its describing a Mac notebook for professionals.
Still, why not keep the name? Power Mac. It has Mac in the name Steve, isn't that enough!? How about xMac?
Personally, I think MacMac would be awesome. Then Apple fans at MacWorlds can run around in circles around steve jobs, waving there arms up and down chanting, "macmacmacmacmacmacmacmacmacmacmac".
That way he knows that they want the new MacMac to be exactly ten and a half times as powerful as the current model.
Only Apple fans (myself included) would debate the name of a computer. I have never witnessed this phenonemen in Dell fans or Hp/Compaq fans or even alienware fans, who have some taste.
Ah, Alienware. I had put down Roswell(where my aunt lives), and Area 51, as possible names(not serious, except Roswell is good), but of course, they are taken. They do a good job of packaging and presenting their products. Often too colourful for me, but so were some of Apple's iMacs and iPods colours not for my taste. I have met many women who did like the various colours, though.
The older Macs used to have names, which were kind of informal. There was a black Mac, called the Blackbird, which at the time was quite potent for a consumer desktop, that had special RAM, and cost nearly 10 grand.
The tower, if it is a tower, will be named Mac Pro. The iBook will likely be renamed the iMac Book or MacBook mini, depending on features and size. These names jives with the others and round out the product lines.
And yet, it would be completely descriptive of the line (except the Cube). Every proper Power Mac since the G3 has been a tower. What do you think the MacBook Pro is? Its describing a Mac notebook for professionals.
Still, why not keep the name? Power Mac. It has Mac in the name Steve, isn't that enough!? How about xMac?
Mac Tower is simple, concise, vivid and not a tongue twister. Two syllables easy to remember for those people who never before considered a Mac. It leaves no doubt in the minds of people we want to impress to buy Apple's computers. Right?
Mac Tower is simple, concise, vivid and not a tongue twister. Two syllables easy to remember for those people who never before considered a Mac. It leaves no doubt in the minds of people we want to impress to buy Apple's computers. Right?
The people who have never beforced considered an Apple get a Mac Mini, not a PowerMAC, which costs five or six times as much.
Comments
Originally posted by Ichiban_jay
I'd say "DeskMac Pro"
or maybe "MacDesk Pro"
Deja vu...
Compaq DeskPro.
It might not fly on ? grounds
A fully integrated solution. Not only do they make the books, they also make the shelves.
(I'm joking there. While I liked my Duo and I'd buy into that concept done well, I'm not sure it'd fly as a mass market product).
I'm not sure I see Apple distancing the Pro Tower from being the "Macintosh" by adding a moniker. I suspect it'll just be a Mac Pro or Macintosh Pro, if anything. Or maybe they'll call it a MAC so the uninformed won't continually miscapitalize it. I could almost see Mac Tower Pro, especially since Tower is a moniker Apple's used in the past to describe them, but then again those were the days when you could buy a desktop model as well, making the distinction one of value. I would see MacStation Pro (as in workstation) as more desirable, though, since there aren't any hard consonants to trip it up into 3 words when said.
But, yeah. My vote's for Mac Mini?iMac?Mac Pro.
The iBook has me perplexed though, since it has strong brand recognition, is linked strongly to the iPod which sells quite well, but then you have Steve telling us he wants Mac in his computer names. So while MacBook makes sense, I think they'd lose more than they gained marketing wise. And iMacBook, well, no. But we do have MacBook Pro, abortion that it is, so who knows.
So I'm 50/50 MacBook?MacBook Pro and iBook/MacBook Pro.
And 10% iBork across the line.
Bork Bork Bork.
I'll get my coat....
THis discussion is mostly premised on the later style naming convention. Maybe they will name it the "Mac I2-06". Or better yet the "Canyonrado"!
and
"Introducing 'The Insanely Great' Macintosh Pro."
Originally posted by NordicMan
I still use the term Mac, but I got tired of the way it became used, too. For example, "What about Mac? Is there no software for Mac?" It sounds like a person, like Mack, someone we know. That does show a closeness of heart to the platform, I realised, and so how can one quibble with that? And so the awkwardness of it passed. But is it nice to hear the original term, which Raskin coined. It relates back to Apple, so I find it refreshing.
Well native English speakers would say "What about Macs? Is there no software for Macs?" which makes perfect sense.
Originally posted by lngtones
Well native English speakers would say "What about Macs? Is there no software for Macs?" which makes perfect sense.
I agree entirely. I call Apple's computers Macs a great deal of the time. I also like to call a Mac a Macintosh at times. It will not hurt us to use the term Macintosh. How can it possibly be old hat? Raskin used the term as it was an apple, but he knowingly spelled it a little differently. To me Macintosh is no more outdated than the apple it refers to. Even if Apple did call a new computer a Macintosh, it still would be called a Mac, too, probably more than it would be called a Macintosh.
Originally posted by DHagan4755
Mac Tower
I also like Mac Tower.
Originally posted by Benton
I also like Mac Tower.
Mac Tower is a description not a name. That's totally lame.
Originally posted by onlooker
Mac Tower is a description not a name. That's totally lame.
And yet, it would be completely descriptive of the line (except the Cube). Every proper Power Mac since the G3 has been a tower. What do you think the MacBook Pro is? Its describing a Mac notebook for professionals.
Still, why not keep the name? Power Mac. It has Mac in the name Steve, isn't that enough!? How about xMac?
That way he knows that they want the new MacMac to be exactly ten and a half times as powerful as the current model.
Only Apple fans (myself included) would debate the name of a computer. I have never witnessed this phenonemen in Dell fans or Hp/Compaq fans or even alienware fans, who have some taste.
The older Macs used to have names, which were kind of informal. There was a black Mac, called the Blackbird, which at the time was quite potent for a consumer desktop, that had special RAM, and cost nearly 10 grand.
Originally posted by IonYz
And yet, it would be completely descriptive of the line (except the Cube). Every proper Power Mac since the G3 has been a tower. What do you think the MacBook Pro is? Its describing a Mac notebook for professionals.
Still, why not keep the name? Power Mac. It has Mac in the name Steve, isn't that enough!? How about xMac?
Mac Tower is simple, concise, vivid and not a tongue twister. Two syllables easy to remember for those people who never before considered a Mac. It leaves no doubt in the minds of people we want to impress to buy Apple's computers. Right?
Originally posted by Benton
Mac Tower is simple, concise, vivid and not a tongue twister. Two syllables easy to remember for those people who never before considered a Mac. It leaves no doubt in the minds of people we want to impress to buy Apple's computers. Right?
The people who have never beforced considered an Apple get a Mac Mini, not a PowerMAC, which costs five or six times as much.
Originally posted by onlooker
Mac Tower is a description not a name. That's totally lame.
Mac Box Pro or
Mac Pro CD (Core Dual)
Mac Core Pro