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

New iPad branding - would iPad2 HD been better?

Booji

Booji

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Nov 17, 2011
793
519
Tokyo
When the new iPad came out, I was sure it would be marketed as an extension of the iPad2 - something like iPad2 HD.

Positioning the new iPad as an upgraded graphics version of the iPad2 would have quashed a lot of the objections of weight, heat and battery life - those opting for the HD model would be clear that it costs more and there would some slight compromises on weight.

They could have announced the price reduction of the iPad2 but keeping with the higher storage options, and still be able to claim the weight and battery life of the basic range (unlike they do now by only offering 16gb)

I realize this is not that much different then they already do now, but marking makes a huge difference on how the product is perceived - especially to non-tech types or newbies.

Its hard to fault Apple here since I'm sure they did their share of homework, but to me it seems as if they extended the iPad2 rather than replace it would have made more sense to me.
 
The product was a substantial upgrade to the iPad 2, claiming it is an "iPad 2 HD" would be like saying its just an iPad 2S and it's far better than that. And adding to the name would make the numbering even more convoluted, the idea was dropping the numbering all together for simplicity and not having to worry about the sound of "iPad 10", etc. It'd be confusing regarding what to name the iPad after the "iPad 2 HD" also.
 
^^^
The naming of the 4S was a stopgap in Apples R&D process, and caused much uproar here. The new iPad, the third generation iPad or the iPad 2012. Are all acceptable, although most accessory retailers call it the iPad 3..:)
 
iHeartsteve said:
Creative idea :) however its not cohesive w apples other naming conventions.
Click to expand...

Seems very consistent when comparing to iPhone 4 vs. 4S and iPhone 3 vs. 3g. Since both retained the same form factor yet updated the technical bits.

Model number changes corresponded to form factor changes. iPad2 looks different than the original iPad, yet same as the new iPad.
 
Should have just been called iPad HD. Then they could call the next the iPad HD2.

----------
Skika said:
iPad HD makes NO sense.
Click to expand...

Really??? Seems that it would make perfect sense to me based on it's resolution being higher than Bluray which is considered HD. So you would prefer what, iPad HDHD (High Definition High Definition? Or maybe iPad UHD (Ultra High Definition). :)
 
The "HD" moniker is so overused and stale at this point there is no way Apple would ever use it.

Dropping the numbering system is the best thing they could have done. It brings the iPad in line with the rest of their computer line.
 
scottw324 said:
Really??? Seems that it would make perfect sense to me based on it's resolution being higher than Bluray which is considered HD.
Click to expand...

So you acknowledge that iPad has an higher resolution than Full HD ( not just HD ) and yet you suggest the HD name :confused:.

So you would prefer what, iPad HDHD (High Definition High Definition? Or maybe iPad UHD (Ultra High Definition). :)
Click to expand...

No, i would preffer it being called just iPad.
 
erawsd said:
The "HD" moniker is so overused and stale at this point there is no way Apple would ever use it.

Dropping the numbering system is the best thing they could have done. It brings the iPad in line with the rest of their computer line.
Click to expand...

I understand Apple's motivation - I think dropping the number would have been better on the next update.

What the new iPad really is about is the screen. Where people get disappointed or confused is that many expected the upgrade to be more than just the screen and the processor dedicated to supporting the resolution. All you have to do is look at numerous postings on this board to confirm that.

In markets outside of the US, Apple has now had to go back to consumers and offer refunds because they did not make it clear that the 4G frequency that the new iPad supports is only available in the US. Putting the emphasis on the screen (HD) could have probably avoided some confusion.
 
I agree with the others. As the name is now past tense, who cares. You can call your device what ever you want!

Apple is not going to, all of a sudden, have a iPad "re-naming" event, so lets try to get past this and move on:p
 
Look at their computers.

If anything, the naming convention of the iPad 2 was off.

It should simply have been called the iPad (2nd generation), like they do with iPods and their computers.

It's not like the newest iMac is called iMac 7 is it?
 
Booji said:
Seems very consistent when comparing to iPhone 4 vs. 4S and iPhone 3 vs. 3g. Since both retained the same form factor yet updated the technical bits.

Model number changes corresponded to form factor changes. iPad2 looks different than the original iPad, yet same as the new iPad.
Click to expand...

What I meant was the models are given for sequential order, 1,2, 2s, 3. Etc. Appple doesn't name them after the 'upgrade' description. You would like it to be HD which makes perfect sense and I think its a nice idea. However it's not how apple previously named other models. And what are they going to do when the next upgrade doesn't have a short and sweet acronym?
 
Technically all the iPads are HD. 720p HD but still considered HD. So, no, iPad 2HD would not have made sense.
 
GraphicsGeek said:
Technically all the iPads are HD. 720p HD but still considered HD. So, no, iPad 2HD would not have made sense.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't make sense to you because, as your name shows, you're a graphics geek but to the average consumer it would make perfect sense, especially considering the exponential jump in resolution.
 
I don't get why people can't understand Apple's motivations here. It's a move to get away from the numbering system. iPod Touches are just iPod Touches. Not iPod Touch 2, iPod Touch 3, iPod Touch 4, etc. Same with Macs. Same with Apple TV. Same with Airports.

That's why iPad-->iPad 2 made no sense and why the iPhone naming progression makes no sense. They're switcing to just iPad for all future models and will probably do the same on the iPhone.
 
spiderman0616 said:
I don't get why people can't understand Apple's motivations here. It's a move to get away from the numbering system. iPod Touches are just iPod Touches. Not iPod Touch 2, iPod Touch 3, iPod Touch 4, etc. Same with Macs. Same with Apple TV. Same with Airports.

That's why iPad-->iPad 2 made no sense and why the iPhone naming progression makes no sense. They're switcing to just iPad for all future models and will probably do the same on the iPhone.
Click to expand...

This!

I certainly hope this is the case. I don't want the iPhone 963. I just want an iPhone! I like this new naming policy and hope that it sticks!
 
Nobody complained when they announced each MBP as "The New MacBook Pro", yet everyone seems to be unhappy about "The New iPad". Just like MBPs, it's probably that eventually the iPads will become known as 2012 iPad, 2013 iPad etc.
 
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