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

iPod touch Why isn't it just called an iTouch?

Status
Not open for further replies.
danpass

danpass

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Jun 27, 2009
2,790
633
Glory
I tried a google search but the only thing that pops up is ipod touch.

I figure there must be some kind of patent/trademark issue out there.


Because its clearly nothing like THE ipod ;)
 
Because "iTouch" is an idiotic name that doesn't tell what the product is.

iPod touch tells you that it is an iPod and you can touch it.
iPod classic tells you it's the old style iPod.
iPod nano tells you it's small.
iPod shuffle tells you it plays randomly.

And this is the iTouch.
 
My guess is one day, there will only be the iPod touch and the "touch" will drop off and it will once again just be called iPod.
 
Because Steve Jobs said... you call it the iTouch and I'll call you fired...

iPod Touch is a much more descriptive name... an iPod with a touch screen.
 
It is called itouch by a lot people and I think the only reason is because it is part of the ipod family. Looking at their website shows that they like things in groups and in order so calling it an ipod allows them to do that. Plus it plays music so it can be called an ipod.
 
rjgonzales said:
My guess is one day, there will only be the iPod touch and the "touch" will drop off and it will once again just be called iPod.
Click to expand...

i doubt that will ever happen.
at least i hope it never does.
i have an iphone but i never use it as an ipod. not because of the capacity or anything. something about the touch screen and how it seems a lot more fragile. (entire screen, thinness etc) i wouldnt use an ipod touch either for music.
I need my iPod Classic.
 
I figure there must be some kind of patent/trademark issue out there.
Click to expand...

Err... why call it something completely new, when you can rely on the spread and popularity of the already prolific iPod brand?

If you call it something new, you have to build the brand from scratch. Relate it to the iPod though, and the expectations and understanding of it (as well as marketing/popularizing the brand) are already done.
 
Because, if you hadn't already worked it out for yourself, the name iTouch would just give rise to 1001 smutty jokes. This is something that the Apple marketdroids have to consider when choosing a name.
 
weckart said:
Because, if you hadn't already worked it out for yourself, the name iTouch would just give rise to 1001 smutty jokes. This is something that the Apple marketdroids have to consider when choosing a name.
Click to expand...

I laughed so hard at this:D But that *is* a good reason.
 
danpass said:
I figured it was an infringement situation.



and 'ipod' didn't mean anything until the ad campaigns started :D
Click to expand...

They didn't call it an iPod over iTouch because of infringement issues. It's an iPod, simple as that. They wouldn't want to add another product line just for the iPhone sans phone.


Anyway, Skil, grow up. Quit calling it "idiotic" it's just a word, no need to get all up in arms.
 
As the others have said, the iPod Touch is indeed part of the iPod family, but then so is the iPhone (Steve Jobs originally called it an iPod with phone abilities). That would mean the iPhone should really be called "iPod Phone". :)

Or, looking at it from the other side, the iPod Touch is really an iPhone with no phone abilities, so that device should be called an "iPhone 0G" or maybe "iPhone noPhone". ;)
 
Because it's a ridiculous name that says (to me) that it's a touchscreen. It should highlight that it's an iPod.

Also there's a software suite called iTouch that IIRC predates the iPod. Certainly the iPod Touch and iPhone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back