How can people be so stupid?

Discussion in 'iPad' started by chriscrk, Mar 7, 2012.

  1. chriscrk macrumors 6502a

    chriscrk

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #1
    This may seem like a pointless ranting thread, but it genuinely irritates me how people can be stupid enough to think that the product is actually called "New iPad". How can they not understand it's just called iPad and that the "new" is to refer to the fact that it's newer than it's predecessor?

    I just can't believe some people are stupid enough to think it's as if we have the "iPad" -> "iPad 2" -> "New iPad"... You can't possibly be that stupid to believe such a thing... And then actually go on about how stupid you think the name is, when it's not even it's name in the first place! So irritating :/

    Regardless, I think this is a very nice update. Another stupidity is people thinking "hur dur no redesign, this is not a worthy update!". I think they can't get around to understanding how big it is that this has a retina screen now. It may not be thinner, or have a glass back, but that doesn't mean it's not a good update.
     
  2. Zenteeric macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #2
    You have to realize that they are confused by all the websites calling it "the new ipad" left and right.
    Once all this calms down it will just be the ipad. So it'll be ipad 1, ipad 2, ipad.
     
  3. tr43z0r macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    Location:
    Leicestershire, UK
    #3
    I agree, but at the same time am sadly not surprised by some people's stupidity.
     
  4. Jspring86 Suspended

    Jspring86

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    Location:
    Tempe, AZ
    #4
    While I do agree with you, it would help your case if Apple didn't list it on its site as "The New iPad" when comparing it side by side with the iPad 2. It makes it look as if the official names are along the bottom of each product.

    Still, you are clearly correct in your analysis.
     
  5. Michael CM1 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    #5
    I'm imagining this will become known as the third-generation iPad on Apple's store when listed with accessories for compatibility. Apple has never put anything other than "iPod," "iPhone" or "iPad" on the back of the devices, so dropping the numbering scheme doesn't surprise me. I just hope there's a better indicator than all the "mid-2007" and "late 2009" monikers you see with the computer products. A behind-the-scenes numbering scheme like operating systems have wouldn't kill anybody.
     
  6. GraphicsGeek macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2008
    #6
    You, my friend, have summed up all my frustration from reading all these stupid threads.
     
  7. striker33 macrumors 65816

    striker33

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2010
    #7
    Well no. Technically it'll be the iPad, iPad 2, iPad. There was never a 1 in the first generation :)

    It would be better if Apple renamed the iPad 2 to iPad 2nd Gen.

    I honestly dont know why on earth Steve decided to change the naming schemes. People were perfectly happy with iPod's being defined by generations.
     
  8. chriscrk thread starter macrumors 6502a

    chriscrk

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #8
    Yeah, but I think it's quite clear the only reason it's listed as "The new iPad" on the comparison page with the iPad 2 is so that customers don't think it's the old iPad being compared to the iPad 2 right there. One might think "People would not be stupid enough to think the iPad being compared to the iPad 2 there is the old one based on the tech specs!", but based on many comments I've been saying around here, I wouldn't be surprised...

    I guess Apple may regret having called the previous iPad the iPad 2, as the numbered name was so short lived, and is now creating more of a complication than it should... But oh well... Hopefully it's not the vast majority that falls in to such illogic thinking...
     
  9. mac jones macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
  10. chriscrk thread starter macrumors 6502a

    chriscrk

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #10
    Whether it was Steve or some last minute decision (and by last minute I mean after Steve died), I think it seems logical, and smart, to do it now.

    Sure, having the numbers helps, but what happens when we reach iPad number 15, or 20? It will just sound silly.

    I think it's nicer to keep it as iPad, feels more integrated with how computers are named. And I don't think many people out there have a major problem finding out which computer is the latest model when they're at a store.

    I think what someone else said is fine, having it labeled as third generation in website listings or on the box in the bar code or something, but keeping the name as iPad and not going off in to iPad 17 later on when that time comes, seems nicer in the long run.
     
  11. SchalaZeal macrumors newbie

    SchalaZeal

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    #11
    Indeed, I've been taken aback by the great furor over the naming issue. What it looks like is that Apple is scrapping the number in the official branding. Much like you have "Macbook" or "iPod Touch" without the generation information, it makes sense that the iPad is now getting the same treatment.

    and really, this new naming convention doesn't stop people from calling the thing iPad 3 or iPad 3rd gen! It's a free world, people, call it what you will! ^__^
     
  12. Batavian macrumors 6502

    Batavian

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2011
    #12
    Good point. There is only iPad or iPad2.
     
  13. chriscrk thread starter macrumors 6502a

    chriscrk

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #13
    What did who say?
     
  14. urkel macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2008
    #14
    While I agree that "New" isn't actually the name, I disagree with your name calling and intense anger towards people over this.

    [​IMG]

    When has Apple ever made a slide that didn't have the exact name of their latest product on it? Apple clearly put "the new" there as a differentiator and even messed with font so why is it so crazy for the media/the public to use the entire term in the same manner that Tim Cook and Apple did?

    So before we call people "stupid" lets not forget that this whole naming mess is more Apple's fault than the consumer/media. If they wanted the product line to only be named "iPad" then they shouldn't have called one "iPad 2" and forced themselves into this position.
     
  15. Stetrain macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2009
    #15
    Notice that "new" is lower case and only "iPad" is bold.

    It's just like when they introduce "The new, faster, Macbook Pro"

    The iPad generations so far are as such:

    2010: iPad (first generation)
    2011: iPad 2
    2012: iPad (third generation)


    Edit: This is the current headline image on the Macbook Pro page:

    [​IMG]

    I don't think the official product name changed to "The New Macbook Pro"
     
  16. wratran macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2010
    #16
    AREED!!!!
    nothing new about this ipad...just like the 4S
     
  17. Nightprowler macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2012
    #17
    Of course everyone is calling it the new iPad because it is the new iPad, but that doesn't mean that's its "name".

    I'm with OP, either people are frickin dumb, or arguing semantics for the fun of it.
     
  18. chriscrk thread starter macrumors 6502a

    chriscrk

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #18
    But it seems fairly obvious to me that the use of the "new" is simply to state that this is a new iPad. It's not the name, it's an adjective! Just like you say "I bought the new Macbook Pro!", it doesn't mean it's called "New Macbook Pro", right?

    I know, but they probably only realised about the name simplicity recently. Maybe they didn't think about it when they released the iPad 2, but I think it's fairly simple to see that, in the long run, having their products have a number in their name based on their generation will just make them sound stupid in the future. iPad 30. It doesn't sound right.

    It just bothers me that people couldn't take the word "new" for what it is, an adjective, and instead got in to a massive fit as to how it was incredibly stupid that the new product was called "New iPad".
     
  19. spiderman0616 macrumors 68030

    spiderman0616

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2010
    #19
    I was also wondering why people are so obsessed with it being called something specific. Did you ever call your iPad 2 your iPad 2? Didn't you just call it your iPad? The press, especially the tech blogs, are obsessed with minutia like this, and I don't get why. Look at CNET if you want to see how stupid they really are. One article says "Who Cares What They Call the iPad!!??" and the next one is called "They Need to Call It Something or It's A Failure!!!!" (Those aren't real titles, but you see that kind of nonsense on CNET all the time.) And then they recycle the article, give it a new name, and stick it back in their twitter feed so everyone clicks on it again.

    In the end, who needs it to be called anything? NOBODY except for the click baiting tech journalists.
     
  20. motoleo macrumors 6502a

    motoleo

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2012
    #20
    Apple products haven't lost their identity. It's just iPad.

    Even with the iPad 2, it was always iPad.

    When you go into the store, you don't even have to say "I want the iPad."

    All you have to say is, "I want iPad."
     
  21. SporkLover macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2011
    #21
    3rd Gen iPad = The new iPad
    2nd gen iPad = the old iPad
    1st gen iPad = the OG iPad.



    Seriously though, this is how apple has named all of their other products, with exception of the ipad 2 and their iPhones. iPod, iPod touch, MBP, MB, MBA, PM, etc etc. it was always the product name, and then the generation.
     
  22. iHeartsteve macrumors 65816

    iHeartsteve

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2012
    #22
    Nice post lol. I feel as though people are getting stupidier by the day.:cool:
     
  23. mcdj macrumors 604

    mcdj

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Location:
    NYC
    #23
    Stupidier indeed.
     
  24. SporkLover macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2011
    #24
    Lol
     
  25. iHeartsteve macrumors 65816

    iHeartsteve

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2012
    #25
    Stupidest lol ;)
     

Share This Page