OPINION : As it emerges that the iPhone ’s naming bodily structure could have been a last - minute change , more clarity would be helpful .
When it comes to identifying a Cartesian product , the name can be just as important as its look for staying in a customer ’s mind ’s center . Of all manufacturers , Apple should acknowledge this best ; after all , simple name such as iPhone , iPad , Mac and more may have seemed a little goofy at the clock time but have since get along to define iconic product ranges for decades , and conjure immediate recognition .
That ’s why I ’m specially mystify by some of the stigma ’s recent travails with name its products .
Just this week , we find out that behind the scenes the newiPhone 14 Plushadpreviously been named the iPhone 14 Max , at least harmonise to documents published on Apple ’s website . The fact that those file names had not been changed indicates it may well have been a decision that was take lately in the day .
But the real question is why was that determination taken at all ? The Pro line of iPhones has a veritable and a Max size , which has been established for a few genesis , with the iPhone 8 being the last to have the Plus suffix ; why not simply adopt the same naming organisation for non - Pro variants to add some consistency when these names connote the same approximation ( i.e. , a orotund screen ) ?
reintroduce the ‘ positive ’ variant after this meter simply seems to muddy the amnionic fluid ; and what ’s more , it may not be immediately clean to an uninformed customer whether an iPhone 14 Plus would be better or sorry than aniPhone 14 Pro .
On top of that , things are further complicated by the names chosen for Apple ’s own silicon chip , the M1 . The substructure model has been follow by the Pro , then the Max , and then the Ultra , each one representing a carrying out climb whereas in the iPhone line , Max simply refer to size rather than processing power . Again , it ’s intemperate to intuitively approximate which chip among these would be the undecomposed ; after all , does n’t Max imply that something is running atmaximum capabilities , with no further melioration possible ? Rumours of anupcoming iPhone Ultracould only intensify this confusion .
I realize there are far more press problem than the names of smartphones or processors , and perhaps the fact that I am finding fault with this quibble of expressive style simply goes to show that the substance – you have a go at it , the important mo – is actually very unattackable . However , for a brand with a gallant history of getting its client - facing Cartesian product to be ingeniously simple and intuitive , I ’m surprised that there is not a clearer naming scheme either at the front of shop or , seemingly , even behind the scenes . The tech giant require to cautiously plan its monikers if we ’re to know our Apples from our orange .
