[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: A couple of more issues...

What we could do is reference the machine by model and the year it was born.
Apple is less likely to release two machines of the same kind in the same
year (As we could witness during the last MW...)

We could also use the Apple tag number for the machine (SKU MM/xxxx)
although it's not really easy to remember.

For outside developers what would make the most sense would be to designate
the machine the same way as they are described internally during the
development phase (iBook 2001 = P29) or by their codename (iBook 2001 =

I like the codename designation, and I believe there are a few mac sites
with a chart showing equivalence between models and codenames.

But from what I read on this list previously, some people seem to favor the
marketing designation of the machine, which as you pointed in your email,
can get really confusing.

There were a time when Apple used numbers for its models which made it
really simple to frame a model, that was when they had more than 20
platforms in their catalog, Performa anyone? SJ's return brought many


on 9/4/01 4:06 PM, Ethan Benson at erbenson@alaska.net wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 05:02:17PM +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
>> I can understand that saying "the new iBook" doesn't help very much
>> especially when a new one comes along. The Apple Tech Info Library uses
>> "iBook Dual-USB (2001)" as the full name. And saying "icebook" doesn't
>> help much, it's just like when somebody says they have a graphite g4, a
>> indigo imac or a tangerine ibook: it's useless (at least after a second
>> version with the same look pops up).
> blame apple's marketing deptartment for naming all the computers
> indistincivly.
> there are now 3 variations of `PowerMac G4' one is a BlueG3 minus
> firmware trojan, plus gray case, and plus G4 processor, the other is
> the AGP model, and now we have another AGP model that has the nickname
> quicksilver....  
> imagine the nightmare it must be to be an Apple tech support agent,
> typical MacOS users are unlikly to know about such names as `iBook
> Dual-USB' much less that they HAVE the Dual-USB version.
> say what you will about the old numbering system at least you know
> what the differences are between a 7200 and a 8500. of course apple
> could have simply used a version number system
> iBook Version 1
> iBook Version 2
> PowerMac G4 Version 1
> PowerMac G4 Version 2
> PowerMac G4 Version 3
> but that would blow apples current `easy to use' naming system
> wouldn't it? </sarcasm>
> -- 
> Ethan Benson
> http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/

Reply to: