Bad Apple naming strategy

10 posts / 0 new
Last post
coius's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 7 months ago
Joined: Aug 25 2004 - 13:56
Posts: 1975
Bad Apple naming strategy

Does anyone know why Apple used a really bad naming scheme for naming Macintosh computers. You would think the 7500 came after the 7300.

cwsmith's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: Oct 13 2005 - 08:23
Posts: 699
Because Steve Jobs was off do

Because Steve Jobs was off doing the NeXT / Pixar thing?

macg4's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 5 months ago
Joined: Jan 17 2005 - 23:33
Posts: 311
i personally blame all weird/

i personally blame all weird/bad names or computers themselves on mr. sculley.

Offline
Last seen: 10 years 5 months ago
Joined: Dec 12 2005 - 07:34
Posts: 104
Shouldn't they be more proper

Shouldn't they be more properly blamed on Herr Spindler?

Krest's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 10 months ago
Joined: Sep 29 2004 - 12:39
Posts: 96
The current names aren't bett

The current names aren't better either.

"I have an iMac."
"Which iMac? iMac G3, G4, G5?"
"iMac G3"
"Revision A, B, C, ..., iMac DV, iMac SE?"
"Or is it an iMac G4? The Desklamp thingy, you know?"
"15", 17", 20", early 2001 or late 2002...?" and so on

Same for PM G4: PCI, AGP, Digital Audio, Gigabit LAN, QuickSilver, MDD...

You'll be surprised how many people don't have a clue what machine they have.
A 7500 is a 7500... you can read it directly off the name tag...

Why the 7300 is newer than the 7500 is a different story.

iantm's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: Apr 2 2005 - 14:01
Posts: 709
The 7300

I always thought it was the 7300 because it was somewhere between the 7200 and 7500/7600 in terms of features. (Yes, I know it was faster than any factory 7500/7600). The 7500/7600 had video input jacks on the back, the 7200 didn't, and neither did the 7300. In some respects, the 7300 was what the 7200 should have been all along. (I'm not talking trash on the 7200, I had a couple, and fond memories of them).

- iantm

macg4's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 5 months ago
Joined: Jan 17 2005 - 23:33
Posts: 311
alright u guys are all right.

alright u guys are all right. both old and new names kinda suck. but they are better then the pc world names( like deskpro, optiplex, dimension,net vista,persario, etc.........)

Hawaii Cruiser's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 7 months ago
Joined: Jan 20 2005 - 16:03
Posts: 1434
lets start naming!

So what would be some good names for Apple to start using for computers?

coius's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 7 months ago
Joined: Aug 25 2004 - 13:56
Posts: 1975
Actually

I prefer the names they use now. like: iMac G5 1.8GHz late 2005. Or PM G4 AGP. stuff like that. Once they hit the G3, it was easier to tell, as they had shrunk the amount of macs that they had in production to a few lines.

It was horrible earlier, as you could not tell what was what. i.e. Performa, LC, Quadra, Centris... And then the numbers Made it confusing, as they were not in a sequencial form

EDIT: at least they got the OS versions right, instead of Mac OS 95, 95b, 95c, 97...

iantm's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: Apr 2 2005 - 14:01
Posts: 709
Confusion

With the current naming scheme, I try to narrow down the range of what the system is. With questions such as : What colour is your iMac? Is there any chrome on your G4? Is there a tray or a slit in the front of your iMac? Oh, your iMac is white - does it have a shiny thing on it?

After spending close to two years doing tech support for AOL, I managed to get the ability to get useful information without torture. Perhaps I should be in the Pentagon. Oh well.

- iantm

Log in or register to post comments