It was widely assumed that the third-generation iPad would be called “iPad 3,” “iPad HD,” or some other name with a qualifier in it. But the nondescript “New iPad” moniker leaves Apple enthusiasts with questions about the future of Cupertino’s naming taxonomy for both the iPad and iPhone.
There is a certain comfort and familiarity to the naming conventions that Apple has used over the years for its iPod, iPhone, and iPad product lines — an innate understanding that an “iPhone 4S” denotes a “refresh,” whereas an “iPhone 5?would indicate an “overhaul.” In the case of prognosticating the name of the third-generation iPad, expected names were “iPad 3? or “iPad HD,” with the former being the most accurate identifier, and the latter a reasonable alternative, boasting of the new Retina display. “iPad 4G” probably would have also sufficed.
But Apple threw us all for a loop, opting for the minimalist “New iPad” instead.
The “New iPad?” Which new iPad? Is this the “New iPad 2?” That would make it an “iPad 2S,” right? Or, given the fact that this is the third-generation iPad, is this a de facto “iPad 3?”\Moreover, will the “New iPad” still be the new iPad 8 months from now? How about 15 months from now, when the 2013 iPad is released? Will that be the “New New iPad?”
The tech community sometimes derides Appledom for stressing over these naming issues, citing it as more proof that consumers’ devotion to the Apple brand is more of a cult-like obsession rather than a healthy passion for cool electronics. But whether or not that is the case, it is Apple’s marketing department that has ginned up its own customers by establishing reasonable naming conventions for its devices — and then wantonly breaking them in disconcerting fashion.
With the “New iPad,” we don’t really know what we have here. Is this a refresh of the iPad 2, or an overhauled design? According to the preponderance of evidence from the mainstream tech media, the New iPad has not impressed enough to warrant calling it an overhaul. Thus, even though the New iPad is the third-generation iPad, will there be an “iPad 3? next year?
According to Apple, we shouldn’t expect much explanation. From the Wall Street Journal: “The company didn’t provide a detailed explanation. Phil Schiller, Apple’s senior vice president of world-wide marketing, simply said that Apple broke from the convention ‘because we don’t want to be predictable.’”
This academic discussion may remind you of similar arguments regarding the iPhone 4S, which is in actuality the fifth-generation iPhone. Many analysts believe that Apple should technically name the 2012 iPhone “iPhone 6,” skipping over the long-awaited “iPhone 5? moniker in order to bring the sixth-generation iPhone’s name in line with its iteration. Whether or not Apple will do that remains to be seen — there is no evidence either way as to whether or not Apple will call 2012's iPhone the “iPhone 5? or “iPhone 6.”
And for all we know, they may call it the “New iPhone.”
One thing is for sure, Apple’s new name for New iPad has once again made it impossible to know for sure what brand name they will stamp on their next device, making it increasingly difficult to divine what Cupertino is up to in their R&D department. Of course, that’s exactly what Apple hopes to do.
There is a certain comfort and familiarity to the naming conventions that Apple has used over the years for its iPod, iPhone, and iPad product lines — an innate understanding that an “iPhone 4S” denotes a “refresh,” whereas an “iPhone 5?would indicate an “overhaul.” In the case of prognosticating the name of the third-generation iPad, expected names were “iPad 3? or “iPad HD,” with the former being the most accurate identifier, and the latter a reasonable alternative, boasting of the new Retina display. “iPad 4G” probably would have also sufficed.
But Apple threw us all for a loop, opting for the minimalist “New iPad” instead.
The “New iPad?” Which new iPad? Is this the “New iPad 2?” That would make it an “iPad 2S,” right? Or, given the fact that this is the third-generation iPad, is this a de facto “iPad 3?”\Moreover, will the “New iPad” still be the new iPad 8 months from now? How about 15 months from now, when the 2013 iPad is released? Will that be the “New New iPad?”
The tech community sometimes derides Appledom for stressing over these naming issues, citing it as more proof that consumers’ devotion to the Apple brand is more of a cult-like obsession rather than a healthy passion for cool electronics. But whether or not that is the case, it is Apple’s marketing department that has ginned up its own customers by establishing reasonable naming conventions for its devices — and then wantonly breaking them in disconcerting fashion.
With the “New iPad,” we don’t really know what we have here. Is this a refresh of the iPad 2, or an overhauled design? According to the preponderance of evidence from the mainstream tech media, the New iPad has not impressed enough to warrant calling it an overhaul. Thus, even though the New iPad is the third-generation iPad, will there be an “iPad 3? next year?
According to Apple, we shouldn’t expect much explanation. From the Wall Street Journal: “The company didn’t provide a detailed explanation. Phil Schiller, Apple’s senior vice president of world-wide marketing, simply said that Apple broke from the convention ‘because we don’t want to be predictable.’”
This academic discussion may remind you of similar arguments regarding the iPhone 4S, which is in actuality the fifth-generation iPhone. Many analysts believe that Apple should technically name the 2012 iPhone “iPhone 6,” skipping over the long-awaited “iPhone 5? moniker in order to bring the sixth-generation iPhone’s name in line with its iteration. Whether or not Apple will do that remains to be seen — there is no evidence either way as to whether or not Apple will call 2012's iPhone the “iPhone 5? or “iPhone 6.”
And for all we know, they may call it the “New iPhone.”
One thing is for sure, Apple’s new name for New iPad has once again made it impossible to know for sure what brand name they will stamp on their next device, making it increasingly difficult to divine what Cupertino is up to in their R&D department. Of course, that’s exactly what Apple hopes to do.
