Terminology accuracy (e.g. 15+ New Products... seriously, MR?)

[theheadguy]

Apple to Launch These 15+ New Products Later This Year​

...
Beyond the usual annual updates to iPhones and Apple Watches, Apple's all-new smart home hub is finally expected to launch later this year, once the more personalized version of Siri arrives. We are also expecting a foldable iPhone, a MacBook Pro with an OLED display, and long-awaited updates to the Apple TV and HomePods this year. Here is what to expect from Apple later this year, according to rumors. Where there are arrows shown, it refers to a device's current chip → next chip.
...

I don’t think MacRumors genuinely believes Apple will release 15 entirely new products this year. It’s clear the list is really a mix of a few new products and a series of updates to existing ones.

So why not just say that?

"Apple to Launch 15+ New Products" is at best exaggerated, and at worst misleading. Either way, it risks diluting the credibility MR has built over the years and shows there is always a risk of slow walking into the quality standards of low-tier aggregation sites.

It also dilutes the meaning of “new.” If every iterative update now counts as a “new product,” then what do we call something that’s actually new—a “new new product”?

The only argument in favor of the quoted writing style (that I can think of) is something along the lines of, "well, technically an updated model is a new product”— but I feel that's also as an admission that the headline can’t stand on its own without semantic gymnastics.

Lastly, if this framing was an intentional editorial strategy and not an oversight, then yes—you’ll win the SEO game with inflated click‑through rates, algorithmic boosts, and engagement metrics. But you’ll win that by cashing out reader trust and durable credibility, and once readers decide you’ve crossed the line from journalism into click‑bait, no amount of SEO will bring that trust and credibility back.

I really hope it was just an oversight and would like to see Arn weigh in.

 

[madeirabhoy]

wait til you look at the constant 'xx new features of the new iPhone xxx' and some of the features are 'the same design as the previous model'

 

[I7guy]

I don’t think MacRumors genuinely believes Apple will release 15 entirely new products this year. It’s clear the list is really a mix of a few new products and a series of updates to existing ones.

So why not just say that?

"Apple to Launch 15+ New Products" is at best exaggerated, and at worst misleading. Either way, it risks diluting the credibility MR has built over the years and shows there is always a risk of slow walking into the quality standards of low-tier aggregation sites.

It also dilutes the meaning of “new.” If every iterative update now counts as a “new product,” then what do we call something that’s actually new—a “new new product”?

The only argument in favor of the quoted writing style (that I can think of) is something along the lines of, "well, technically an updated model is a new product”— but I feel that's also as an admission that the headline can’t stand on its own without semantic gymnastics.

Lastly, if this framing was an intentional editorial strategy and not an oversight, then yes—you’ll win the SEO game with inflated click‑through rates, algorithmic boosts, and engagement metrics. But you’ll win that by cashing out reader trust and durable credibility, and once readers decide you’ve crossed the line from journalism into click‑bait, no amount of SEO will bring that trust and credibility back.

I really hope it was just an oversight and would like to see Arn weigh in.

First “Macrumors is doomed” post I’ve seen.

I took it from the headline as a generic announcement. They don’t say “product categories”. An iPhone 18 and iPhone fold are two new products. A HomePod 3 (or whatever) is a new product to me. AirPods Max 2 is a new product.

You get my take, even if you don’t agree.🙂

 

[theheadguy]

First “Macrumors is doomed” post I’ve seen.

I took it from the headline as a generic announcement. They don’t say “product categories”. An iPhone 18 and iPhone fold are two new products. A HomePod 3 (or whatever) is a new product to me. AirPods Max 2 is a new product.

You get my take, even if you don’t agree.🙂

To be precise, my post is quite the opposite of your unfunny characterization. I brought this up specifically to preserve the well-earned strong reputation that MR has built over many years. If I thought MR was doomed, I would state such. So yeah, I got your take, but you clearly missed mine.

 

[I7guy]

To be precise, my post is quite the opposite of your unfunny characterization. I brought this up specifically to preserve the well-earned strong reputation that MR has built over many years. If I thought MR was doomed, I would state such. So yeah, I got your take, but you clearly missed mine.

Well no. I don’t think I missed your point when you say:

It also dilutes the meaning of “new.” If every iterative update now counts as a “new product,” then what do we call something that’s actually new—a “new new product”?

Which is what my point was.

 

[theheadguy]

I took it from the headline as a generic announcement. They don’t say “product categories”. An iPhone 18 and iPhone fold are two new products. A HomePod 3 (or whatever) is a new product to me. AirPods Max 2 is a new product.

Then what is not a new product to you?

 

[I7guy]

Then what is not a new product to you?

Would the headline be less controversial to you if “products” were replaced by “things”?

 

[theheadguy]

Would the headline be less controversial to you if “products” were replaced by “things”?

Can you just answer my question? You brought up multiple examples, and named them, of what you considered "new products". So, again, in terms of the "generic announcement" that this post is based on...

Then what is not a new product to you?

 

[jz0309]

I don’t think MacRumors genuinely believes Apple will release 15 entirely new products this year. It’s clear the list is really a mix of a few new products and a series of updates to existing ones.

So why not just say that?

"Apple to Launch 15+ New Products" is at best exaggerated, and at worst misleading. Either way, it risks diluting the credibility MR has built over the years and shows there is always a risk of slow walking into the quality standards of low-tier aggregation sites.

It also dilutes the meaning of “new.” If every iterative update now counts as a “new product,” then what do we call something that’s actually new—a “new new product”?

The only argument in favor of the quoted writing style (that I can think of) is something along the lines of, "well, technically an updated model is a new product”— but I feel that's also as an admission that the headline can’t stand on its own without semantic gymnastics.

Lastly, if this framing was an intentional editorial strategy and not an oversight, then yes—you’ll win the SEO game with inflated click‑through rates, algorithmic boosts, and engagement metrics. But you’ll win that by cashing out reader trust and durable credibility, and once readers decide you’ve crossed the line from journalism into click‑bait, no amount of SEO will bring that trust and credibility back.

I really hope it was just an oversight and would like to see Arn weigh in.

From a manufacturer's perspective, if "ingredients" change, it is a different product and in most cases a new product. And it will get a new (different) part number.
From a retail perspective, be that Apple or Best Buy or whoever, this "new" product will will also get a new SKU to differentiate it from previous products.
From a consumer's perspective, at least for me, it is a new product as it has newer/updated components that are presumably better.

Now, if Apple releases say a M5 Ultra Mac Studio, while from the outside it likely looks the same as the existing one, it is a new product with new/different specs.

Take automobile as another example, there is typically the model year as. differentiator, say eg the 2025 Toyota Camry, and while optically the 2026 Camry might look identical, it is an important differentiator and Toyota will market it as the "new" Camry, and so will all the dealers ...

So, will Apple introduce 15 new products that didn't exist before? yes. Will they introduce 15 new product categories/product lines? No.

I can't speak for the MR editors, but for me it is absolutely correct use of language to say "15 new products".

 

[I7guy]

Can you just answer my question? You brought up multiple examples, and named them, of what you considered "new products". So, again, in terms of the "generic announcement" that this post is based on...

I’m asking if replacing the word products by the word “things” alleviates the issue?

 

[theheadguy]

I’m asking if replacing the word products by the word “things” alleviates the issue?

I don't think something truly exciting (i.e. a brand new product like MacBook Neo) should be lumped together with all other iterative updates like apple pencils and airpod spec bumps. To answer your question simply: no, if they release any number of actual new products, they deserve mention (and special callout if all products are being referenced) in the headline for sure, and switching the word products for things doesn't accomplish this.

I can't speak for the MR editors, but for me it is absolutely correct use of language to say "15 new products".

For clarity, you would not prefer "5 new products and 10 updates"?

Heck, I could even meet in the middle and go with 10 new and 5 brand new. No compromise there either?

I'm asking because "it is absolutely correct" to say "15 new products" is pretty declarative that lumping them together without distinction is the absolutely correct way to go.

I just don't see the upside to that, maybe an explanation of why that is absolutely better will make complete sense, but I haven't seen it yet.

 

[theheadguy]

...
Take automobile as another example, there is typically the model year as. differentiator, say eg the 2025 Toyota Camry, and while optically the 2026 Camry might look identical, it is an important differentiator and Toyota will market it as the "new" Camry, and so will all the dealers ...

I just realized, you made my point for me and stated it almost better than I could myself.

Just like you said, they will call it the new Camry-- makes perfect sense, because they released a new Camry.

But if they came out and said, we released a new car this year-- you'd have to admit that it would be dishonest to say you didn't expect an actual new car. When you found out they really only updated the Camry (as they do every year), a reasonable person would say, "they didn't release a new car, they just updated the Camry again."

I realize you made my point and not yours, but it is a good example I myself didn't think of.

 

[jz0309]

For clarity, you would not prefer "5 new products and 10 updates"?

Heck, I could even meet in the middle and go with 10 new and 5 brand new. No compromise there either?

I'm asking because "it is absolutely correct" to say "15 new products" is pretty declarative that lumping them together without distinction is the absolutely correct way to go.

I just don't see the upside to that, maybe an explanation of why that is absolutely better will make complete sense, but I haven't seen it yet.

no, for me "15 new products ..." is the correct term, for the reasons I mentioned in my initial response.
I've worked in new product development/introduction in the high-tech industry for 25+ years, for me, it is common language.

 

[jz0309]

I just realized, you made my point for me and stated it almost better than I could myself.

Just like you said, they will call it the new Camry-- makes perfect sense, because they released a new Camry.

But if they came out and said, we released a new car this year-- you'd have to admit that it would be dishonest to say you didn't expect an actual new car. When you found out they really only updated the Camry (as they do every year), a reasonable person would say, "they didn't release a new car, they just updated the Camry again."

I realize you made my point and not yours, but it is a good example I myself didn't think of.

well, except, no automaker would say "we released a new car", they will all say "here is the new 2027 xyzzy" ... and the press reporting on those will also say eg "Toyota just released the 2027 Camry", and no, I disagree that a "reasonable" person would use the term "updated Camry", they'd say "the new Camry" ...

 

[M4th]

It's really not that complicated... (knowing how to read headlinese).

 

[eifelbube]

"Apple to Launch [These] 15+ New Products" is at best exaggerated, and at worst misleading.

A little bit of both is in it for me. And it is a teaser, i.e. clickbait. “These” plus the number put additional emphasis on “New”.

In reality, 12 of the 17 hardware products are new merely in an evolutionary sense. “Revolutionary” new for Apple 😊 are the iPhone Fold and the OLED display on the MBP. The remaining three items on the 15+ list — Home Hub, security camera, and doorbell — are actually new product introductions.

Apple to Launch Several Updated, Enhanced, and Introductory Products Later This Year

 

[theheadguy]

A little bit of both is in it for me. And it is a teaser, i.e. clickbait. “These” plus the number put additional emphasis on “New”.

In reality, 12 of the 17 hardware products are new merely in an evolutionary sense. “Revolutionary” new for Apple 😊 are the iPhone Fold and the OLED display on the MBP. The remaining three items on the 15+ list — Home Hub, security camera, and doorbell — are actually new product introductions.

Apple to Launch Several Updated, Enhanced, and Introductory Products Later This Year

Exactly. I just think there can be a commitment to a better way. The headline you have proposed is an example of that, and for the record, I would click on that headline!

To really drive the point home, below is a quote from a more recent article. And to think, this was lumped in to the "15+ new products"...

Repair site iFixit today shared a teardown of Apple's new AirPods Max 2 headphones, and as expected, there are few changes. iFixit says the AirPods Max 2 are "basically the same" as the original AirPods Max headphones that came out in 2020.
...
With no updates to the AirPods Max 2 design, the headphones are no more repairable than the prior-generation models. iFixit gave the prior version a repairability score of 6/10.

And to think, this was lumped in to the "15+ new products"... Doesn't feel like it should get equal weight in a headline.

Edit: as eifelbube pointed out, the Max 2 was not included in the 15+. Sorry, MR!

 

[eifelbube]

Exactly. I just think there can be a commitment to a better way. The headline you have proposed is an example of that, and for the record, I would click on that headline!

To really drive the point home, below is a quote from a more recent article. And to think, this was lumped in to the "15+ new products"...


And to think, this was lumped in to the "15+ new products"... Doesn't feel like it should get equal weight in a headline.

I have not changed my mind about your original observation but to MR’s credit, they did not include the Max 2 in that list of 15+ “new” products. 😊

 

[theheadguy]

I have not changed my mind about your original observation but to MR’s credit, they did not include the Max 2 in that list of 15+ “new” products. 😊

I'm glad you pointed this out! My mistake-- my constructive criticism always needs to be fair and accurate, so I'm going to edit my post. Thanks again!