What will Apple call their Phone? THE BIGGER PICTURE!!
I don’t write for the Washington Post or the New York Times, but who cares about that, that’s not the point here.
I felt compelled to write this post as I think a lot of people are missing the bigger picture with regard to this products name.
If this phone is announced at Macworld, and Apple are not allowed use the name iPhone for one reason or another, i.e. don’t have the Trademark, or can’t get permission to use the name from the Trademark owner, then there is only one option left in Apple’s eyes I believe, and it’s really rather simple.
Let’s go through a few points first:
* Apple likes to keep its product names simple.
* They like to convey what each particular product does or is, by their respective names.
* They like to name their products in a simple and logical way.
* Apple likes their product names to sound different, yet be easy to remember.
* The iPod is one of the strongest brands in the world right now, Apple wont want to mess with that.
* The general consensus on the internets right now is that it will be an iPod first, and a phone second.
Using the above points as rules for a new set of points based on Apple’s recent product naming history, let’s see what we discover:
* Apple’s recent product names for its whole lineup of hardware is starting to form a pattern.
* Apple wanted to make a little iPod with the concept of shuffling music as its main selling point. Thus the iPod Shuffle.
* Apple wanted to make a mini version of it’s popular iPod music player. Thus the iPod Mini.
* Apple wanted to make an even smaller version of the iPod Mini, and emphasize its tininess. Thus the iPod Nano.
Are we seeing a pattern here? Simple right?
So the general consensus is that this product will be an iPod first, and a phone second.. hmmm?
As in like this?
Looks like your average iPod, until you pop out the keypad and then it becomes a phone.
Yes, like that!
Well in that case why not call it the iPod Phone?
* iPod Shuffle
* iPod Mini
* iPod Nano
&
* iPod Phone
iPod + Phone = iPod Phone.
So if they can't get iPhone, they'll use iPod Phone.
Keep it simple right? That’s what I say - and I suspect Apple is saying the same. It’s really not very complicated when you think about it.
- Ireland
PS, if Apple makes a smart-phone to introduce later in the year, they could easily call it iPod SmartPhone®
So if you wanted to describe what type of new Apple phone you’ve got, to one of your friends over the phone, the conversation would go something like this;
X. So I heard you got a new Apple phone? Which one is it?
Y. It’s the SmartPhone!
X. You luck devil you, I just have the phone... but it’s an iPod Phone, so I’m still happy.
I felt compelled to write this post as I think a lot of people are missing the bigger picture with regard to this products name.
If this phone is announced at Macworld, and Apple are not allowed use the name iPhone for one reason or another, i.e. don’t have the Trademark, or can’t get permission to use the name from the Trademark owner, then there is only one option left in Apple’s eyes I believe, and it’s really rather simple.
Let’s go through a few points first:
* Apple likes to keep its product names simple.
* They like to convey what each particular product does or is, by their respective names.
* They like to name their products in a simple and logical way.
* Apple likes their product names to sound different, yet be easy to remember.
* The iPod is one of the strongest brands in the world right now, Apple wont want to mess with that.
* The general consensus on the internets right now is that it will be an iPod first, and a phone second.
Using the above points as rules for a new set of points based on Apple’s recent product naming history, let’s see what we discover:
* Apple’s recent product names for its whole lineup of hardware is starting to form a pattern.
* Apple wanted to make a little iPod with the concept of shuffling music as its main selling point. Thus the iPod Shuffle.
* Apple wanted to make a mini version of it’s popular iPod music player. Thus the iPod Mini.
* Apple wanted to make an even smaller version of the iPod Mini, and emphasize its tininess. Thus the iPod Nano.
Are we seeing a pattern here? Simple right?
So the general consensus is that this product will be an iPod first, and a phone second.. hmmm?
As in like this?
Looks like your average iPod, until you pop out the keypad and then it becomes a phone.
Yes, like that!
Well in that case why not call it the iPod Phone?
* iPod Shuffle
* iPod Mini
* iPod Nano
&
* iPod Phone
iPod + Phone = iPod Phone.
So if they can't get iPhone, they'll use iPod Phone.
Keep it simple right? That’s what I say - and I suspect Apple is saying the same. It’s really not very complicated when you think about it.
- Ireland
PS, if Apple makes a smart-phone to introduce later in the year, they could easily call it iPod SmartPhone®
So if you wanted to describe what type of new Apple phone you’ve got, to one of your friends over the phone, the conversation would go something like this;
X. So I heard you got a new Apple phone? Which one is it?
Y. It’s the SmartPhone!
X. You luck devil you, I just have the phone... but it’s an iPod Phone, so I’m still happy.
Comments
ipod Pro?
Powerpod?
iGiveup?
I felt compelled to write this post as I think a lot of people are missing the bigger picture with regard to this products name.
iThink someone needs the iPod phone to have auto text formatting to insert apostrophes where they are missed?
Yes, but what if it is more than just an ipod + phone
1. iPod Phone = music playing cellphone.
2. iPod Smartphone = music + video playing smartphone.
iThink someone needs the iPod phone to have auto text formatting to insert apostrophes where they are missed?
Oh do shut up.
I still think the generic name "iPod" was so called so it could be a container for what ever you wanted it for - it just so happens the nav and initial offering made music so very simple.
So I still think you should only need 1 iPod device - over time its abilities increase, though we are not much past the music stage and we're 5 years on - so I am dissapointed.
So there now might be a true fork in the road for the ipod *propper* to 2 distinct products :
So 2nd *Mega* Generation splits like so:
MEDIA device (continuation and development)
COMMUNICATION device (with media functionality - though will be spun the other way)
Perhaps they will come together in the 3rd *Mega* generation of the device?
perhaps this should already be considered into future naming.
Perhaps what this future product will do make derivatives irrelevent so reverts back to the oringinal name in the true spirt of the concept:
iPod
/u1
iThink someone needs the iPod phone to have auto text formatting to insert apostrophes where they are missed?
I think the iPod phone should analyze sentences and correct the punctuation when one puts a question mark where a period would be more appropriate.
I don?t write for the Washington Post or the New York Times, but who cares about that, that?s not the point here.
I felt compelled to write this post as I think a lot of people are missing the bigger picture with regard to this products name.
If this phone is announced at Macworld, and Apple are not allowed use the name iPhone for one reason or another, i.e. don?t have the Trademark, or can?t get permission to use the name from the Trademark owner, then there is only one option left in Apple?s eyes I believe, and it?s really rather simple.
Let?s go through a few points first:
* Apple likes to keep its product names simple.
* They like to convey what each particular product does or is, by their respective names.
* They like to name their products in a simple and logical way.
* Apple likes their product names to sound different, yet be easy to remember.
* The iPod is one of the strongest brands in the world right now, Apple wont want to mess with that.
* The general consensus on the internets right now is that it will be an iPod first, and a phone second.
Using the above points as rules for a new set of points based on Apple?s recent product naming history, let?s see what we discover:
* Apple?s recent product names for its whole lineup of hardware is starting to form a pattern.
* Apple wanted to make a little iPod with the concept of shuffling music as its main selling point. Thus the iPod Shuffle.
* Apple wanted to make a mini version of it?s popular iPod music player. Thus the iPod Mini.
* Apple wanted to make an even smaller version of the iPod Mini, and emphasize its tininess. Thus the iPod Nano.
Are we seeing a pattern here? Simple right?
So the general consensus is that this product will be an iPod first, and a phone second.. hmmm?
As in like this?
Looks like you're average iPod, until you pop out the keypad and then it becomes a phone.
Yes, like that!
Well in that case why not call it the iPod Phone?
* iPod Shuffle
* iPod Mini
* iPod Nano
&
* iPod Phone
iPod + Phone = iPod Phone.
So if they can't get iPhone, thye'll use iPod Phone.
Keep it simple right? That?s what I say - and I suspect Apple is saying the same. It?s really not very complicated when you think about it.
- Ireland
digg
zzzzzzzzzzzz
I don?t write for the Washington Post or the New York Times, but who cares about that, that?s not the point here.
I felt compelled to write this post as I think a lot of people are missing the bigger picture with regard to this products name.
If this phone is announced at Macworld, and Apple are not allowed use the name iPhone for one reason or another, i.e. don?t have the Trademark, or can?t get permission to use the name from the Trademark owner, then there is only one option left in Apple?s eyes I believe, and it?s really rather simple.
Let?s go through a few points first:
* Apple likes to keep its product names simple.
* They like to convey what each particular product does or is, by their respective names.
* They like to name their products in a simple and logical way.
* Apple likes their product names to sound different, yet be easy to remember.
* The iPod is one of the strongest brands in the world right now, Apple wont want to mess with that.
* The general consensus on the internets right now is that it will be an iPod first, and a phone second.
Using the above points as rules for a new set of points based on Apple?s recent product naming history, let?s see what we discover:
* Apple?s recent product names for its whole lineup of hardware is starting to form a pattern.
* Apple wanted to make a little iPod with the concept of shuffling music as its main selling point. Thus the iPod Shuffle.
* Apple wanted to make a mini version of it?s popular iPod music player. Thus the iPod Mini.
* Apple wanted to make an even smaller version of the iPod Mini, and emphasize its tininess. Thus the iPod Nano.
Are we seeing a pattern here? Simple right?
So the general consensus is that this product will be an iPod first, and a phone second.. hmmm?
As in like this?
Looks like you're average iPod, until you pop out the keypad and then it becomes a phone.
Yes, like that!
Well in that case why not call it the iPod Phone?
* iPod Shuffle
* iPod Mini
* iPod Nano
&
* iPod Phone
iPod + Phone = iPod Phone.
So if they can't get iPhone, thye'll use iPod Phone.
Keep it simple right? That?s what I say - and I suspect Apple is saying the same. It?s really not very complicated when you think about it.
- Ireland
digg
ireland i think youre right that its a bigger picture but i think they are going to leave ipod all together and create a new line.
what they are releasing really has nothing to do with the ipod. they made that five years ago and now they want to revolutionize something else. strong word but its the truth. when they wanted to introduce something to the mp3 market they didnt throw a mac at the problem they thought of something new...something that would actually fix the situation.
with everything we've heard and everything thing we think they are going to release, i think they have a much bigger idea than the ipod in mind. the ipod plays media. and the iphone (or whatever you wanna call it) would play media...and make calls? i dont think so...it too complicated. they want to keep the ipod simple. keep it doing common tasks. the ipod i believe will continue to be a musical device with an emphasis on simple UI. introduce something else to make calls...
everything we've heard makes the iphone grandious and new. two batteries, slide out keyboard, touchscreen? and yet we dont really have any idea. i think that instead of just adding "phone" to the ipod UI's main screen; what we will actually see is a new UI all together...well something like a slimmed OS X or front row with swiveling icons and widgets and stuff.
so instead of introducing a fourth type of ipod to the line (suffle, nano, video, and phone) i think they are going to stick to the three ipods and then intoduce something that can handle a broader vision. the ipod written UI was built to search a library of songs with great easy, not find and use a different program.
i think such a device we be called an iChat or somthing a long those lines. with a new frontrow/icon dock graphical interphase that emphasizes the ability to move through programs. address book, aim, phone, itunes, iphoto, movies, games, maps, safari on a frontrow instead of a list. making things much more appealing and easier to find in the get go.
rambling is complete.
All I can say is, that is one CRUSTY hand.
macphone pro
maybe they will connect a name to ipod but ipod phone is awkward, KISS
so how about
ipod plus
ipod slick
ipod jive
italk
and for the "smart phone"
italk smartly
Also, like some have said, based on AI's latest reports there would seem to be a divergence between Apple's phone plans: to first release an "iPod phone" and then months later release a more full fledged phone/smartphone.
(Yawn) Seriously, who cares? Does it even remotely matter? Don't you have a job? o wait
Why do you, ya prick. Go back to your house in Tramore David, or come up with something meaningful fo say.
"Yawn", with your 6 measly posts.