970 - compelling naming scheme

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 53
    vox barbaravox barbara Posts: 2,021member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by fred_lj

    Speaking of NAMING, please FIX THE SPELLING in this thread's title. I'm a grammar-OCD; it's driving me crazy!



    Me either. Spelling is fixed I'm sorry. But the very moment i pushed "submit reply", i saw that very issue.

    By than - it was too late...
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 42 of 53
    junkyard dawgjunkyard dawg Posts: 2,801member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Luca Rescigno

    How about if iMacs are called "Le Mac" then call PowerMacs "Le Big Mac." Heh heh.



    You beat me to it!



    I see Apple keeping the "Powermac", but losing the "G". No more G5, because Motorola has soiled the G's reputation.



    How about,



    Sledgehammer Powermac

    Ass-Reamer Powermac

    Powermac 3 (yeah, I know it's really 2, but 3 sounds cooler)

    Powermac Jive

    Powermac Excelsior

    Powermac 911 (hey if Dubya can cash in on 911, why not Apple?)

    Powermac Dope

    Powermac Smackdown

    Powermac High



    Powermac iX
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 43 of 53
    michaelbmichaelb Posts: 242member
    "Mac" has to be kept.



    It is important that the machine running the OS bears a connection to the name of the OS. Many people (especially techy people) call PCs by more specific terms:



    "Windows machine"

    "Linux box"



    Everyone's concentrating on the suffix, "G5", "970", etc. What about the prefix... That is, replacing "Power" with something that extends the Mac again, just like "Power" pushed the Mac into the realm of RISC computing, and "i" suddenly reinvented the Mac into a modern classic.



    "PowerMac"

    "iMac"



    So what is a prefix that could be added to "Mac" to convey even more power than "Power"...



    "DynaMac"

    "UltraMac"

    "StrongMac"

    "HyperMac"



    Okay, so none of these are going to work, but just maybe there are prefixes out there like "Power" and "i" that could work with "Mac" to name the next (970 series or future) generation of Macs?



    Just a thought.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 44 of 53
    gammera3dgammera3d Posts: 37member
    How bout "Apple ?"

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 45 of 53
    gammera3dgammera3d Posts: 37member
    I meant "Apple Pi" (option p)
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 46 of 53
    gizzmonicgizzmonic Posts: 511member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by son of Gib

    One of the biggest mistakes that companies are making now is the thinking that they have to refreshen/reinvent/re-logotize their brand in fits and starts of grandeur that quickly subside leaving them with a shadow of their former prestige and image.



    The most recent/troubling example of this has been UPS's shunning of their great, iconic logo done by the preeminent designer of his day, Paul Rand. They traded in their classic, beautiful, artful logo for a p.o.s. with a fckn' 3D gradient effect. The idiots.





    You are so right on. Is it just me, or does the new UPS logo look like it's peeling?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 47 of 53
    wrong robotwrong robot Posts: 3,907member
    I'm liking some of these other Apple names



    Somerfield -is kind of cool, reminds me of some sort of IBM prototype.



    Macoun - also neat



    gala- a little bit wishy washy but still usable



    braeburn- definitely a happening name, the description for this apple
    Quote:

    Braeburn has high impact flavor.







    I think that Mac is very important in the sense that people have come to relate to it.



    But apple really could use something that is fresh and exciting, like the original g3, when that was released, just the name alone oozed power. But now, given the disaster of the g4(the stalls and stuff) the g series is kind of a tainted name. Though g5 is still fresh, a lot of people may get misconceptions about it just from the name.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 48 of 53
    netromacnetromac Posts: 863member
    Or something geeky like: Apple Macintosh PowerForce

    Or something a little les geeky: PowerStation

    The new mac eclipses all other computers: Macintosh Eclipse

    Something simple: Macintosh One "there's only one"

    Pink Floyd inspired: Power Macintosh Interstellar Overdrive Edition







    netro
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 49 of 53
    vox barbaravox barbara Posts: 2,021member
    Quote:

    ...

    ...



    Well, the bottom line is



    ? naming is quite an issue

    ? naming represents the product

    ? naming binds the custumer

    ? naming woos the audience (which is hopefully listening)



    best
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 50 of 53
    I'm agnostic as to what they should called the 970 towers but Apple should change it's name to zaphod.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 51 of 53
    bartobarto Posts: 2,246member
    All your pentiums are belong to us
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 52 of 53
    netromacnetromac Posts: 863member
    How 'bout storm names (just trying something new here):



    PowerMac Cyclone

    PowerMac Tempest

    PowerMac Thunderstorm

    PowerMac Thunder

    PowerMac Blizzard

    PowerMac Twister ?

    PowerMac Tornado

    PowerMac Typhoon
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 53 of 53
    boy_analogboy_analog Posts: 315member
    OK, I've got something serious to add this time. This is directed at those posters that think that Apple should ditch the Macintosh name entirely.





    No!!!





    To be sure, a lot of people have built up negative connotations regarding Macs, but it is an immediately recognised brand name. It is

    much easier to massage those perceptions (once the requisite hardware is in place) than to start afresh and build up a new brand.



    We Mac users are part of a proud heritage. No apologies are necessary.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.