“A generic PC is often known as a Wintel box. So, is a generic Mac running Intel a Mactel? Of course that is a trick question. Apple doesn’t license out its OS, so the folks in Cupertino would rightfully say there is no such thing as a generic Mac. Nor, apparently, does the company want the term Mactel to become generic. The same day that Steve Jobs announced Apple’s plans to adopt Intel chips, the company filed a trademark application for the term Mactel,” Ina Fried blogs for CNET’s Apple Blog.
Fried also reports on other names Apple has filed trademark applications for, including: “Jam Box” (the oft-rumored “Asteroid” audio breakout box), “VoiceOver” (which already exists in Mac OS X Tiger; look in Applications/Utilities), and “iPod Socks” (we still can’t believe people buy these things, or do they?).
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: If they’re going to do it that way, “Macintel” works better because it contains the overlap of the “in” in Mac-in-tosh, and the “in” in In-tel. That’s how “Wintel” works. “Mactel,” with the first three letters from one and the last three letters from another just slammed together, with no overlap, fails conceptually. It isn’t about matching the “Wintel” moniker’s six letters. Someone just tell Jobs that “Mactel” fails conceptually; that’ll kill it off quickly.
Just like when Apple blew it by originally naming the iPod photo, the “iPod Photo” with a capital “P” in “Photo,” and had to change the name’s capitalization to match the naming convention already held by the “iPod mini,” the Apple naming people aren’t thinking things through again.
We’ve been using “Intel-based Mac,” lately, after doing the “Macintel” thing early on. We stopped because it made us (and some MDN readers) queasy; it reminded us of “Wintel” too much. Go trademark “Macintel,” too, Apple, and then shelve them both forever.
I think its a pretty stupid name.
Maybe they’re locking down the names so no one will use them…as in no one. They are pretty stupid names. We never called them MotoMacs or I-B-Macs, so why should we care that there is an Intel chip inside. I say no “Intel Inside” labels, no additional names. It’s a Mac. The OS proves it; ’nuff said.
Yea, for us Aussies, who remembers cheap, trashy products from K-Tel??? (apologies for anyone who works there, or loves their products)
Nope, Mactel sounds crapola, and whilst Macintel sounds better, they should work much harder and be able to come up with something much better. Perhaps name it after the chip they’ll use as they did with PowerMacs.
They could also hold a competition.
Huh, MW was “try”. Yea, they’d better.
Why don’t they just call them Macs?
Well the Apple pro computer line are actually PowerMacs, IntelMacs would sound even worse, Maybe they are trying to differenciate between the lines of Intel based and PowerPC based systems, just a thought. Though what would you call a PowerBook?
Um:
Wintel (six letters)
Mactel (six letters)
Makes sense to me. Doesn’t really fail conceptually, since it’s obviously a play on Wintel more than a combination of Mac and Intel.
Magic Word: order (what I’ll do when these Mactel/Macintel/Intel-based Macs come out)
“Though what would you call a PowerBook?”
A PowerBook. The moniker ‘PowerBook’ predates the PowerPC.
It would still be good to be able to distinguish between a Mac from before Intel and a Mac with Intel inside, so just ‘Mac’ doesn’t cut it IMO.
Macintel works for me I have to say, but then again, I’m not a Wintel-hater
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Maybe we can distinguish between Old Skool Macs, Macs and Nu-Macs?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Between Mactel and Macintel I would choose Macintel too but still don’t like it. I have been calling them Intel Macs. Since they probably will be able to run all three prodominent systems (OS X, Linux, and Windows) “Almighty Mac” seems to make the most sense – and I am only half joking.
Although PowerMacintosh originally meant a Macintosh with a PowerPC processor, I think PowerMac could still be used for Intel-based Macs. Now “Power” designates the Pro line and “i” designates the consumer line. After all, the original meaning of “SuperDrive” was a 1.44MB floppy drive, not a CD-R/W & DVD-R optical drive.
MDN Magic Word: Window, as in this is Apple’s window of opportunity to break into the corporate world.
maybe its for telephony software
haha..great one kelly…..
right on.
Remember, the “POWER” moniker was used by apple BEFORE they switched to the powerPC chip. I’m thinking about the powerbook 100 and 500 lines which used the 68k chips. I see no reason for apple to suddenly change the name of their products.
“Macintel” won’t fly either — ‘cuz the brand is no longer called “Macintosh,” it’s just “Mac.”
Somebody last week suggested “iNtel” – that’s cute. But to mirror PowerMac, maybe inMac? They could cross-promote with Verizon. (Are you inMac?)
–Rob
It would be stupid to change the product branding. It doesn’t benefit Apple to stop using PowerMac/PowerBook, iMac/iBook, unless they have an entirely new branding scheme that works as well. But just changing those names because of the chip inside would be a big mistake.
They probably just don’t want anyone else using the name. I’m with MDN on this one, trademark and shelve!
MDN magic word: self, damn, should have been shelf
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Come on Apple…Please do not destroy the 20 year history of calling a Mac a Mac.
Macintel or Mactel does nothing but degrade the brand name. A Mac should be called a Mac regardless of the processor it uses.
In the past we have never used the terms “Macmoto” or “Macppc” they have always been referred to as simply Macs.
Why not just start using the term G6? The Generation fours (G4) were the Motorola Macs, the generation fives (G5) were the IBM Macs, so it only seems logical the generation six (G6) should be the Intel Macs.
I thought we all agreed it was INTELITOSH…capturing the more intelligent, savvy, forward looking nature of Macintosh users?
MacIntel doesn’t work because its all of Intel.
Mactel is sharing nicely.
But plain Mac is best,. So Apple, just keep it.
Jamie Kelly is the only smart one in the thread.
It will never be called a mactel or macintel or any reference to the name Intel. The number one brand in PC’s didn’t get their by promoting other companies. Come on guys think this crap through. Remember the macarola and the macIBM?
I thought of “Macx86”, but I guess I wasn’t the first to think of it: http://Macx86.com
………..the Intel-a-Mac
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
The “Win” part of Wintel is the OS. The “tel” part of Wintel is the CPU maker.
So to be a direct analogy the new Mac GENERIC (Apple will not rebrand the Intel based machines except for the model type) term would have to be OSXtel
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
I predict Apple will call the new machines something based around a new chip name as in Mac Z3 or some such thing.
How about MacDell or Compmac? MicroMac?
I am decidedly concerned that you guys at the less than nimbly monikered ‘Mac Daily News’ should consider that ‘Mactel’ sounds inherently incongrous. Would you like to tell that to the pre-eminent if rather crusty old folky musician Ralph McTell please.
This is actually further proof that Jobs is suffering from the onset of
dementia–How could he fail to consider mac -in-tel? Its definitely
the way to go. How about a Macshiba QuosimoMac? Its time for Jobs
to stop crying about chips and start innoveting products–Half of
2005 is gone—the year of the HD—half of the year of the HD–where are the new displays —I know some is going to tell me that Apple never introduces Displays in a four letter month. Here is my innovation–Apple should buy Transit and use it on the new MacWhiteFlag computers BUT
Apple should also offer it as a factory installed upgrade to any Macly Fool who has already bought a G5 Mac to insure that G5’s will be supported for years to come. I want a GPS IPOD and a Star Chat IPOD–where is the star chart for my geographic location widget? I happen to like Stars. Apple should get Kevin McCarthy to do a POD ad–isnt there a channeling widget?
How about: BI and AI bi or ai
before intel – after intel
before intel – apple intel
its AI
“Macintel” won’t fly either — ‘cuz the brand is no longer called “Macintosh,” it’s just “Mac.”
We’re not talking Macin + Intel here.
[Just]Mac + [Just]Intel = MacIntel…
gardigargargargar
MW: I “like” it.
Apple have been anticipating this “switch” for years and have been intimidating IBM and Moto by dropping hints. Where do you think the iMac and iBook idea came from. The i is for intel. Of course now they will reinforce the concept by calling their products iiPods, iiBooks, etc. Pretty strong concept don’t you think? Common wisdom states that two i’s are better than one. And for those who aren’t completely sold on the iidea the new Macs will be referred to as the Aye yi yiMacs.
Its just gotta be Mac. Any addition or change gives too much credit to someone else. We never loved our Macs because of the chip inside, we loved them for the OS and the Apple connection, not the third party contribution no matter how integral. So, let it be a Mac for now and all time. If there has to be some other techinical designation then how about Mac/p, Mac/i, Mac/m. Just don’t call it those in public.
mactel… macmoto… macppc… e.a. al sound wrong.
in the motorola days they could have could it:
macorola
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
sounds at least tasty………
sorry for the typos… 🙁
al = all
could have could it = could have called it
ProMac? ProBook?
aMac? aBook?
Yeah, all too sucky.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”LOL” style=”border:0;” />
I’ve got no ‘answer’.
Jobs won’t go for Macintel, because that lets Intel have their whole name in it. That’s not allowed.
http://www.needgod.com
Just call ’em “Macs”.
PERIOD.
I agree with the other traditionists. Its a Macintosh, Mac for short, and to change the name even disables the reference to a type of Apple (or had you all forgotten the mcintosh apples for which the machinces were named).
MW class – Changing the name to reflect the chipmaker shows no class, and only further antagonizes those who still have trouble accepting Intel.
Great MDN take, as usual
Could not agree more with Grrilla.
I like the name ‘Wipple’. OK maybe it’s just me.
But seriously, if it’s a Mac running windows it’s still a Mac. Just like a Dell running windows is still a Dell. We seem to be confusing the name of the machine with the operating system installed on it. Mactel? It’s Intel inside a Mac. But don’t put those stickers on it or i’ll be tearing it off.
I don’t call my iBook a Sony just because it has a Sony CD/DVD player in it.
Prophet,
Thanks for that link. I’ve learned that not only am I going to hell, but any attempt to turn to God now is simply my selfish attempt to escape my fear of hell. How very uplifting.
This site is for MAC ZEALOTS! Not GOD ZEALOTS!
what if the future apple (tele)phone will be called mac-tel?
Mactel: a handtop ?
Death to Microsoft, Death to the Pocket PC, Death to Palm.