“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.