The New Macintosh Naming Scheme?
Since Apple now is leaving PowerPC processors and going Intel, what are they going to do with the names PowerMac and PowerBook?
The current names were launched with the shift from the motorola 68k CISC processors to PowerPC RISC processors.
With the new shift back to CISC, will Apple invent a new naming scheme?
The current names were launched with the shift from the motorola 68k CISC processors to PowerPC RISC processors.
With the new shift back to CISC, will Apple invent a new naming scheme?
Comments
Originally posted by svin
Since Apple now is leaving PowerPC processors and going Intel, what are they going to do with the names PowerMac and PowerBook?
The current names were launched with the shift from the motorola 68k CISC processors to PowerPC RISC processors.
With the new shift back to CISC, will Apple invent a new naming scheme?
The answer is "probably." However, anyone who knows won't tell you and anyone who will tell you doesn't know.
Word to the wise: Most questions about Apple's future plans have essentially the answer I gave to your question. Apple is an enormously secretive company with excellent security. Its security has only gotten better in recent years. IIRC, the last accurate leak of a new Apple computer box was the MDD G4. Everyone knew the G5 was coming, but the best sketch of it was totally wrong. Consider the Mighty Mouse. Despite the fact that a lot of people were screaming that Apple should sell a multibutton mouse, the existence of Mighty Mouse was not leaked. I dare say that no one would have guessed that Apple's multibutton mouse would look like the Mighty Mouse. And to your point, no one guessed or leaked that its name would be Mighty Mouse.
Originally posted by svin
Since Apple now is leaving PowerPC processors and going Intel, what are they going to do with the names PowerMac and PowerBook?
The current names were launched with the shift from the motorola 68k CISC processors to PowerPC RISC processors.
With the new shift back to CISC, will Apple invent a new naming scheme?
Those are very useful, well-entrenched trademarked names. They are worth a great deal of money to Apple in terms of brand recognition and therefore sales. Why would Apple change them just because the processor architecture is changing? The vast majority of users care little and know practically nothing about the change. The idea, seen here and on other boards, that the product name should somehow reflect the processor name just seems badly wrong, at least to me. I'll be astonished if they change the names.
Originally posted by Mr. Me
The answer is "probably." However, anyone who knows won't tell you and anyone who will tell you doesn't know.
Word to the wise: Most questions about Apple's future plans have essentially the answer I gave to your question. Apple is an enormously secretive company with excellent security. Its security has only gotten better in recent years. IIRC, the last accurate leak of a new Apple computer box was the MDD G4. Everyone knew the G5 was coming, but the best sketch of it was totally wrong. Consider the Mighty Mouse. Despite the fact that a lot of people were screaming that Apple should sell a multibutton mouse, the existence of Mighty Mouse was not leaked. I dare say that no one would have guessed that Apple's multibutton mouse would look like the Mighty Mouse. And to your point, no one guessed or leaked that its name would be Mighty Mouse.
I didn't actually expect an answer from somebody who knows for sure whats going to happen. I was just thinking of all the "Intel powermac" or "Intel Powerbook" related discussions, and thought since the "power" stands for PowerPC Apple almost *needs* to invent a new name for the intel based products. But what could possibly be cooler sounding than PowerMac or PowerBook. Maybe they'll just keep the names because of the allready strong brand value...
P= power
M= merom
S= Single core
only gives you trouble at the end of the month!
Hey why don't they just call them iBook, iMac, Mac mini, Powerbook, Powermac and XServe???
Power Book -> Power Book Pro
Imac -> Power Mac
iBook -> Power Book
Mac Mini -> Power Mac Mini
I think they will go for unified naming theme without any specific processor or model identifiers.
PowerMac:
Workstation tower, multi-core, multiprocessor, 2 Apple Drive Modules for hard drives.
$2000-3000
PowerBook:
$1500-2500
Mac Pro:
Vertically-oriented small form-factor machine.
$1000-2000
Consumer:
iBook
$1000-1500
iMac
$1000-1500
Mac Mini
iMac minus the monitor
$500-1000
The only other secretive company I can think of that's more secretive than Apple is Nintendo.
Originally posted by icfireball
You have to relealize, with this archetecture change, Apple wants to slip it under the rug as much as possible.
I agree.
That's why I don't think that Apple will refrain from announcing newly redesigned products just because they're waiting for the Intel parts to put in them.
Originally posted by FireEmblemPride
Well, on the issue of Apple's secrecy, I do remember seeing a 20GB iPod "photo" on Ebay, complete with a photo, about a week before the touted upgrade.
Are you talking about the recent change to color screens or the original iPod photo? There was no 20GB "iPod photo"...ever.
Originally posted by CosmoNut
Are you talking about the recent change to color screens or the original iPod photo? There was no 20GB "iPod photo"...ever.
Yes, hence the quotation marks around the word "photo."
Altho the notebooks were called PowerBooks before they had PowerPCs in them, the PowerPC conversion was in progress at the time, so the use of "Power" on such un-powerful units was an instance of what Gerald Weinberg calls "the Bolden Rule", an intentional altho deceptive use of the "halo effect". Much like one might call the Mac Mini the "iPod Mac" even though it is not an iPod.
So inasmuch as the "Power" name does definitely indicate the processor architecture, for them to continue using it on new products would be bad in two ways: (1) deceptive to those who intended to purchase a PowerPC product, and (2) a "reverse halo effect" by associating the new machines with the old architecture. It would be similar to Apple calling a 7100, say, a "Quadra". They did not do so then, nor will they now, if they have any sense (or good legal advice).
We'll just have to see.
The question to my mind is how Apple will market generational stages.... no more G-, of course. This is an interestingly thorny marketing challenge that I think Apple could handle better than other PC manufacturers out there.
Powerbook Centrino
Ibook Celeron
PowerMac V (for Pentium V)
Imac Celeron
or just the Intel processor numbers:
Powerbook 780
Ibook 750
Powermac 840
Imac 350
Or what about a Rebirth of the legendary powerful Quadra(dual, dual-core processors = 4 = quadra:
Powermac = Apple Macintosh Quadra 840
The Powerbook is more difficult because it has only been called Powerbook in it's entire life time.
double post