Pontiac G6

Discussion in 'Community' started by phreakout13, May 10, 2005.

  1. phreakout13 macrumors 6502


    Jan 4, 2004
    South Eastern MA
    Hello! A few minutes ago I saw a commercial for a Pontiac G6 on T.V. I was wondering if anyone here thinks it could be a problem for Apple's next line of processors. Could Apple get away with using the name since they're not really in the same market as Pontiac? Thanks in advance for replying:)
  2. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Jan 6, 2004
    this has been brought up a couple of times already, but not today so here it goes....

    technically i dont see why apple couldnt use G6, but they probably won't they are smarter than that and they will probably develop a new marketing scheme for the processors once they move on past the G5
  3. saabmp3 macrumors 6502a

    Jul 22, 2002
    Tacoma, WA

    The G3 was good, the G4 had a nice ring to it. [Sarcasm]I think the G5 sounds like ****[/Sarcasm].

    G6 seems like the next logical step to the G5. Intel et al are having a horrible time teaching customers new number schemes.

  4. 840quadra Moderator


    Staff Member

    Feb 1, 2005
    Twin Cities Minnesota

    Good question, I think G6 sounds ok, but I am not sure about G7.


    I don't think it is hard to market whatever they decide to make. Most people know what a Cintrino, Pentium 4, and the likes are now. Intel has had a good marketing program and has spread the word quite well.

    On the subject more,

    I don't think Apple computer will have any issue bringing the G6 to market, for one they are talking about a computer component, not a model name, or an automotive related item. If GM decided to go after Apple, it would look like the legal issues of Tiger Direct going after Apple for naming 1.0 OS X "Tiger". I would hope the courts throw it out!
  5. katie ta achoo macrumors G3

    May 2, 2005

    When I first heard this commercial (I was reading a magazine, not looking at the screen) I got excited because I thought Apple was actually having a COMMERCIAL! (shock!)
    But then.. it was a car.. It made me sad. I figured that the PowerMacs would move to the G6 and I could get a sweet deal on a G5.
    Stupid car commercial! >:O
  6. emw macrumors G4


    Aug 2, 2004
    So why did they start with G3, and not G1 or G2? I'm not being sarcastic, I really don't know. I'm assuming it meant something like "3rd Generation."

    And would that naming have any impact on where they go with the G6? Perhaps if the new chips are of a significantly different architecture, they'd go with a new naming convention.
  7. seamuskrat macrumors 6502a


    Feb 17, 2003
    New Jersey USA
    Probably moot

    From what I have heard, the Pontiac G6 is one of the worst selling cars in history, so by the time we roll out a G6, the car may not even exist.

    As for the naming scheme, if memory serves, the G1 was the first PPC chip 601 series.
    G2 was the 603/604x series
    G3 was the 700 series by Moto and later IBM all part of the PowerPC alliance
    G4 was the 7000 by Moto

    Presumably, Apple decided that rather than calling it the PowerMac 7400 and 5 months later releasing the PowerMac 7410, making it seem all too similar to the Performa days, that something like Generation 3 or G3 sounded cool, mature, and marketable.

    As for why they did not do it with the early chips. Would you buy a Generation 1 CPU?
    In reality, back then, it was still an Intel 386 or 486. When Intel ran the Intel Inside and came out with the Pentium monniker, calling a CPu by its designated model number seemed very unfriendly to consumers. Intel had Pentium and speed. Apple had G3 and speed. So I figure it was just a catchy, yet simple means to compete with the massive marketing engine Intel created with the naming of the i586 chip the Pentium.

Share This Page