Note how the mini sub-brand was retired from the iPod line to be used exclusively in the Mac product line. That may not be specifically necessary or desirable but it is an interesting coincidence. (The Pro sub-brand is shared between different Mac lines)
However, when we look at the iPhone and the iPad, the nomenclature has been distinctly different. Both products have been using generational naming conventions. This implies no sub-branding as the iPhone and iPad are the only identifiers of brand and hence the only meaning being imparted to the buyer. You either get an iPhone or and old iPhone.
That changed with the iPad however. The third generation iPad became just iPad. This was deliberate (why would they want to confuse buyers?) I think there is some logic to this.
Brilliantly thought out piece on why the iPhone may not be called “the new iPhone” just like how the new iPad.
The logic sits very nicely with the rumoured iPad mini. I have been skeptical about entertaining the idea, but it seems more and more obvious that Apple would release such a product. Along with the naming nomenclature, the following seems to drive the idea at home:
3) Eddy Cue’s internal mail to Tim Cook, Phil Schiller, and Scott Forstall.
4) Jim Dalrymple corroborated the two event theory.
The iPad Mini seems to stick out of the rumour mill and a Dalrymple “yep” almost confirms it.
On the iPhone 5 — which comes on September 12, the rumour mill’s most plausible predictions are:
Along with the iPhone, new iPods are expected too.
It’s going to be an exciting fall.