More Hints at Apple's Desire to Hold 'iPad' Trademark for Tablet Device

[E.Lizardo]

Are you willing to eat your own shoe? If you stick by your word I'll make a wager here before everyone on the forums, that I'll cook and eat my own shoe, if it isn't called iPad. I'm 100% sure it's called iPad.

Please, please take the wager…

I'll eat both your shoes and make tea with your dirty socks if it's the iBook.

 

[mixel]

I would expect the iPad to be the expanded touchpad input device for pre-existing Macs (so they aren't left out when some future macs get more touch friendly), and iSlate to be the flagship standalone tablet device.

I'd say the chance of them actually releasing two devices like that are small. :/

 

[deconstruct60]

Personally, I'd love to see it named "Newton". I think the whole "i" thing is past its sell by date.

In so far as "i" is indicative of the Internet being the new feature that is (or one of the primary) evolutionary differences then it would be more appropriate here than on the original iPods (which had no native internet connectivity). The evolution of the iPods into the iPod Touch is only now a reflection of that on the device.

One of the primary differentiators of the iPhone was also the internet. You can look at the wide disparity in folks surfing the web on iPhone versus other smartphones to see that. The display and the browser (and to lessor extent multitouch gestures) basically make that tolerable (versus what most of the competitors had out on the market at the time).

Likewise a huge difference between the Newton and this device will likely b e that it is hooked to the internet out of the box. Likely in multiple ways (i.e., WiFi and cell based data networks ). Yeah sure you could stick some do-dad onto the Newton in one of the slots to add capability, but it wasn't a core, defining feature.

To be fair, the internet was still not well know at the time the Newton started and was still evolving when it got killed.
(and Apple's attempt to create networks with infrared was a bust.

http://gizmodo.com/5452193/the-story-behind-apples-newton

one of several things that were just too early to do right associated with the Newton. )

 

[deconstruct60]

No.They won't name something completely new and different after a previous product.

Would Toyota come out with a new luxury flagship and name it the Tercel?

How is it completely new and different? Are you looking at physical attributes or intent?

The original iBook was designed as a computer to be used in educational classroom. If this is a computer than takes elements of the classroom ( books, pen and paper , drawing , note taking , filling out exams , etc. ) into the computer than it serves a very similar purpose.

Its purpose was also to deliver a more affordable portable computer. There is a huge gap between iPod Touch and MacBook now that is not being filled by Apple. Again if go back to the original intent it is serving similar purposes. [ Not in the same way though as being a Mac OS X device. However, there is a question really need a Mac OS X device or not. ]


Frankly a 1966 Mustang doesn't look exactly like a 2010 Mustang.
Neither does a 2010 Camaro look exactly like a 1975 one.
Nor did a Thunderbird flashback look exactly like the most popular thunderbird.


I suspect may not want to pigeon hole it as a "book replacement only" device, but then again the original iBook didn't really suffer from that perception when it was released.

I can see if solely look at the final generations of iBook might create confusion, but if you got back to the roots it could be a better targeted solution to the name. Although the lack of "Mac" in the new should be instructive to people at this point to set expectations.

 

[SmokyD]

This just in: it's going to be called the iMatey.

Yarrhh!

 

[powers74]

iPad

Why? What could possibly be wrong with calling it iPad?

I wonder if Steve's seen that...

 

[Clix Pix]

The more I think about it the more I like "Magic Slate...." Really! As I stroke my finger(s) along my Magic Mouse it just seems like a natural progression of that "magic" naming convention bit to call this new "slate" a "Magic Slate."

Only a week until we are put out of our misery and finally find out!

 

[motulist]

There are so many better alternatives that there's no reason to call it an iPad, which is too close to iPod, and connotes a feminine hygiene product. For instance, depending on how they're planning on positioning this new product, they could call it any of these:

iHand
iNote
iPaper
iWalk
iMe
iFrame
iCompanion
iAttendant
iEtc.

or even just calling it iNotePad would be good.

 

[djchuckc27]

mac, phone, work, pod, tunes, life... i think pad fits in the apple lingo

 

[MinorBidoh]

'Maxi-pad' (Mac'siPad) is already floating around uni atm. Pah!
Please oh please not iPad.

 

[mossme89]

*iGasm*

 

[knightlie]

I am guessing that He/she is posting with an iPhone , and that is why the spelling is all out of whack

Obviously, because the iPhone has no possible way to go back and correct typos before submitting a post.

 

[kwiiboy]

What if they kill off the plastic white macbook, make the _____ $1000, then call it macbook or macpad? (MacMan)?

 

[tdream]

iSaw iConquered iCame

 

[cxny]

iDunno

but if it's called iPad I'm selling all my AAPL

 

[0dev]

So, two tablets, the iSlate and iPad, I assume. One will be for ebooks, newspapers, etc, and one will be for music, films, games, etc.

 

[Sydde]

iContact

 

[adville]

I have filed for trademarks myself and based on the posted article I think I can offer an explanation:

When you file for a TM, but have not yet "used it in commerce" the TM is classified as "intention of use". Until the status of the TM becomes "used in commerce", meaning it is being sold, the TM cannot actually be granted. So, it appears Apple's desire to extend the time to oppose Fujitsu's move to revive the TM (which in itself would indicate it has not actual produced a product for sale) is due to the fact that, if Apple does produce an "iPad" device "used in commerce", its claim for the TM would supersede Fujitsu's attempt to revive its expired "intention to use" (my assumption) TM status. Sorry for the *very* long sentence.

This is not really accurate. First, Toshiba filed its application on the basis of use in commerce, and it was filed in 2003, claiming first use in 2002. The potential opposer does not need to state what rights they have in order to request an extension of time in which to oppose. As others on the thread pointed out, iPad bears some similarity with iPod, so, to the extent an opposition were based on that mark, Apple's ability to oppose would likely depend not on the mark for a new tablet coming into use, but Apple's priority dates for its rights in the iPod mark.

 

[ianhowell64]

They're going to call it the iPalette

Just look at the invitation, there are splashes of different colors of paint. It just hit me.