Keeping the "power" and "i" names makes sense, but I have no idea what to do about the "G" naming structure. Doesn't seem like apple can really keep it and replacing it seems difficult. Perhaps they'll just use the names of the intel chips. Not sure what intel's marketing names are going to be but for ex. PowerMac P5. Can't think of any better way to do it...
You're probably right when it comes to keeping the Power and the "i" names.
I alsp think the G will be abandoned. Apple could keep the G name for the future since the G stands for generation. But as previously said, this namning sceem was introduced with the RISC processors and I think all of us assosiate the G namn with a PowerPC processor.
But there are problems renaming the Intel processors. It would be stupid to come up with a new name just for renamings sake. But if the chips would be in some what different, then I think it would be advantagouse to have an apple specific name for their CPUs.
and will be available in your choice of Beige, Platinum, and Desert Sand Mica. For only $399 extra you will be able to get a "Mac Compatible" PowerPC add-in card.
Welcome to the future...
I was thinking the Mini could become the Macintosh IIIsi
The PowerMac could become the Macintosh IIIfx (Wicked Fast!)
Maybe between the two Apple could launch the IIIci (or they could call it Malcolm)
later, Apple could name the Pentium 5 model the Quintro
Well I have been of the opinion that Apple should use ProMac for the tower if they make it capable of being a workstation class computer in the league of BOXX, and Alienware, but as for the PowerBooks. I don't know. ProBook just doesn't sound right to me. I think they should either just keep the name Power throughout, or go with Pro for the tower, and completely rename the laptop. If they migrate it to a convertible laptop/tablet it would be a lot easier to rename it.
But using the power-name is totally associated with the PPC to just about all Mac users, and coming up with something else would be a refreshing change of pace. But I guss Apple ProBoook doesn't sound that bad after you give it a minute. iBook, ProBook.?.?.?.?.?
I like ProBook and ProMac! Someone tell Steve. Much better than MacTel.
I think ProBook and ProMac names are really rubish. PowerBook And PowerMac are just fine (despite the fact that Power does have a loose affiliaton with the PowerPC, as onlooker pointed out). PowerBook is for me a synomym for an Powerfull Apple laptop, a PowerMac stands for a Powerfill Apple stationary. It's what comes after that's important. Example: If someone askes you what kind of PowerBook you have.
I would awnser: an 1.67 with superdrive (there is really no need to say it's a G4).
The same goes for the PowerMac. You have a computer (PowerMac) which you specify as a, for example, a dual 2.3.
Ok so, since the formfactor isn't changing (as far as we know, and if it would, thats a different topic) part one of the name can stay (PowerMac/Book-iMac/book) as for the name that specifies what version you have will have to change.
So we want to decribe a PowerBook that has an Intel chipset with X Ghz and with what screen and drive.. Let's say a Yonah 2.16 ghz 12inch with 16x duallayer superdrive. I for one would like a name that as short as posible and gives me as much information as possible. Could be effective and a bit boring and calll it a PowerBook YS 2.2s (yonah, small 2.16 ghz, superdrive). Or do like for example ahhh... you get the point.
The company has decided against assigning a codename to this new, common processor microarchitecture, curiously enough. As we've noted, the first CPUs based on this design will be available in the second half of 2006 and built using Intel's 65nm fabrication process.
There in lies the proof of Apple & Intel announcing the new G6 processor (family) powering the new Apple Macintosh line of personal computers...
Bleeh, bad marketing taste in mouth...
Some may scoff, but look deeper...
G6 + second half of 2006 + built using Intel's 65nm fabrication process = 666
Which just happened to be the original price of the first Apple's, the computer for the rest of us...
I mean if MacBook Pro was the winner, I would hate to see what else was in the nomenclature running...
Since the primary demand was that the new name had to fit 'Mac' in there somewhere then you can ponder for yourself just how horrible the others would have been. MacBook Pro is hardly elegant but it sounds much better than the alternatives that I can think of.
I think the important inference into Apple's new naming scheme is that there will be no more "iBook"!
For me, a recent switcher (and even though I switched to a 12" PowerBook), the iBook is a name that better sums up the Apple philosophy (integration, simplicity). Though I think the new naming scheme will eventually end up being:
iMac = Mac
PowerMac = Mac Pro (everyone's guessing this one)
iBook = MacBook
PowerBook = MacBook Pro (duh)
Why would they name it MacBook Pro if there is not going to be a MacBook? Unless there is a new line of laptops coming out and the iBook gets desginated to being a new form factor, I just don't see the name hanging around much longer.
I have scanned most of the topics, and would be really surprised if I am the first person to post this, so I apologize for beating the dead horse.
i personally think they should have made there naming scheme
iMac = iMac
Power Mac = ProMac
iBook = iBook
Power Book = ProBook
But then the the laptops dont have "mac" in them, but i think that works better as a whole
I will say that i do have faith in apple's marketing people. I mean the whole "i" has gotten kind of old, like 7 years. I can tell they have something up their sleeve.
I have an idea. Maybe the rumored ultra-thin laptop will be the macbook or maybe the tablet, but then ppl will think the macbook pro was a tablet. Then it would be
iMac = iMac
iBook = iBook
new Laptop = MacBook
Power Book = MacBook Pro
Power Mac = Mac Pro or MacTower(cuz if mac pro then imac would prolly become just mac)
Mac Book Pro is a mouthful. I was more interested in what it could do, so it surely is good to see an advance come to the Mac World.
But I rather hope they change it when they get to the next line of processors. Apple, I hope you find another name.
I will still call it a PowerBook for a while. Hard to believe they are scrapping the Power portion of the name. I reckon it reminds Steve Jobs of the many waits he has had for cpus, (even during the time he started Next, too), from motorola, and then from ibm.
Mac Mac, in stead of PowerMac, no, I don't think Apple will do that.
Perhaps Pro Macintosh, or Macintosh Pro, I could really see that, but Apple seems to cling to Mac, more than Macintosh.
Actually, the "Pro" label reminds me of some other clunky names from way back when. Anyone remember Power Computing's machines, like the Power Tower Pro? Power Computing made good machines, but their marketing wasn't as slick as it could have been. Honestly, when was the last time anything for professionals was marketed as Pro, except maybe Apple's own software like Final Cut Pro? Heck, even DVD Studio Pro isn't really for pros.
I remember Power Computing. "Let's kick intel's ass." I did not like their names all that well.
About the 'pro' part of a name, I am indifferent. I agree, there are names that have it, that are unwieldy, or awkward. It just indicates a more powerful machine, with more abilities.
I would like it if Apple used the name Macintosh more.
Comments
Originally posted by Algol
Keeping the "power" and "i" names makes sense, but I have no idea what to do about the "G" naming structure. Doesn't seem like apple can really keep it and replacing it seems difficult. Perhaps they'll just use the names of the intel chips. Not sure what intel's marketing names are going to be but for ex. PowerMac P5. Can't think of any better way to do it...
You're probably right when it comes to keeping the Power and the "i" names.
I alsp think the G will be abandoned. Apple could keep the G name for the future since the G stands for generation. But as previously said, this namning sceem was introduced with the RISC processors and I think all of us assosiate the G namn with a PowerPC processor.
But there are problems renaming the Intel processors. It would be stupid to come up with a new name just for renamings sake. But if the chips would be in some what different, then I think it would be advantagouse to have an apple specific name for their CPUs.
Viktor
Originally posted by concentricity
Yes, the first Intel-based Macs will be named...
PowerMac 6100i
PowerMac 7100i
PowerMac 8100i
and will be available in your choice of Beige, Platinum, and Desert Sand Mica. For only $399 extra you will be able to get a "Mac Compatible" PowerPC add-in card.
Welcome to the future...
I was thinking the Mini could become the Macintosh IIIsi
The PowerMac could become the Macintosh IIIfx (Wicked Fast!)
Maybe between the two Apple could launch the IIIci (or they could call it Malcolm)
later, Apple could name the Pentium 5 model the Quintro
But using the power-name is totally associated with the PPC to just about all Mac users, and coming up with something else would be a refreshing change of pace. But I guss Apple ProBoook doesn't sound that bad after you give it a minute. iBook, ProBook.?.?.?.?.?
Originally posted by cubist
I like ProBook and ProMac! Someone tell Steve. Much better than MacTel.
I think ProBook and ProMac names are really rubish. PowerBook And PowerMac are just fine (despite the fact that Power does have a loose affiliaton with the PowerPC, as onlooker pointed out). PowerBook is for me a synomym for an Powerfull Apple laptop, a PowerMac stands for a Powerfill Apple stationary. It's what comes after that's important. Example: If someone askes you what kind of PowerBook you have.
I would awnser: an 1.67 with superdrive (there is really no need to say it's a G4).
The same goes for the PowerMac. You have a computer (PowerMac) which you specify as a, for example, a dual 2.3.
Ok so, since the formfactor isn't changing (as far as we know, and if it would, thats a different topic) part one of the name can stay (PowerMac/Book-iMac/book) as for the name that specifies what version you have will have to change.
So we want to decribe a PowerBook that has an Intel chipset with X Ghz and with what screen and drive.. Let's say a Yonah 2.16 ghz 12inch with 16x duallayer superdrive. I for one would like a name that as short as posible and gives me as much information as possible. Could be effective and a bit boring and calll it a PowerBook YS 2.2s (yonah, small 2.16 ghz, superdrive). Or do like for example ahhh... you get the point.
Last paragraph caught my attention...
The company has decided against assigning a codename to this new, common processor microarchitecture, curiously enough. As we've noted, the first CPUs based on this design will be available in the second half of 2006 and built using Intel's 65nm fabrication process.
There in lies the proof of Apple & Intel announcing the new G6 processor (family) powering the new Apple Macintosh line of personal computers...
Bleeh, bad marketing taste in mouth...
Some may scoff, but look deeper...
G6 + second half of 2006 + built using Intel's 65nm fabrication process = 666
Which just happened to be the original price of the first Apple's, the computer for the rest of us...
Come on! It just makes sense!
;^p
So simple and yet powerful: MacBook
Amazing that no one guessed that in this thread.
So what is the PowerMac then becomming?
the ProMac?
Originally posted by svin
Well then it DID happen, which also imo made good sense since the Power PC is now out.
So simple and yet powerful: MacBook
Amazing that no one guessed that in this thread.
So what is the PowerMac then becomming?
the ProMac?
No doubt about it: We all await the MonsterMac!
i dont see why some people are complaining about it.
But I gotta admit, as a Mac user since the Plus days who used plenty of PowerBooks before the PPC chip, I find the name silly at best.
I mean if MacBook Pro was the winner, I would hate to see what else was in the nomenclature running...
Originally posted by mullman
I mean if MacBook Pro was the winner, I would hate to see what else was in the nomenclature running...
Since the primary demand was that the new name had to fit 'Mac' in there somewhere then you can ponder for yourself just how horrible the others would have been. MacBook Pro is hardly elegant but it sounds much better than the alternatives that I can think of.
Originally posted by svin
Well then it DID happen, which also imo made good sense since the Power PC is now out.
So simple and yet powerful: MacBook
Amazing that no one guessed that in this thread.
So what is the PowerMac then becomming?
the ProMac?
Mac Pro is more likely given MacBook Pro. Perhaps they'll have MacTower Pro, MacCube Pro, MacMini Pro, etc.
macpro book wouldve sounded better, no?
For me, a recent switcher (and even though I switched to a 12" PowerBook), the iBook is a name that better sums up the Apple philosophy (integration, simplicity). Though I think the new naming scheme will eventually end up being:
iMac = Mac
PowerMac = Mac Pro (everyone's guessing this one)
iBook = MacBook
PowerBook = MacBook Pro (duh)
Why would they name it MacBook Pro if there is not going to be a MacBook? Unless there is a new line of laptops coming out and the iBook gets desginated to being a new form factor, I just don't see the name hanging around much longer.
I have scanned most of the topics, and would be really surprised if I am the first person to post this, so I apologize for beating the dead horse.
or, so I hope.
iMac =iMac
still.
iMac = iMac
Power Mac = ProMac
iBook = iBook
Power Book = ProBook
But then the the laptops dont have "mac" in them, but i think that works better as a whole
I will say that i do have faith in apple's marketing people. I mean the whole "i" has gotten kind of old, like 7 years. I can tell they have something up their sleeve.
I have an idea. Maybe the rumored ultra-thin laptop will be the macbook or maybe the tablet, but then ppl will think the macbook pro was a tablet. Then it would be
iMac = iMac
iBook = iBook
new Laptop = MacBook
Power Book = MacBook Pro
Power Mac = Mac Pro or MacTower(cuz if mac pro then imac would prolly become just mac)
They'll figure something out.
Don't Worry!
Originally posted by andresp
iMac = Mac
I can imagine it now...
"Hey, I just got a new Mac."
"Cool, which one did you get?"
"The Mac."
"No, I mean which model?"
"The Mac."
"You already said it's a Mac!"
(With apologies to Abbot and Costello.)
But I rather hope they change it when they get to the next line of processors. Apple, I hope you find another name.
I will still call it a PowerBook for a while. Hard to believe they are scrapping the Power portion of the name. I reckon it reminds Steve Jobs of the many waits he has had for cpus, (even during the time he started Next, too), from motorola, and then from ibm.
Mac Mac, in stead of PowerMac, no, I don't think Apple will do that.
Perhaps Pro Macintosh, or Macintosh Pro, I could really see that, but Apple seems to cling to Mac, more than Macintosh.
RIP, "Powerbook," you will be missed.
About the 'pro' part of a name, I am indifferent. I agree, there are names that have it, that are unwieldy, or awkward. It just indicates a more powerful machine, with more abilities.
I would like it if Apple used the name Macintosh more.