G5? G6? whose running this naming scheme? Intel?

Do we actually know if they'll be called the G5, G6 and so on? That's what we're all saying but when did Apple ever say it's official?

I think the name Power Mac isn't that bad.

I think they can be called xMac. It sounds x! :)

[quote]Originally posted by Mike Eggleston:
<strong>

I disagree. Completely. I would shudder at the thought of Macintosh 12000 or even worse is Macintosh Xlp or somethng strange like that. If there is a real problem with the word Power (which I think is good), then maybe something else: Super, Awesome, Knarley, Aqua, etc.

However I just think Power is a good enough name by itself.</strong><hr></blockquote>

"Power Mac" is just so unspeakably obtuse. I've always found the name like fingernails on a chalkboard...

It's outlived its purpose anyhow; today's Macs are all PPC-based. There isn't even a single model named "Macintosh" left to distinguish from. And Apple now emphasizes processor technology using the names of the chips themselves as suffixes. Since iMac/iBook enjoy greater recognition among the public now than "Macintosh", wouldn't it be nice if Apple would bring a little brand equity back to the name of the platform along with that of its individual machines?

I'm often surprised at how many people fail to realize that the Mac is actually a wide-reaching platform - much more than one egg-shaped appliance/PC. That Apple sells more than one product. When you draw this to someone's attention today, the implication is that the other 'Power' Macs are powerful, but the iMac is, uh, not. Terrific. I've seen this depressing angle in far more shallow articles than I care to recall.

Besides, "Macintosh" is a great name. It's distinctive, sounds good, relates to "Apple," is dignified yet friendly. Time for it to return! "Power Mac" is a tacky and ham-handed (and wholly unnecessary) variation. In fact, considering the PPC clock speed woes - it seems not a little desperate as well. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

Then again, if Apple does deliver a truly magnificent G5 next month, I probably won't care two bits about whatever it's called. ;)

Cheers,

Mark.

[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: Mark ]</p>

I am the only person at my work (20 or so) that has Mac. However the general thought among all the employees is that the "G4" = "Super Mad Fast". They all just feel that they can't afford a G4, especially when they can get a 1.1Ghz Celery processor for under $999. However they all are under the impression that the G4 would smoke any Intel chip in most tasks.

So I think when apple releases an iMac with a G4 it will need to be called the "iMac G4". Many people will buy it because they will feel like they are getting high-end professional power in a consumer machine.

G4 holds a lot of weight and the G5 will hold more.

my $.02

;)

You know something, I think Apple may be moving that direction, since he (Steve Jobs) called the new G4 towers, "Quicksilver." And more and more people are referencing their new G4 towers as "Quicksilvers."

I have a "Extreme Machine," might be something you'll hear come January when G5's are intro'd...

I think you're right...the naming scheme has to be changing as to bring a breath of fresh air to Apple's imagine.

I for one really liked som parts of Apple's old naming scheme..."Quadra" was way cooler than "PowerMac"...and "Centris" also had a good ring to it. "Newton" was another cool name of that era

Apple ought to use it's often ultra cool codenames instead of cryptic numbers or the name of the previous product in the same category.

The old PB G4 could have been the PowerBook Mercury
The new PB G4 could have been the PowerBook Onyx (or Mercury II)
etc.

Maybe it would also be a smart idea to append the processor speed (in MHz) to the product's name (Apple is already more or less doing this with the 2001 iMacs). In this way customers are able to easily differentiate different versions/minor revisions of the same product.

Then Apple could call the PowerMac G5 for Macintosh Synergy (since it combines OS X as default OS, a new ultra fast G5 processor (64 bit), a new/better motherboard and possibly a new case) :cool:

/CyberD.

[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: CyberDog ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by G4Dude:
<strong>Ideas for new names:
xMac
PowerMac 2k2
PowerMac G5
AmazingMac
Macintosh 1600XP+ (shudder)
Macintosh 3g (i subtle reference to it blowing away a 3ghz Pentium)
KickAss G5
PowerMacintosh G5 (my favorite)
PowerMac G5 1.4 (ghz)
PowerMac G5 1.6 (ghz)
TheCrusher

As you can see, there aren't really any good new names for a PowerMac. if you have one, post it. I'd like to see more people's ideas.

[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: G4Dude ]

[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: G4Dude ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

[quote]though i don't get the iPod. seriously... can someone explain that to me? i suppose if it sells, they can call it iTurd for all anyone cares, but i just don't see where "Pod" came from.<hr></blockquote>

That's something I've been wondering and would like to know where it came from too.

whatever happened to "wicked fast"

they should bring that back for the G5 intro...

I think that they should name them after the codenames.

Imagine having a computer that said "quicksilver" or "pismo" or "Apollo" instead of "powermac G4 533"

[quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:
<strong>how about they say that the G5 is "bitchin' fast!"

Or they could just have some benchmarks that show the G5 is way faster than any Intel or AMD chip.

Or how about showing terrorists trying to smuggle a powermac G5 out of the country...the FBI arrests them for trying to acquire a computer so powerful it could be used as an instrument of death!</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yeah, that's be perfect for what this country's going through now. :rolleyes:

Im not going to get into how Apple names its comps. But the naming scheme behind the G3-G4-G5 is just fine. It easily and simply shows a progression between the processors, and that one is most likely 'faster' than the other. If we ever see the day that the G6 gets released I agree it will get a little redundant, but it serves its purpose.

Yea, it was Mac Warehouse not Mac Mall. Or maybe it was both.

I think G3, G4, etc is fine. What Apple does need to do however is spice up their ads. Example:
http://members.aol.com/bponpc/G5.jpg
note: the G5 mockup was taken from the macnn fourms, I did not draw it so don't yell at me.

[ 12-03-2001: Message edited by: G4Dude ]</p>

I don't have a problem with the current naming stucture either. In fact PowerBook is my favorite name for a computer. If they did change the name of the PowerMac the only thing I can think of that I like is the ProMac.

I like the G5 but think they should change it by the time the G6 is ready.

i have to admit, i like the idea of apple actually using their codenames for product names... apple has some of the best codenames in the industry - heck, ANY industry. mercury, quicksilver, kihei, pismo, lombard.

though i wonder if anyone would have bought a "BHA" (aka butt-headed astronomer) :D

[quote] If anything, there shouldn't have been a regular DV.<hr></blockquote>
Yeah... I forget exactly how they were configured but it was something like 1. iMac, no FireWire, CD-ROM, 2. iMac DV FireWire, CD-ROM 3. iMac DV+ FireWire, DVD 4. iMac SE (more ram, hd, proc power). Oh and you could only choose certain colors in each level, but there was some overlap, so colors couldn't even help distingusing the models (they only painted "iMac" on the front). <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />

[quote]Originally posted by G4Dude:
<strong>I think G3, G4, etc is fine. What Apple does need to do however is spice up their ads. Example:
http://members.aol.com/bponpc/G5.jpg
note: the G5 mockup was taken from the macnn fourms, I did not draw it so don't yell at me.

[ 12-03-2001: Message edited by: G4Dude ]</strong><hr></blockquote> I just want to add that that has to be the fastest looking toaster I have ever seen, bar none.

NO NO NO
A FAST toaster will burn the bread!
you want a slow but sweet toaster oven thats not to hot but toasts bread in under 3 minutes.
my toaster oven is funky Its REALLY hot and takes like 30 seconds to reach max heat, and likewise Its hard to get the right setting for various breads, but I manage

toaster ovens are the greatest invovations in the bread and personal pizza preparing business since toast

[quote]Originally posted by cdhostage:
<strong> 9200
</strong><hr></blockquote>

NO SUCH COMPUTER!!!

Also, I know EVERY NUMBER of EVERY MAC ever made, I liked their old numeric system, and I was sad to see it go, But love the performance that the G3 brought.