That's not what I mean. Branding is important, but the names that they dropped in favor of "Mac"-naming convention were better in my opinion. They weren't gauche sledgehammer-style branding of putting three specific letters into the name of every single product of that type.
Hardware includes:
- i___________ (iPod, iPhone, etc.)
- Mac________ (MacBook, MacBook Pro, etc.)
- Apple______ (AppleTV, a lone product without a line)
Their software includes these descriptors, but is a naming nightmare:
- _______Pro
-_______Studio
-______Express
-Aperture, .mac, and others provide further naming confusion
- AND they Include "i" software products, iTunes, iLife, iWork... which further muddy their product lines
What happens if they want to port iLife for iPhone, for example? The horror.
Even though the computer products were somewhat cleaned up for consistency, the iMac remains the problem that does not fit into the correct naming slot. They should have named the 'home' level applications i-apps, while the hardware should have consistently been Mac specific. Now, with the addition of iPhone, they've really screwed things up.
Eh, I don't mind the i moniker for consumer hardware like the iPod and iPhone - has a nice ring to it. iTunes is obviously tied to the iPod, so it's a natural naming as well. And the iMac is such a strong brand on its own, that renaming it wouldn't make a lot of sense. (What you replace it with, the generic 'Mac'? Confusing.)
While the iPhone and higher-end iPods obviously run OS X, they don't run *Mac*OS X... there's a distinction. They're not Macs.
But iLife? iWork? Eh. They seem like odd choices to me.
- Apple______ (AppleTV, a lone product without a line)
Their software includes these descriptors, but is a naming nightmare:
- _______Pro
-_______Studio
-______Express
-Aperture, .mac, and others provide further naming confusion
- AND they Include "i" software products, iTunes, iLife, iWork... which further muddy their product lines
What happens if they want to port iLife for iPhone, for example? The horror.
Even though the computer products were somewhat cleaned up for consistency, the iMac remains the problem that does not fit into the correct naming slot. They should have named the 'home' level applications i-apps, while the hardware should have consistently been Mac specific. Now, with the addition of iPhone, they've really screwed things up.
I do see their reasoning though.
All the products with an "i", except for the Mini, which would sound really odd with it, have that descriptor as being a consumer product.
The iPhone started as a pure consumer product, but morphed into a business product as well.
As Apple updated its naming conventions, that's where the confusion came about. The iBook became the MacBook
The pro machines lost the "Power" and gained the 'Mac" in front, requiring (in Apple's eyes) the moniker "Pro" after the name.
I really hate (is that too strong a term for a name?) the addition "Pro" to a name, because every cheap piece of junk says "Pro" or "Professional" in the name, usually meaning that if the word is in the name, the product is NOT professional. It just seems to cheapen the name.
So I agree that NOW the naming nomenclature is confusing.
Eh, I don't mind the i moniker for consumer hardware like the iPod and iPhone - has a nice ring to it. iTunes is obviously tied to the iPod, so it's a natural naming as well. And the iMac is such a strong brand on its own, that renaming it wouldn't make a lot of sense. (What you replace it with, the generic 'Mac'? Confusing.)
While the iPhone and higher-end iPods obviously run OS X, they don't run *Mac*OS X... there's a distinction. They're not Macs.
But iLife? iWork? Eh. They seem like odd choices to me.
Well, iLife, and iWork are home software products. As in personal products rather than business products.
I'd love to see a chart from Apple with some kind of clear rationale for each product line's naming.
I don't think the rational us there any longer, except for some products.
I don't mind the Pro, Studio, and Express as much. Though I wish something could have been used instead of Pro. Just Final Cut, would have been enough.
But, Studio follows a convention, of bundling the products into a "studio".
Express says that it's a cut down version of the Arg!!! "Pro" app. So that's ok, as in Logic, and Express.
So Apple really has only two product lines. Work and Home.
Naw.
Computer, software, consumer electronics.
The first has the Mac brand. The second has, well, nothing. The third has the i. (Remember what the original name of the AppleTV was? iTV. Not used for trademark reasons.)
Mac:
Consumer: {i}Mac{Book, Mini}
Professional: Pro
Software:
Consumer: i / Express
Professional: Pro / Studio
Consumer Electronics:
er... it's all consumer, and it's all i, unless for legal reasons.
The iMac and the Mac mini are the only real standouts, IMO, but they're pretty self-explanatory. i still means consumer, mini means, well... look at the darned thing.
I dunno, I don't see how this is particularly confusing. Consumer wants a computer, they're looking at anything with Mac in the name... and there are only five. Consumer wants an MP3 player, it's one of the four iPods. A phone, an iPhone. A tv feed, AppleTV. Kinda simple, if you ask me.
The first has the Mac brand. The second has, well, nothing. The third has the i. (Remember what the original name of the AppleTV was? iTV. Not used for trademark reasons.)
Mac:
Consumer: {i}Mac{Book, Mini}
Professional: Pro
Software:
Consumer: i / Express
Professional: Pro / Studio
Consumer Electronics:
er... it's all consumer, and it's all i, unless for legal reasons.
The iMac and the Mac mini are the only real standouts, IMO, but they're pretty self-explanatory. i still means consumer, mini means, well... look at the darned thing.
I dunno, I don't see how this is particularly confusing. Consumer wants a computer, they're looking at anything with Mac in the name... and there are only five. Consumer wants an MP3 player, it's one of the four iPods. A phone, an iPhone. A tv feed, AppleTV. Kinda simple, if you ask me.
From a retail standpoint, you are correct. If you actually try to categorize and rationalize each product, it's more difficult to defend.
- Apple______ (AppleTV, a lone product without a line)
Their software includes these descriptors, but is a naming nightmare:
- _______Pro
-_______Studio
-______Express
-Aperture, .mac, and others provide further naming confusion
- AND they Include "i" software products, iTunes, iLife, iWork... which further muddy their product lines
What happens if they want to port iLife for iPhone, for example? The horror.
Even though the computer products were somewhat cleaned up for consistency, the iMac remains the problem that does not fit into the correct naming slot. They should have named the 'home' level applications i-apps, while the hardware should have consistently been Mac specific. Now, with the addition of iPhone, they've really screwed things up.
From the retail standpoint, it's a "Home' unit... but businesses are using them since they are more than powerful enough, and they represent a significant savings over the MacPros.
Though it's doing well, what I had wanted Amazon to do with the Kindle was turn textbook publishers upside down and make that expense as nominal as buying a bestseller paperback on Amazon.
Do you know how many higher education students would pay for a Kindle-sized device to replace all the textbooks they'd ever need to carry somewhere? How enticing that would be for well-endowed universities to adopt and dispense (serving as an attractive, modern branding for the college, too?)
Of course, the business plan I can't envision is the whole telling-publishers-we're-paying-10%-of-what-you-charge-for-your-glossy-economics-textbook part.
10% of something is better than the nothing they'll get when all university coursework is based around podcasts and webpages.
Not so sure about that. I've suspected for a while that crafty old Steve may use the rumor sites to his own advantage. It would be conceivable to leak a rumor to a site, then watch the comments, as a sort of market survey. Additionally, we know that SOMEONE has leaked his event-wardrobe choices just before the event... doesn't take a leap to find a suspect. Thirdly, he could use rumor mongering to build up hype before a product launch. This shortage, plus a rumor here or there 'accidentally' leaked by a cohort...
I would honestly be surprised if he, or someone at Apple with his blessing, does NOT play the community in one way or another. It's a perfect route into the minds of the most enthusiastic segment of Apple's customer base.
Whether we always get the intended message, or blow things out of proportion like the goofs we are, well, that's another question.
Absofreakinlutely. There is a tendency for us, perhaps brought over from our dreary working lives (or Dilbert!), to believe "the boss is stupid." This is most definitely not the case with Apple.
Anyway, to my way of thinking, I cannot help but believe that AI is not monitored by some executive's flunkey at 1 Infinite Loop. Maybe for fun, Kasper could put on the AI homepage how many hits a day he's getting from Apple...
This is exactly why SJ said the Kindle is crap. When I first heard about it, I checked it out. Unfortunately I was incredibly disappointed as it can only read the stuff you buy from Amazon on it. Can't load PDFs onto it, other kinds of e-books, NOTHING
The Kindle can read other formats except the proprietary/DRM'd formats of Sony and other manufacturers of readers. It can't handle PDFs natively, but they can be run through a free translation program and downloaded.
Comments
That's not what I mean. Branding is important, but the names that they dropped in favor of "Mac"-naming convention were better in my opinion. They weren't gauche sledgehammer-style branding of putting three specific letters into the name of every single product of that type.
Hardware includes:
- i___________ (iPod, iPhone, etc.)
- Mac________ (MacBook, MacBook Pro, etc.)
- Apple______ (AppleTV, a lone product without a line)
Their software includes these descriptors, but is a naming nightmare:
- _______Pro
-_______Studio
-______Express
-Aperture, .mac, and others provide further naming confusion
- AND they Include "i" software products, iTunes, iLife, iWork... which further muddy their product lines
What happens if they want to port iLife for iPhone, for example? The horror.
Even though the computer products were somewhat cleaned up for consistency, the iMac remains the problem that does not fit into the correct naming slot. They should have named the 'home' level applications i-apps, while the hardware should have consistently been Mac specific. Now, with the addition of iPhone, they've really screwed things up.
While the iPhone and higher-end iPods obviously run OS X, they don't run *Mac*OS X... there's a distinction. They're not Macs.
But iLife? iWork? Eh. They seem like odd choices to me.
Hardware includes:
- i___________ (iPod, iPhone, etc.)
- Mac________ (MacBook, MacBook Pro, etc.)
- Apple______ (AppleTV, a lone product without a line)
Their software includes these descriptors, but is a naming nightmare:
- _______Pro
-_______Studio
-______Express
-Aperture, .mac, and others provide further naming confusion
- AND they Include "i" software products, iTunes, iLife, iWork... which further muddy their product lines
What happens if they want to port iLife for iPhone, for example? The horror.
Even though the computer products were somewhat cleaned up for consistency, the iMac remains the problem that does not fit into the correct naming slot. They should have named the 'home' level applications i-apps, while the hardware should have consistently been Mac specific. Now, with the addition of iPhone, they've really screwed things up.
I do see their reasoning though.
All the products with an "i", except for the Mini, which would sound really odd with it, have that descriptor as being a consumer product.
The iPhone started as a pure consumer product, but morphed into a business product as well.
As Apple updated its naming conventions, that's where the confusion came about. The iBook became the MacBook
The pro machines lost the "Power" and gained the 'Mac" in front, requiring (in Apple's eyes) the moniker "Pro" after the name.
I really hate (is that too strong a term for a name?) the addition "Pro" to a name, because every cheap piece of junk says "Pro" or "Professional" in the name, usually meaning that if the word is in the name, the product is NOT professional. It just seems to cheapen the name.
So I agree that NOW the naming nomenclature is confusing.
Eh, I don't mind the i moniker for consumer hardware like the iPod and iPhone - has a nice ring to it. iTunes is obviously tied to the iPod, so it's a natural naming as well. And the iMac is such a strong brand on its own, that renaming it wouldn't make a lot of sense. (What you replace it with, the generic 'Mac'? Confusing.)
While the iPhone and higher-end iPods obviously run OS X, they don't run *Mac*OS X... there's a distinction. They're not Macs.
But iLife? iWork? Eh. They seem like odd choices to me.
Well, iLife, and iWork are home software products. As in personal products rather than business products.
I'd love to see a chart from Apple with some kind of clear rationale for each product line's naming.
I don't think the rational us there any longer, except for some products.
I don't mind the Pro, Studio, and Express as much. Though I wish something could have been used instead of Pro. Just Final Cut, would have been enough.
But, Studio follows a convention, of bundling the products into a "studio".
Express says that it's a cut down version of the Arg!!! "Pro" app. So that's ok, as in Logic, and Express.
So Apple really has only two product lines. Work and Home.
What else could there be?
Other than work and home, I can't think of another overreaching category.
Lifestyle?
So Apple really has only two product lines. Work and Home.
Naw.
Computer, software, consumer electronics.
The first has the Mac brand. The second has, well, nothing. The third has the i. (Remember what the original name of the AppleTV was? iTV. Not used for trademark reasons.)
Mac:
Consumer: {i}Mac{Book, Mini}
Professional: Pro
Software:
Consumer: i / Express
Professional: Pro / Studio
Consumer Electronics:
er... it's all consumer, and it's all i, unless for legal reasons.
The iMac and the Mac mini are the only real standouts, IMO, but they're pretty self-explanatory. i still means consumer, mini means, well... look at the darned thing.
I dunno, I don't see how this is particularly confusing. Consumer wants a computer, they're looking at anything with Mac in the name... and there are only five. Consumer wants an MP3 player, it's one of the four iPods. A phone, an iPhone. A tv feed, AppleTV. Kinda simple, if you ask me.
Naw.
Computer, software, consumer electronics.
The first has the Mac brand. The second has, well, nothing. The third has the i. (Remember what the original name of the AppleTV was? iTV. Not used for trademark reasons.)
Mac:
Consumer: {i}Mac{Book, Mini}
Professional: Pro
Software:
Consumer: i / Express
Professional: Pro / Studio
Consumer Electronics:
er... it's all consumer, and it's all i, unless for legal reasons.
The iMac and the Mac mini are the only real standouts, IMO, but they're pretty self-explanatory. i still means consumer, mini means, well... look at the darned thing.
I dunno, I don't see how this is particularly confusing. Consumer wants a computer, they're looking at anything with Mac in the name... and there are only five. Consumer wants an MP3 player, it's one of the four iPods. A phone, an iPhone. A tv feed, AppleTV. Kinda simple, if you ask me.
From a retail standpoint, you are correct. If you actually try to categorize and rationalize each product, it's more difficult to defend.
Hardware includes:
- i___________ (iPod, iPhone, etc.)
- Mac________ (MacBook, MacBook Pro, etc.)
- Apple______ (AppleTV, a lone product without a line)
Their software includes these descriptors, but is a naming nightmare:
- _______Pro
-_______Studio
-______Express
-Aperture, .mac, and others provide further naming confusion
- AND they Include "i" software products, iTunes, iLife, iWork... which further muddy their product lines
What happens if they want to port iLife for iPhone, for example? The horror.
Even though the computer products were somewhat cleaned up for consistency, the iMac remains the problem that does not fit into the correct naming slot. They should have named the 'home' level applications i-apps, while the hardware should have consistently been Mac specific. Now, with the addition of iPhone, they've really screwed things up.
So what line does the iMac belong to?
So what line does the iMac belong to?
From the retail standpoint, it's a "Home' unit... but businesses are using them since they are more than powerful enough, and they represent a significant savings over the MacPros.
Though it's doing well, what I had wanted Amazon to do with the Kindle was turn textbook publishers upside down and make that expense as nominal as buying a bestseller paperback on Amazon.
Do you know how many higher education students would pay for a Kindle-sized device to replace all the textbooks they'd ever need to carry somewhere? How enticing that would be for well-endowed universities to adopt and dispense (serving as an attractive, modern branding for the college, too?)
Of course, the business plan I can't envision is the whole telling-publishers-we're-paying-10%-of-what-you-charge-for-your-glossy-economics-textbook part.
10% of something is better than the nothing they'll get when all university coursework is based around podcasts and webpages.
Not so sure about that. I've suspected for a while that crafty old Steve may use the rumor sites to his own advantage. It would be conceivable to leak a rumor to a site, then watch the comments, as a sort of market survey. Additionally, we know that SOMEONE has leaked his event-wardrobe choices just before the event... doesn't take a leap to find a suspect. Thirdly, he could use rumor mongering to build up hype before a product launch. This shortage, plus a rumor here or there 'accidentally' leaked by a cohort...
I would honestly be surprised if he, or someone at Apple with his blessing, does NOT play the community in one way or another. It's a perfect route into the minds of the most enthusiastic segment of Apple's customer base.
Whether we always get the intended message, or blow things out of proportion like the goofs we are, well, that's another question.
Absofreakinlutely. There is a tendency for us, perhaps brought over from our dreary working lives (or Dilbert!), to believe "the boss is stupid." This is most definitely not the case with Apple.
Anyway, to my way of thinking, I cannot help but believe that AI is not monitored by some executive's flunkey at 1 Infinite Loop. Maybe for fun, Kasper could put on the AI homepage how many hits a day he's getting from Apple...
http://spidouz.wordpress.com/2008/09...oks-and-games/
INSANELY GREAT!
This is exactly why SJ said the Kindle is crap. When I first heard about it, I checked it out. Unfortunately I was incredibly disappointed as it can only read the stuff you buy from Amazon on it. Can't load PDFs onto it, other kinds of e-books, NOTHING
The Kindle can read other formats except the proprietary/DRM'd formats of Sony and other manufacturers of readers. It can't handle PDFs natively, but they can be run through a free translation program and downloaded.
Honestly, the thing looks awwwwful.
I'd much rather have Sony's e-reader.
I'm fairly confident that the Kindle's look was designed by an 80 year old.
Honestly, the thing looks awwwwful.
I'd much rather have Sony's e-reader.
Almost no one has bought Sony's model
They are coming out with a new one that's said to be much better.
Almost no one has bought Sony's model
They are coming out with a new one that's said to be much better.
Sony's model hasn't quite been marketed as well as the kindle.
In fact, Sony blows when it comes to marketing their stuff.