PDA

View Full Version : Will Apple keep the "G" brand name?


jamdr
Jun 8, 2005, 12:25 AM
Imagine going to Apple's site and seeing this PowerMac:

3.2GHz x2 Intel Pentium D
800MHz frontside bus/processor
1MB L2 cache/processor
512MB DDR2 533 SDRAM
160GB Serial ATA
16x SuperDrive (double-layer)
Three PCI Slots
ATI Radeon 9600
128MB DDR video memory

Could they call this the G6? I mean technically it is the sixth generation of processor used by Apple--it's also an Intel processor. I really hope Apple doesn't start using numbers in their model numbers, like PowerMac 840 or something. Do you think this is a possibility?

dejo
Jun 8, 2005, 12:34 AM
I really hope Apple doesn't start using numbers in their model numbers, like PowerMac 840 or something.

You mean start again? Power Macs were named by model numbers in the '90s. For example, I had a Power Mac 8600...

iMeowbot
Jun 8, 2005, 01:18 AM
Could they call this the G6? I mean technically it is the sixth generation of processor used by Apple
It's not even the sixth processor for the Mac, there were 68000, '020, '030 and '040 before PowerPC came along.

I think that the new Mac mini gives us a good hint about future naming schemes.

iBook -> Mac Shuffle
Mac mini: no change
eMac: who cares?
iMac: no change
PowerBook -> Mac U2
Power Mac -> Mac Photo

DakotaGuy
Jun 8, 2005, 02:11 AM
It would be possible that Apple would call it the G6, but I doubt it. There are 5 generations of PowerPC's in Macs. That is where you get the whole G3, G4, G5 trademarks. My guess is they will just refer to the product as what it is...an iMac, iBook, PowerMac, Powerbook. They might also add model numbers based on what processors they are running, but they can just say here is a new iMac with a 3.6Ghz Pentium 4 processor. (don't flame me, it was only an example.)

savar
Jun 8, 2005, 02:17 AM
It's not even the sixth processor for the Mac, there were 68000, '020, '030 and '040 before PowerPC came along.

I think that the new Mac mini gives us a good hint about future naming schemes.

iBook -> Mac Shuffle
Mac mini: no change
eMac: who cares?
iMac: no change
PowerBook -> Mac U2
Power Mac -> Mac Photo

There are 5 generations of PPC, however, hence the G3, G4, and G5 monikers. Why not a G6?

I think Apple will pick a slightly more Gen Y name, like calling it the Apple Z6. Sounds more like a BMW than a CPU.

progx
Jun 8, 2005, 02:34 AM
i think the G5 is it for the g-series, since it only referred to the generations of powerpc chips in the mac. it would cause confusing marketing to media and customers alike, it'll be something different.

i'm thinking they might go back to numbers.

or possibly use intel's chip name scheme: power mac D, power book M

as i type these examples, i'm shuttering at everyone of them.

why didn't Apple try to match up their roadmap with AMD? they were heading in the same direction as IBM, but with a mobile chip. AMD has the 64-bit technology, Intel doesn't (in fact, they're trying to find a way to steal it from AMD; like they always do. talk about a lack of innovation from the leading x86 supplier, they're a joke. :D )

Chaszmyr
Jun 8, 2005, 02:56 AM
There are 5 generations of PPC, however, hence the G3, G4, and G5 monikers. Why not a G6?


There are 5 generations of Power processors, but the G5 is based on the derivative of the Power4, not the Power5 :p

From a marketing/naming perspective, i wish they would keep the G name, but I don't see why Apple would keep the G name... It describes the processor, not the computer, and I think calling the same processor Pentium 5 and G6 would be confusing.

jamdr
Jun 8, 2005, 03:20 AM
why didn't Apple try to match up their roadmap with AMD? they were heading in the same direction as IBM, but with a mobile chip. AMD has the 64-bit technology, Intel doesn't (in fact, they're trying to find a way to steal it from AMD; like they always do. talk about a lack of innovation from the leading x86 supplier, they're a joke. :D )
I know. I think this whole thing would be a lot easier to swallow if it was AMD and not Intel. This is going to take a long time to get used to.

cube
Jun 8, 2005, 03:46 AM
Can we stop now with the ridiculous questions?

deanbo
Jun 8, 2005, 05:25 AM
I'm guessing the PowerMac derived it's name from PowerPC. So what will the Intel based PowerMac be called?

Roy Hobbs
Jun 8, 2005, 06:51 AM
Does Apple even have trademark rights for "G6", Pontiac has a car called the G6?????

yellow
Jun 8, 2005, 06:55 AM
They will use "I", rather then "G". Intel will insist upon that.

Chaszmyr
Jun 8, 2005, 07:11 AM
They will use "I", rather then "G". Intel will insist upon that.

Not another "i" name...

Platform
Jun 8, 2005, 07:17 AM
Imagine going to Apple's site and seeing this PowerMac:

3.2GHz x2 Intel Pentium D
800MHz frontside bus/processor
1MB L2 cache/processor
512MB DDR2 533 SDRAM
160GB Serial ATA
16x SuperDrive (double-layer)
Three PCI Slots
ATI Radeon 9600
128MB DDR video memory

Could they call this the G6? I mean technically it is the sixth generation of processor used by Apple--it's also an Intel processor. I really hope Apple doesn't start using numbers in their model numbers, like PowerMac 840 or something. Do you think this is a possibility?

OK to be a G6 CPU wise, but the rest NO WAY, 9600, PCI slots, 160GB HDD, No Blue-Ray :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: And even with new Intel CPUs the 'famous' PPC amazing FSB will go down :mad:

buryyourbrideau
Jun 8, 2005, 07:18 AM
i dont think that they will even use the processor name in the title anymore.

i think that they are just going to come out with new machines and call them the new powerbook and ibook and so on. and then you will just now how fast your new intel processor is without having it in the name. im not sure that intel would want apple changing the processor names specifically for their own products.

:mad:

hcuar
Jun 8, 2005, 07:57 AM
No.

Man that was simple. :p

efoto
Jun 8, 2005, 08:20 AM
It's not even the sixth processor for the Mac, there were 68000, '020, '030 and '040 before PowerPC came along.

I think that the new Mac mini gives us a good hint about future naming schemes.

iBook -> Mac Shuffle
Mac mini: no change
eMac: who cares?
iMac: no change
PowerBook -> Mac U2
Power Mac -> Mac Photo

They better not call PowerBooks "Mac U2", I would yell boycott down the streets for miles if my voice carried that far. A U2 iPod I can overlook, but lord help whomever decides to take it further, I'll slay them myself with my not-U2 homebrew PowerMac Dual-AMD 64 box running OSX 10.6 "Super-cool Huge/strong Cat" :rolleyes:

I'm really hoping for something like buryyourbrideau had, where they just start to call the systems by name and you just know whats in them. Afterall, PowerBook G4 works fine for three models, we all know the specs based on screensize. I pray Apple doesn't adopt 'model names' again, its far too Dell-ish IMO.

minimax
Jun 8, 2005, 08:33 AM
really, apple moves to intel x86 architecture and all hell breaks loose:

a) will there be stickers on my mac?
b) will mac commercials be accompanied by the Intel theme?
c) will apple keep using the power prefix?
d) what will be the new name to replace G4/G5?

Those are all quite existential questions for the mac platform. Only God knows the answer to those questions. May Steve have mercy on us.

njmac
Jun 8, 2005, 08:52 AM
You can bet that the Apple marketing department is working hard on what the name will be. G5 has a great identity of its own, you don't have to say PowerMac G5, its just understood that it's Apple's high end computer

James Philp
Jun 8, 2005, 09:07 AM
I figure they will keep the names:
PowerMac
PowerBook
iMac
iBook
eMac
Mac mini

But append different monikers at the end for example:

PowerMac ID4 (Intel Dual 4Ghz)
PowerBook IM3

etc etc.

efoto
Jun 8, 2005, 09:33 AM
I figure they will keep the names:
PowerMac
PowerBook
iMac
iBook
eMac
Mac mini

But append different monikers at the end for example:

PowerMac ID4 (Intel Dual 4Ghz)
PowerBook IM3

etc etc.

Appending the names like that would be the lesser of evils, but I still don't know if its neccesary for the lines. Apple has differentiated itself nicely in that it just names the systems and thats it, so simple.
You don't read PowerBook G4 1.5, that is something you say to clarify but its not in the model name itself.
I hate how Dell has their Inspirion 6000d or whatever, it even sounds like cheap plastic :p

I think Apple can and will keep the current naming however, because although the 'power' portion can be connected with PowerPC chips, it is also their power line of computers, professional level or what have you. I think and hope it stays, I don't see a reason for it to go anywhere.
As for the stickers....well, lets not go there today :o

yellow
Jun 8, 2005, 09:48 AM
To those that say there won't be an chip designation, I seriously doubt you are correct.

I cannot see Apple simply calling a PowerBook a PowerBook from now until the end of time. Currently if someone says "I have a PowerBook", there are quite a few models to choose from. The same applies to iMacs, PowerMacs, iBooks, etc.

There WILL be some sort of designation.

meh, maybe not. :D iMac P5 3.5GHz.

AoWolf
Jun 8, 2005, 09:53 AM
It could be powermac I1 and powerbook Im when they hit the next gen it could be powerbook m2.

yellow
Jun 8, 2005, 10:05 AM
I wonder if the'll start out with a 1 (hypothetically speaking, if they decided to use a chip designation). 1 makes it sound 'old'. It always amused me how Netscape skipped from v4.x to v6, simply because it was 1 rev behind the (then) IE5.. Just to make Netscape Communicator sound like a newer product.

Yebot
Jun 8, 2005, 10:08 AM
Paul O: The force is strong with you, Steve. Henceforth you will be known as Darth

Steve J: Hold on there, Lets get one thing straight. Im not putting those God-awful stickers on my machines.

Paul O: So be it. Henceforth your new machine will be known as PowerBook X1. (X ~ x86)

Steve J: Were already using X on our OS.

Paul O: Mmmmm, I can feel you anger. Henceforth your new machine will be known as PowerBook I1. (I ~ Intel)

Steve J: Hello?!? iMac? iBook? iPod? Played out

Paul O: I have been waiting for this my little brushed-chrome friend. Henceforth your new machine will be known as PowerBook M1. (M ~ mobile, Pentium M)

Steve J: M1? Me likey! Mmmmm Hardware (http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyarchives/693.html)

_bnkr612
Jun 8, 2005, 10:15 AM
iBook -> Mac Shuffle

Yeah, it will have no screen. You just have to guess.

Laugh.

efoto
Jun 8, 2005, 10:37 AM
Yebot's designation of PowerBook M1 is actually the best I have heard so far without sounding PC-ish.

I don't think Apple has to concern itself with the 'sounding old/slow' arguement solely because they are starting from the group up, and those 'in the know' know that, so 1 is logical. For those not in the know, they do know enough that Apple is different than a PC, and so they probably assume 1 in Apple does not equal 1 (original Pentium :p) in PC.

I don't know, I'm more concerned with stickers than naming nomenclature.

yellow
Jun 8, 2005, 10:38 AM
For those not in the know, they do know enough that Apple is different than a PC, and so they probably assume 1 in Apple does not equal 1 (original Pentium :p) in PC.

I think you're giving the idiots at large far more credit then they deserve. :)

Remember, it's a marketing tactic.

We didn't start out with a G1. There was no G2. Why? Because the Intel chip at that time was the P2. But we're Apple, we're different, and our chip is the G3. 1 better then the P2. Intel came out with the P3. Guess what happens shortly thereafter. What's that you say? The G4 came out? You'd be correct!

I don't think it was an accident. But hey, it's just my opinion, I could be way off. Maybe it's coincidental, and none of it has anything to do with marketing and psychology. Apple could easily abandon all of that and start over. After all, with the move to Intel, they have a clean canvas, right?

efoto
Jun 8, 2005, 10:49 AM
I think you're giving the idiots at large far more credit then they deserve. :)

Remember, it's a marketing tactic.

We didn't start out with a G1. There was no G2. Why? Because the Intel chip at that time was the P2. But we're Apple, we're different, and our chip is the G3. 1 better then the P2. Intel came out with the P3. Guess what happens shortly thereafter. What's that you say? The G4 came out? You'd be correct!

I don't think it was an accident. But hey, it's just my opinion, I could be way off. Maybe it's coincidental, and none of it has anything to do with marketing and psycology. Apple could easily abandon all of that and start over. After all, with the move to Intel, they have a clean canvas, right?

I completely agree and see your point, I just want simplicity in the lines and hope they start over and keep things basic. If not, G6 would be fine as an ongoing thing but I don't see that with these new chips somehow.

they could just continue the number but change the letter to signify a different processor with continued (and ever increasing) numerical performance.
So we are one up already, with a G5 vs. the P4. We could start the Macintels out at, oh I don't know....say the F6! The F quite obviously stands for FAST and the 6 stand for one more than 5...how about that? :p

Just please don't call them PowerBook 6000d or crap like that....I hate how Dell names and markets their stuff. Some of their products I have zero problems with but I hate the naming of it.

macphisto
Jun 8, 2005, 10:49 AM
Imagine going to Apple's site and seeing this PowerMac:

3.2GHz x2 Intel Pentium D
800MHz frontside bus/processor
1MB L2 cache/processor
512MB DDR2 533 SDRAM
160GB Serial ATA
16x SuperDrive (double-layer)
Three PCI Slots
ATI Radeon 9600
128MB DDR video memory


If these were the stats for the PowerMacs in the next year to two years, we are in a world of hurt.

yellow
Jun 8, 2005, 10:53 AM
Just please don't call them PowerBook 6000d or crap like that....I hate how Dell names and markets their stuff. Some of their products I have zero problems with but I hate the naming of it.

I concur. I don't care for Dell's naming scheme. I don't worry so much about Apple doing that. I just suspect that Intel will want to get into the game a little so people will know there's an "Intel Inside". Hopefully we won't have stickers. I think I'm realisitically shooting for P5-64 or P4M.. something along those lines.

benbondu
Jun 8, 2005, 10:57 AM
PowerMac ID4 (Intel Dual 4Ghz)
PowerBook IM3

etc etc.

Wasn't ID4 that horrible movie from the '90s about space aliens?

I don't like PowerBook IM3 or M1 either. 'M' means mobile right? Isn't that a little redundant?

The prefix Power doesn't necessarily refer to the PowerPC. The first PowerBooks used 030s. On the desktop end, models were starting to be given names and numbers when the PowerPC came out (Centris, Quadra, etc.). PowerMac was like another name. The change in processors for both the notebook and desktop lines was noted by using 4 digits in the model number instead of 3.

I'd personally like to see a return to the old school by using the full Macintosh name. I don't see that ever happening though. Some people these days probably don't even know Mac is short for Macintosh.

yellow
Jun 8, 2005, 11:01 AM
Some people these days probably don't even know Mac is short for Macintosh.

Macintosh? What the hell is that? It's a MAC! :rolleyes: :D

aloofman
Jun 8, 2005, 11:17 AM
Does Apple even have trademark rights for "G6", Pontiac has a car called the G6?????

Don't worry. The Pontiac G6 is selling so poorly that I don't think it will be around much longer anyway.

yellow
Jun 8, 2005, 11:19 AM
Don't worry. The Pontiac G6 is selling so poorly that I don't think it will be around much longer anyway.

But it's got a tri-fold roof! Who wouldn't want that in an ugly-ass car?

minimax
Jun 8, 2005, 11:24 AM
Where can I vote this topic for *most relevant discussion of the week* ?

benbondu
Jun 8, 2005, 11:25 AM
But it's got a tri-fold roof! Who wouldn't want that in an ugly-ass car?

Can't you guys give GM a break? They're trying their best.

jazzmfk
Jun 8, 2005, 11:45 AM
ooh, oooh, pick me...pick me!

How's this for a name:
the iiMac (pronounced "eye-eye Mac", of course...)

How bout the (...sings the intel jingle...)
bum-bum-bum-bum Mac?

(As I was considering the musical intervals contained in their jingle, it dawned on me that they are a perfect fourth and fifth, which are often expressed as P4 and P5. Clever or coincidence?)

OK, one more:
iMaci (Pronounced ee-mace-ee) Now anyone who uses one would be iMaciated........ ;) :confused: :confused: :p

Sorry.

sigamy
Jun 8, 2005, 11:52 AM
Even if the 'Power' prefix in Power Mac and PowerBook doesn't refer to the PowerPC chips, I think Apple should change it to 'Pro'. I also don't think we need a chip notation as a suffix. Apple needed the chip suffix to show the progress because at times the progress was so slow to be made. Hopefully, with Intel we will have newer/faster chips much more frequently and buyers will just look at specs to determine what chip/machine to purchase (like in the Dell world).

Apple themselves have been all over the map on this, mainly on the consumer side:

The original iMac was just iMac, then we had iMac DV and DV SE. The G4 iMac (sunflower) was never officially called iMac G4 by Apple, it was iMac G4 Flat Panel or something like that. Now we have iMac G5.

The clamshell ibook was just iBook, so were the dual-USB white iBooks. Then when it went G4 we got iBook G4.

eMac has always been eMac.

We had a beige Power Mac G3, then the B&W, then the Power Mac G4s and G5s.

Macheads will always use the code names to differientate machines. (Yikes, Sawtooth, MDD, Pismo, Lombard, Wallstreet, etc)

My votes are:
Mac mini (I hate that name, btw)
eMac
iMac
iBook
ProMac
ProBook

yellow
Jun 8, 2005, 11:53 AM
OK, one more:
iMaci (Pronounced ee-mace-ee) Now anyone who uses one would be iMaciated........ ;) :confused: :confused: :p

Sorry.

You are so fired. :)

aloofman
Jun 8, 2005, 12:15 PM
Can't you guys give GM a break? They're trying their best.

That was sarcasm, right?

Roy Hobbs
Jun 8, 2005, 12:25 PM
Don't worry. The Pontiac G6 is selling so poorly that I don't think it will be around much longer anyway.


It won't matter how long the car is around if GM holds the trademark for "G6".

yellow
Jun 8, 2005, 12:31 PM
LOL! We just uncovered the REAL reason Apple jumped ship from IBM and moved to Intel. The next chip couldn't be called the G6! :)

But I suppose that GM's trademark for G6 extends only to the realm of cars and car-related products? Therefore Apple would have had no problem using G6 in their computer line. Much the same way Tiger Direct got spanked by Apple over the use of the name "Tiger".

velocityg4
Jun 8, 2005, 01:25 PM
I think it would be great if they started using the old 030 mac naming again. Except Mac III instead of Mac II. Then we could have a mac III, IIIx, IIIcx, IIIfx etc all over again. What would really stink is if they dropped Macintosh all together and went with Jonagold, Red Delicious, or Granny Smith instead. Just think a PentiGran I666 :eek:

JasonElise1983
Jun 8, 2005, 01:58 PM
Why does everyone believe apple will continure to deligate it's models by what processor is in it? Apple, in general but not always, changes their computer design with every processor change. Why couldn't they give each design a reference name or number. It could be something simple like the PowerMac X, or the PowerMac P, but have nothing to do with the processor that is inside. Say the iMac could be the iMac 4, and the PowerMac be the PowerMac 5 or whatever. Not saying this is better, but just throwing out another option. What if they went with what generation the computer was in instead. The iMac 4, the PowerBook 4 , the iBook 3, the eMac 2, the Mac Mini 2, and the PowerMac 5. I could definately be wrong on all these numbers but you get the ideal.

JE

iMeowbot
Jun 8, 2005, 02:53 PM
There have been Apple ][, Lisa 2, Macintosh II, but no PowerMac II. Hmm.

t^3
Jun 8, 2005, 09:55 PM
I just found this at http://www.macosx.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-93462.html

NOTE: The articles there are FAKE news, but it brings up an interesting point below:

"Although the "G6" designation would be the most obvious for the next generation of Power Macs, G6 has already been extensively advertised by Pontiac as "the first ever G6" for their new performance sedan. It's also the name of a digital camera from Canon. Can you imagine the confusion of connecting your G6 to your G6 in a G6?"

As yellow mentioned, G4 and G5 might be just marketing names, most likely meant to compete with the P4. But now, there will be no need for this. However, if Apple does decide to use some kind of a designation, I really doubt it would have '1' in it. I mean, there was no Pentium 1 (just Pentium), or even iTunes 1 (yes, it was version 1.0, but it wasn't marketed this way). In fact, this is how Intel is marketing their new Pentium D and M processors. I'd bet (not much, though) there'll eventually be a Pentium D2. I don't think Apple would use anything that refers to Intel, since AMD is out there and they could be a future supplier too, just how both Motorola and IBM made G3's.

Based on Yebot's suggestions, I think PowerBook X would be a good name. It would be Intel-neutral, represent x86, and we can say, "I'm running OS X on my PowerBook X!" I honestly don't think there'd be any confusion. I mean, Apple's already reusing "Extreme" and "mini". New generations would be PowerBook X2, X3, and so on. I can already see the X-Men related mods people will be doing...

smurphur
Jun 8, 2005, 10:28 PM
Who cares?! It's a name of something... the only thing I care about is how it works and what is inside of it. They could call it the Apple Powerbook AXSDSAVXZ32123 and it would make no difference as to how it performs. All these silly questions since Apple has announced it's decission to go with Intel are getting out of hand. Sure it is going to be an Intel processor under the hood, but it is still going to be an Apple computer, and rest assured everything that people have come to expect from Apple will not be going away. As Steve said in the keynote, OSX is the soul of Apple... so you are still going to have the same OS and just because they go to Intel doesnt mean they are going to change their inovative ascetetic design. So... no it probably won't be G6, but again who cares what they call it. I'm sure marketing will think up of some clever name that will get people saying "ohh I wonder what that is?"

FredAkbar
Jun 8, 2005, 10:36 PM
There are 5 generations of Power processors, but the G5 is based on the derivative of the Power4, not the Power5 :p
savar was referring to the 5 generations of the PowerPC as used in PowerMacs: 601, 603/604, G3, G4, and G5 (the latter three actually being, respectively, the 740/750, 74xx, and 970; courtesy everymac.com).

plastique45
Jun 8, 2005, 10:36 PM
I know. I think this whole thing would be a lot easier to swallow if it was AMD and not Intel. This is going to take a long time to get used to.

read http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/ for an answer to your questions: AMD are vastly inferior in portable chip design, and they face a supply issue as big as that of IBM. Also, while they may currently be ahead of Intel, in 2 years Intel's new CEO will have continued to push the company way ahead of AMD. So in the long run, AMD would have been like the G5.

They went to the right company.

plastique45
Jun 8, 2005, 10:37 PM
I just found this at http://www.macosx.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-93462.html

NOTE: The articles there are FAKE news, but it brings up an interesting point below:

"Although the "G6" designation would be the most obvious for the next generation of Power Macs, G6 has already been extensively advertised by Pontiac as "the first ever G6" for their new performance sedan. It's also the name of a digital camera from Canon. Can you imagine the confusion of connecting your G6 to your G6 in a G6?"

As yellow mentioned, G4 and G5 might be just marketing names, most likely meant to compete with the P4. But now, there will be no need for this. However, if Apple does decide to use some kind of a designation, I really doubt it would have '1' in it. I mean, there was no Pentium 1 (just Pentium), or even iTunes 1 (yes, it was version 1.0, but it wasn't marketed this way). In fact, this is how Intel is marketing their new Pentium D and M processors. I'd bet (not much, though) there'll eventually be a Pentium D2. I don't think Apple would use anything that refers to Intel, since AMD is out there and they could be a future supplier too, just how both Motorola and IBM made G3's.

Based on Yebot's suggestions, I think PowerBook X would be a good name. It would be Intel-neutral, represent x86, and we can say, "I'm running OS X on my PowerBook X!" I honestly don't think there'd be any confusion. I mean, Apple's already reusing "Extreme" and "mini". New generations would be PowerBook X2, X3, and so on. I can already see the X-Men related mods people will be doing...

There was also a G5 from Canon.

efoto
Jun 9, 2005, 03:45 AM
Who cares?! It's a name of something... the only thing I care about is how it works and what is inside of it. They could call it the Apple Powerbook AXSDSAVXZ32123 and it would make no difference as to how it performs. All these silly questions since Apple has announced it's decission to go with Intel are getting out of hand. Sure it is going to be an Intel processor under the hood, but it is still going to be an Apple computer, and rest assured everything that people have come to expect from Apple will not be going away. As Steve said in the keynote, OSX is the soul of Apple... so you are still going to have the same OS and just because they go to Intel doesnt mean they are going to change their inovative ascetetic design. So... no it probably won't be G6, but again who cares what they call it. I'm sure marketing will think up of some clever name that will get people saying "ohh I wonder what that is?"

Thats actually a GREAT NAME smurphur. It gets all of the important information across in a very concise and manageable manner. I mean, that is obviously this computer:
Powerbook w/ Airport Xpress (AX), SuperDrive (SD), SuperAirport (SA) (which none of you know about yet because you are all nOObs), Variable X-celeration drive (VX) (the latest in compact Terabyte technology at 24,000rpm with 128Mb cache), and most obvious of all, its the new Z proc. clocked at on the low end at only 32.123Ghz....and only dual-core, can you believe that? I was really REALLY hoping for the newer Octa-core Z proc. at 2.67 TeraHz....but maybe next rev, who knows.

Chill out buddy, this is a rumor site that ENJOYS talking about this type of thing. Its posted in a more or less accurate thread discussing Mac Harware and Computers. I like the discussion, thanks for adding :p

efoto
Jun 9, 2005, 03:54 AM
It won't matter how long the car is around if GM holds the trademark for "G6".
But I suppose that GM's trademark for G6 extends only to the realm of cars and car-related products? Therefore Apple would have had no problem using G6 in their computer line. Much the same way Tiger Direct got spanked by Apple over the use of the name "Tiger".

Do trademarks work similar to patents? or are they specified in given realms and areas of work (as patents can be, but are not commonly expressed)?

I would tend to agree that if Apple holds a trademark on G6 (which they probably do) it probably applies to competitors in the related field like Intel, AMD, intesert_chip_manufac, etc. Prime example is listed about Apple's G5, Canon's G5, and probably another place either called G5 or with a product called G5.

I would imagine that as soon as Apple decided to go with "G" in their chips, they probably trademarked 5-10 series in advance, just to be safe. Large companies have little trouble doing this since money is of little object for the costs of trademarking.

BWhaler
Jun 9, 2005, 04:11 AM
They better not call PowerBooks "Mac U2", I would yell boycott down the streets for miles if my voice carried that far. A U2 iPod I can overlook, but lord help whomever decides to take it further, I'll slay them myself with my not-U2 homebrew PowerMac Dual-AMD 64 box running OSX 10.6 "Super-cool Huge/strong Cat" :rolleyes:



Um...it was a joke.

Jo-Kun
Jun 9, 2005, 04:33 AM
maybe they will provide stickers for Die Hard PPC people

the kind the Red Bull F1 Team had in Monaco: Powered by the Dark Side :p huhu

maybe because they go to a 'classic' I mean intel's original x86 design is a classic so we get

Mac mini classic
eMac classic
iBook classic
iMac classic
ClassicMac
ClassicBook

huhu

they probably will keep the 'power' and 'i' names Power for the powerusers we who need a powerfull animal and i for everything plastic,
and off course mini for the one that isn't plastic on the outside but has the i hardware inside...

the G will be gone I guess, its quite logicall the intell is not the 6th PPC gen...

efoto
Jun 10, 2005, 07:09 AM
They better not call PowerBooks "Mac U2", I would yell boycott down the streets for miles if my voice carried that far. A U2 iPod I can overlook, but lord help whomever decides to take it further, I'll slay them myself with my not-U2 homebrew PowerMac Dual-AMD 64 box running OSX 10.6 "Super-cool Huge/strong Cat" :pUm...it was a joke.

Well apparently I suck at humor then, since slaying someone with software titled OSX 10.6 - "Super-cool Huge/strong Cat" doesn't make anyone but myself chuckle :rolleyes:
Thank lordy I didn't take up comedy.

iGary
Jun 10, 2005, 07:38 AM
GCrap works for me. :D

jiggie2g
Jun 10, 2005, 08:12 AM
Imagine going to Apple's site and seeing this PowerMac:

3.2GHz x2 Intel Pentium D
800MHz frontside bus/processor
1MB L2 cache/processor
512MB DDR2 533 SDRAM
160GB Serial ATA
16x SuperDrive (double-layer)
Three PCI Slots
ATI Radeon 9600
128MB DDR video memory

Could they call this the G6? I mean technically it is the sixth generation of processor used by Apple--it's also an Intel processor. I really hope Apple doesn't start using numbers in their model numbers, like PowerMac 840 or something. Do you think this is a possibility?



That thing would be a Dog in released in 2yrs.

However am I the only one that finds it funny that a cheap'O Single 3.6ghz P4 runs it's Native OSX Apps as fast and sometimes faster then the brand new Dual 2.7ghz G5.

And now for the real Specs:

Powermac G6

1 Dualcore P-M Conroe CPU around 2.5ghz full 64-bit
800mhz FSB
1-1.5GB DDR2 800 SDRAM(should be standard by that time)
PCIe with SLI/Crossfire , 2 PCIe x1 , 1 PCIe x4 , 2 PCIe x16
8-12 Pipeline Videocard (standard)
FW 800 , USB 3.0 , WiMax or 802.11n , BT 2.0 EDR
Blu-Ray DVD-RW Superdrive
250GB HD standard
All Aluminum , BTX based enclosure. Dead Silent :D

I will add that IMHO Apple will not put out any more Dual CPU systems , it's just not required anymore, maybe for Xserves. Apple put DP systems out in the 1st Place because Intel CPU's were hitting 800mhz when the G4 was stuck at 450mhz forever.

Adding DP systems in Mactel PC's would price them out of the competition , Dell , HP , Sony , and Gateway will never put Dual CPU's in a PC. Adding DP to Dual core systems for home use is just plain over kill.

efoto
Jun 10, 2005, 08:53 AM
That thing would be a Dog in released in 2yrs.

However am I the only one that finds it funny that a cheap'O Single 3.6ghz P4 runs it's Native OSX Apps as fast and sometimes faster then the brand new Dual 2.7ghz G5.

And now for the real Specs:

Powermac G6

1 Dualcore P-M Conroe CPU around 2.5ghz full 64-bit
800mhz FSB
1-1.5GB DDR2 800 SDRAM(should be standard by that time)
PCIe with SLI/Crossfire , 2 PCIe x1 , 1 PCIe x4 , 2 PCIe x16
8-12 Pipeline Videocard (standard)
FW 800 , USB 3.0 , WiMax or 802.11n , BT 2.0 EDR
Blu-Ray DVD-RW Superdrive
250GB HD standard
All Aluminum , BTX based enclosure. Dead Silent :D

I will add that IMHO Apple will not put out any more Dual CPU systems , it's just not required anymore, maybe for Xserves. Apple put DP systems out in the 1st Place because Intel CPU's were hitting 800mhz when the G4 was stuck at 450mhz forever.

Adding DP systems in Mactel PC's would price them out of the competition , Dell , HP , Sony , and Gateway will never put Dual CPU's in a PC. Adding DP to Dual core systems for home use is just plain over kill.

Seems fine and dandy, however do you really think FW800 is going to survive once USB3.0 comes out? FW400 is having issues as it is since USB2.0 is running 80mbps over it, so USB 3.0 would logically run at least 1Gbps....its a logical step. Unless FW gets a hardware rev and updates its transfer speeds, I see FW dying quite soon.

Quartz Extreme
Jun 10, 2005, 09:21 AM
The "G" series has always been used for the PowerPC processor lineup

(G1) - PPC 601, 603, 603e
(G2) - PPC 604, 604e
G3 - PPC 750
G4 - PPC 7400-7450
G5 - PPC 970, 970FX
(G6) - PPC 970MP

Apple will probably come up with something new for these Intel machines.
Something maybe with an i. Apple loves using i. :p

Quartz Extreme
Jun 10, 2005, 09:28 AM
FW400 is having issues as it is since USB2.0 is running 80mbps over it

FireWire 400 actually gets faster transfers most of the time than USB 2.0.
The "up to 480Mbps" label means just that: a theoretical max.

Unless FW gets a hardware rev and updates its transfer speeds, I see FW dying quite soon.

FireWire is still the standard port for many DV video cameras. USB and FireWire each have their strengths. FireWire is a peer-to-peer bus meaning you can do that target-disk thing and network with it, while USB is a master-slave bus, meaning it is better just for peripherals. We wont see either USB or FireWire die out.

efoto
Jun 10, 2005, 10:11 AM
FireWire 400 actually gets faster transfers most of the time than USB 2.0.
The "up to 480Mbps" label means just that: a theoretical max.



FireWire is still the standard port for many DV video cameras. USB and FireWire each have their strengths. FireWire is a peer-to-peer bus meaning you can do that target-disk thing and network with it, while USB is a master-slave bus, meaning it is better just for peripherals. We wont see either USB or FireWire die out.

FW gets its more consistent transfer speeds because it's a high-power line correct? USB is moving in that direction with charge-over and other things that are making it quite similar to FW. If the speeds of USB can get up to near FW and a slightly higher power consumption would give relatively the same stability, the only thing left is peer-to-peer bus.

Perhaps saying FW would die was not the best arguement, but already many new pro-sumer level products are getting away from FW and using "Hi-Speed" :p USB 2.0 for their transfers and direct shooting.

sacear
Jun 19, 2005, 02:39 AM
Imagine going to Apple's site and seeing this PowerMac:

3.2GHz x2 Intel Pentium D
<snip>

Could they call this the G6? I mean technically it is the sixth generation of processor used by Apple--it's also an Intel processor. I really hope Apple doesn't start using numbers in their model numbers, like PowerMac 840 or something. Do you think this is a possibility?Well, technically, it is way more than the sixth generation of processor used by Apple. The current generation moniker (G3, G4, & G5) only marks the generations of Power Macintosh computers then the PowerPC processor based CPUs were named to follow suit.

Apple first used MOS Technology 6502 processors in the Apple |, Apple ||, and Apple ||| series computers.

For the Apple ||gs, Apple used Western Digital Center's 65816 processor.

Then Apple used the Motorola 68000 processor for the Lisa and the Macintosh.

Apple used the Motorola 68020 processor for the Macintosh II and the Macintosh LC.

Next, Apple used the Motorola 68030 processor for the SE/30 and the rest of the Macintosh || series. At this time the Macintosh model line increased to several model lines, each line containing several variants.

Apple next used the Motorola 68040 processor for wide variety of Macintosh models.

Apple then moved to the Power Performance Computing 601 processor for the Power Macintosh. (First generation PowerPC, "G1") (Seventh generation processor used by Apple)

The next PPC processor for Apple was the 603 series. Followed closely by the 604 series. Both together considered the second generation PPC. ("G2")

Then the PowerPC 750 processor was used in Apple's Power Macintosh G3 (third generation) model computer and Apple gave the CPU the same name.

The PowerPC 7400 series processor is the G4 CPU used in the Power Macintosh G4.

The PowerPC 970 processor is the G5 CPU used in the Power Mac G5. (The fifth generation PowerPC processor, yet the eleventh generation processor used by Apple Computer.)

So, "Could they call this the G6?" Well, they could. If they want to. The moniker Gx is Apple's and refers to the Macintosh model first and predominantly, and secondarily to the CPU. The CPU was named after the Power Mac model moniker. At this particular time the fifth generation Power Mac just happens to coincide with the fifth generation of PowerPC.

The next generation of Power Mac will still be the sixth (G6), no matter what they call it and no matter what processor is inside. The new Intel processor based CPU ought to not, and properly cannot be called G6, unless they use the sixth generation of some Intel processor (hmm, P6 in the G6?) The Pentium itself was the fifth generation of Intel's x86 processor (80586, i586, P5), the Pentium Pro, Pentium ||, Pentium |||, and Pentium M are the P6, (Pentium M P6 in the Power Mac G6? PowerBook Yonah?) hmm.

So the machine itself will still be a Power Mac G6. However, Apple may decide to change the naming scheme altogether.

sacear
Jun 19, 2005, 03:06 AM
i think the G5 is it for the g-series, since it only referred to the generations of powerpc chips in the mac.From a marketing/naming perspective, i wish they would keep the G name, but I don't see why Apple would keep the G name... It describes the processor, not the computer, and I think calling the same processor Pentium 5 and G6 would be confusing.That is incorrect. The G series moniker as used by Apple refers to the generation of "Power Macintosh," describing the computer. Apple secondarily named the CPU (not the PowerPC chip) after the machine. "Power Macintosh G3" means third-generation Power Macintosh, not G3 CPU Power Macintosh, nor Power Macintosh with a G3 CPU. The CPU is named after and according to the Power Macintosh. The Power Macintosh is not named after and according to the CPU.

sacear
Jun 19, 2005, 03:38 AM
The prefix Power doesn't necessarily refer to the PowerPC. The first PowerBooks used 030s. On the desktop end, models were starting to be given names and numbers when the PowerPC came out (Centris, Quadra, etc.). PowerMac was like another name. The change in processors for both the notebook and desktop lines was noted by using 4 digits in the model number instead of 3.

I'd personally like to see a return to the old school by using the full Macintosh name. I don't see that ever happening though. Some people these days probably don't even know Mac is short for Macintosh.That is correct. The Power moniker as used my Apple did not and does not directly refer to PowerPC. Apple used the "Power" moniker years before the PowerPC.

The first generation PowerBooks (the PowerBook 100, from 1991) used Motorola 68000 processors. The 68030 was used for the second generation PowerBooks. The PowerPC was used in the fourth generation PowerBooks in 1997, six years after Apple had already been using the "Power" moniker.

skubish
Jun 19, 2005, 09:06 AM
Does Apple even have trademark rights for "G6", Pontiac has a car called the G6?????

GM has a trademark registered in the US for G6. Looking at http://www.uspto.gov Apple does not have G6 registered but they also don't have G5 registered either.