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

Apple Marketing Chief Phil Schiller: 'One Need Never Pluralize Apple Product Names'

People kept saying iPad 3 and iPad 4 when in reality they were the 3rd and 4th generation and named as such.
My point?
People will name the products whatever they want to, regardless of what the official names for them are. Might as well embrace this as they are the paying customers.
 
I would think that there are a lot bigger problems at Apple than how to pronounce the plural forms of device names. Must be nice to be filthy rich and correct people's grammar yet can't come up with more than watered down reasons why people might kinda sorta want an Apple Watch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: apolloa, Hank Carter and SusanK
Reason077 said:
"iPads pro" is clearly wrong
Click to expand...

And yet "Attorneys General" is correct (not Attorney Generals). People often mistake proper grammar for mistakes. For example:

"Whom is John following?" - Most say "Who is John following?"
"Come with John and me." - Most say "Come with John and I"

Who knows? (er... whom knows?)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mw0103
I'm pretty sure this a legal issue because iPhone is the brand of device not the kind of device.

When we refer to Kleenex we are referring to any number of facial tissues, but the correct usage is kleenex brand facial, or xerox copies, or jell-o brand desserts etc...

If the brand name becomes to common it weaken the trademark ownership... So Iphone Devices, or IPad Tablet Computers is simply Apple trying to stop people from using their brand names to ultimately be confused with generic versions.

Imagine if all smartphones where thought of iPhones, or all tablets as iPads...

see this wikipedia article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_trademark
 
Man, is this ever a Friday post!

It's comforting to know that I never need to pluralize the names of Apple devices. I'll continue to do it, though, because it feels so darn good.
 
wlossw said:
I'm pretty sure this a legal issue because iPhone is the brand of device not the kind of device.

When we refer to Kleenex we are referring to any number of facial tissues, but the correct usage is kleenex brand facial, or xerox copies, or jell-o brand desserts etc...

If the brand name becomes to common it weaken the trademark ownership... So Iphone Devices, or IPad Tablet Computers is simply Apple trying to stop people from using their brand names to ultimately be confused with generic versions.

Imagine if all smartphones where thought of iPhones, or all tablets as iPads...

see this wikipedia article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_trademark
Click to expand...
Kleeneces. Stewardi.
 
So Apple only makes adjectives? Well that's their problem. How's an adjective supposed to compete with Google, which is verb?
 
Does this sound better Phil -> iPhone, iPhone 3, iPhone 3G, iPhone 4, iPhone 4S iPhone 5, iPhone 6 Plus .... crappy iPhone 8?, moving to Samsung ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: SusanK
CFreymarc said:
This is a talk any good IP attorney will give you. For a trademark to continue, it should only be used as an adjective.

To keep a trademark, a company should never use marks of trade in other parts of grammar for public communication. Using a trademarked term as a noun or a verb dilutes the value for the mark.

Trademarked terms such as Xerox and Kleenex have been compromised because this diluted use in ads and press releases.
Click to expand...
This legally sound.

And grammatically ridiculous.

Language is used how people use it, not how IP lawyers wish them to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hlfway2anywhere
This is hilarious and has already given me a few laughs, sorry, I mean laugh chuckle-responses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: apolloa
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