Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Issues Invitations for Media Event on September 12

Flore said:
So they might actually call it iPhone 5. Did not anticipate this.
Click to expand...

And what did you aticipate?

For all of those who were thinking about iPhone 6, do you have any sense of logic? After iPhone 4S - iPhone 6?
iPhone, then iPhone with 3G, then faster iPhone for 3GS and then they entered new serie of iPhone 4 which is the basic model and the more powerful version iPhone 4S. Next will be iPhone 5 and iPhone 5S, or they will drop the serie name and call it simply The New iPhone. The only logic for iPhone 6 is that it is the 6th iPhone but choosing this name will provoce a mass confusion so it was imposible name in all possible scenarios.

For the iPad the situation is a bit strange, because we have iPad, iPad 2 and The New iPad. The next iPad cant be 3, because many people are considering the new iPad to be iPad 3 and again, it cannot be The new iPad 2, becase it is a crappy name. The discusion here is open for opinions, but for the iPhone name, all was more than clear.

My GF has birthday 26th of September so her gift will be iPhone 5 or a skydive jump, tricky choise.
 
jrswizzle said:
And as I've said, if they start naming each iPhone "the new iPhone" in 2 years we will have 3 "new iPhones" on the market at the same time.
Click to expand...

Right, which is a problem for phones, but not for iPads or desktops. For the next few generations, iPhones will certainly be numbered and iPads won't.

People get hung up on:
1. iPhone
2. iPhone 3G
3. iPhone 3GS
4. iPhone 4
5. iPhone 4S
6. ??

when what they don't realise is that nobody, really, thinks like this. Most people think that the oldest iPhone is a 3, the newest is a 4. Some people know of 3/4/G/S but don't really care. 3, 4, 5 is so clear to most people.

The people who do think like the above are unimportant to business as they're such a huge minority. By having the iPhone 2 as the 'iPhone 3G', the number system changed for marketing. Is naming something accurately more important than sensible branding? It's not. Case closed.
 
urbanslaughter said:
I love all the "iPhone 5ers" on here gloating that they were right, and all the iPhone 6ers" eating crow . . . WHO CARES what the thing is called??? I want to know what it does and how it looks - well, I guess all the rumors have covered that. Seriously though, how bored is everyone that there is this much excitement over what Apple calls a new iPhone?
Click to expand...

Pissy little fanboys care, and they all post here.
 
pwaryuex said:
....
Apple is a business and it's catering to what people want. If you argue that they should 'correctly' call it the 6, you're completely arguing against Apple's philosophy of making things simple and accessible.
Click to expand...


I was never ever arguing for "iPhone 6", that would have been problematic to me. It seems to me that "4G LTE" is a new feature that they want to tout (just like they did with the 3rd generation iPad). It seems to me that Apple marketing was concerned about the "iPad 3" versus "4G LTE" confusion and opted to drop the "3" from the iPad and just go with "The new iPad". I figured that Apple would simply apply the same solution to the 4G LTE problem here. I was actually arguing for Apple's demonstrated philosophy for naming their new iOS devices (i.e.: the same philosophy they use for iPod and iPad).

Maybe their motivation for "The new iPad" was different. Maybe they are opting with Mac-like and iPod-like product names for iPad for some other reason, whereas they want to keep the suffix on the iPhone name.

Certainly the path of least resistance for the media is "iPhone 5". This the name that the media has already given it. Then again the media was also certain that the iPad would be called the "iSlate".
 
jrswizzle said:
Because the previous name was the iPhone 4/4S....and 5 comes after 4.

I mean aside from the coincidental 4 being the 4th gen, when has apple named the iPhone based on generation?
Click to expand...

In my opinion, this just proves that Apple sometimes has no coherent naming policy at all. While the iPhone 4 was the first iPhone to be named after its generation, the 4S already broke that rule by referring to its technical aspects instead of its generation (a faster iPhone 4, hence 4S). If you compare this to the iPad, while the second iPad followed the iPhone naming policy, the third iPad was simply called ‘the new iPad’ instead. So even for the iPad the naming policy has changed.

Because of this, I think that Apple tends to come up with a name that fits depending on the circumstances. In the media, there have been so many claims about this ‘iPhone 5’ even before the iPhone 4S was announced. Looking back at the overall disappointment that was expressed, the public may still expect a ‘true’ iPhone 5 after all, even though it would make no sense generation-wise. Considering this, I suppose Apple could just go along with the name that everyone is expecting anyway.

It could also be that Apple is just playing with us. Apple has on several occasions placed subtle hints on its invitations. It could be that the 5 is just a hint to the next iPhone, since everyone is expecting the ‘iPhone 5’, thus symbolically pointing to the iPhone. That does not mean that it could not have a different name.
 
shartypants said:
If you look carefully at the shadow, at the top of the 5, between the 1 and 2, it looks like about the right aspect ratio for the rumored iPhone 5. :)
Click to expand...

True. That mini-shadow also appears to have slightly darker bars along the top and bottom (it's easiest to see on a TN panel).
 
What a lame invitation
Previous apple event invitations all had a hint or two as to what innovative features we can expect (e.g. iPhone 4S was...let's talk, iPhone-->siri).
Tim Cook, you suck.
 
Ew. So instead of calling the 2012 iPad--which actually is the 3rd iPad--the iPad 3, they call it the iPad. For clarity.

Then the same year, they decide to call the 2012 iPhone the iPhone 5--despite the fact that it is neither the 5th major version of its shell, but the 3rd; nor the 5th phone they released, since it's the 6th)

Backwards. As hell.
 
An iPhone 5 makes no sense.

iPhone
iPhone 3G
iPhone 3GS
iPhone 4 (note how the 3GS was counted)
iPhone 4S
iPhone ... 6. This is the 6th iPhone.

How could they count the 3GS but not the 4S?

Then again, Windows 8 is not really the 8th version of Windows... so it's not unheard of.

Or they could be starting a new tradition, considering the 4S to simply be an iPhone 4 tweak.

The best they could do is call it "iPhone" and return to simplicity.
 
If they aren't going to follow the path of the iPad... they should have gone with iPhone LTE or something else... it sounds so much better.
 
I think Apple dropped the numbering scheme from iPads because of the iPad mini more than anything else.
 
jrswizzle said:
Which previous iPhone has been so named because of its generational number?

Hmmm, for the general public, continuing the numbering scheme is a much better marketing strategy than skipping one, having all these people ask where the iPhone 5 was, and have to explain that its the 6th generation and that the 4S was the 5th generation, but other than the 4 (which happened by coincidence) no other iPhone was named for it's generation.

And as I've said, if they start naming each iPhone "the new iPhone" in 2 years we will have 3 "new iPhones" on the market at the same time.
Click to expand...

There is no numbering scheme. No iPhones have ever shared the same name pattern. It is already very complicated. The names themselves are simple. There is no pattern. A 5 or 6 would not make it any more or less complicated. And actually, the only time a number was used alone, it was also the generational number (iPhone 4).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back