Apple CPU naming scheme
Will Apple simply call their CPUs whatever Intel calls them?
Or will there be an Apple-Centric name such as "G6"?
Personally, I think that Apple should either continue the "G" moniker, or adopt a potentially cooler sounding "X" moniker (ie: "X1" for desktop and X1-M for mobile-with variations for the consumer vs pro machines which will likely differentiate in number of cores at first).
The X makes sense for as long as "OSX" is out. And it also makes sense for being X86.
I just hope there is no lame "Intel Inside" sticker.
Thoughts?
Or will there be an Apple-Centric name such as "G6"?
Personally, I think that Apple should either continue the "G" moniker, or adopt a potentially cooler sounding "X" moniker (ie: "X1" for desktop and X1-M for mobile-with variations for the consumer vs pro machines which will likely differentiate in number of cores at first).
The X makes sense for as long as "OSX" is out. And it also makes sense for being X86.
I just hope there is no lame "Intel Inside" sticker.
Thoughts?
Comments
Everything is X.
eXtreme deodorant.
eXtreme television.
eXperimental weapons.
eXtreme crypticism.
eXternal hard drives.
eXtra 10% when you buy now.
Jobs doesn't call OS X "OS X," he calls it "Oh-Ess Ten."
Apple revolutionized th "i." If they make an "x," they lose brownie points with me. They ought to adopt the greek alphabet: name the G6 "Theta One," "Lambda 37," or anything else excepting Alpha and Omega, which are likewise overused. Hell, make a new symbol with a new name. Make it three dimensional so it really throws people off. I trust Apple will be better than 90's marketing.
I can't believe anyone is still impressed by the letter X. There must be a lot of people REALLY excited about waking up each morning, ready to face X-marketed products with open wallets. (note: author does not intend to flame anyone)
Now we will have Intel G4 and Intel G5 or whatever. Its simply the generation of the processor, according to Apple. If this transition really is so simple, they should support it by confusing customers by still using the "G" moniker.
Edit: And that "X" idea will run into problems in the second generation. X2 is already used by AMD. So original AMD, surprised they didn't call them Longhorns this time around
If the sticker was embossed into the metal, that would be kind of cool. With the downside of not being able to remove it.
And no, I have no suggestions as to what the name should be. And yes, i'm a pessimest.
anyway, apple should stick with G. intel could be G6.
anything else would make this "smooth" transition more rocky.
it'd would make perfect sense from a marketing perspective as well AND an easy way to not confuse consumers - ie software could be labelled "optimised for G6". which in reality, is saying, re-written for intel.
my. too. sense.
Originally posted by quamb
aye- tried to bring up this topic in the other thousand intel threads.
anyway, apple should stick with G. intel could be G6.
anything else would make this "smooth" transition more rocky.
it'd would make perfect sense from a marketing perspective as well AND an easy way to not confuse consumers - ie software could be labelled "optimised for G6". which in reality, is saying, re-written for intel.
my. too. sense.
Problem is how to delineate the lower end machines from the higher end, which will probably use a different processor. Maybe G6 in the mini and ibook and G7 in the powerbooks and power macs?
But I think they should move away from the G? completely. It will allow them to expand the Apple lexicon in a more creative way.
The "G" naming scheme is a bit old now, its time for something new. Maybe just use 'Powermac', 'iBook' and so on?
Never mind; I'm sure Steve's got this all figured out.
V/R,
Aries 1B
Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch
The "G" naming scheme is a bit old now, its time for something new. Maybe just use 'Powermac', 'iBook' and so on?
i agree, keep it simple (again)
PowerBook Pentium M
xServe Xeon
I think the consumer products will drop the processor from its name, thus reverting back to iBook, iMac, and Mac Mini.
Originally posted by DHagan4755
Power Mac Pentium D
PowerBook Pentium M
xServe Xeon
I think the consumer products will drop the processor from its name, thus reverting back to iBook, iMac, and Mac Mini.
They wouldn't call it the "Power" Anything, because it was called a PowerMac, and PowerBook originally because it used PowerPC processors. That is no more.
I think they should just use Pro instead of Power. ProMac. How they number them is questionable. I like the Idea of using X for next Gen. Xeons though.
Also the PowerMac, or ProMac would use a Xeon not a pentium. Apple always pitted the PowerMac against the Dual Xeon as it's equal across the platform for workstations. So they wouldn't pull the processing power out of what was the PowerMac because it's supposed to be using the top of the line workstation processor in the industry. That wont change.
Also, as Steve pointed out he's concerned with performance per watt, so it is unlikely they will be using Pentium 4 based designs in Apple's; though stranger things have happened. But seriously, if it were to be a Xenon, it'll be a pentium M branched Xeon, which Intel may not even call the same thing.
That being said, Apple has long abandoned model numbers in favor of a simple processor suffix in their product names; no doubt to strengthen brand recognition. Now that Apple really has less value in advertising the PowerBook Pentium 775, or PowerBook I7.7.5, I have to wonder if for the sake of advertising if they won't just lop it off to plain "PowerBook," or "PowerMac." The Mac mini would obviously get confusing because it's never used the CPU name in it's title, but I'm guessing Apple is betting the majority of that segment of the market is less interested in the difference.
Hell maybe all of Apple's machines will ship with virtualization enabled on the CPU and they'll all be "Duos" for their ability to run both OS at the same time.
PowerBook Duo, Mac mini Duo, iBook Duo, etc.
Or sequels.
PowerBook II, Mac mini II, iBook II
1) I read this thread
2) the thread could still be going in 9 months time
For the sake of continuity, 'G6' would be the most logical.
Gives continuity and distinguishes the new processor.
Ok but seriously ... I'm not being serious.