The iPad, as Apple CEO Steve Jobs explained, is a personal computing device that fills a void between laptops and smart phones. Jobs says the device excels at everyday computing tasks like browsing the internet, reading email and watching movies.

A quick look at the Apple Tablet:

History of Apple’s i

Prior to using the i prefix, Apple had product names like Power Macintosh 7300, PowerBook 4300 and Workgroup Server 9650. Apple first used the prefix on the first iMac, introduced in August of 1998. The original iMacs were very successful, selling 800,000 within five months.

The name iMac was based on the ideas of personal computing and the internet. “iMac comes from the marriage of the excitement of the internet with the simplicity of Macintosh,” Jobs declared at its introduction. “We are targeting this for the number-one use that consumers tell us they want a computer for, which is: to get on the internet.”

The following descriptors, displayed during the press event, better explain Apple’s choice of name:

• internet
• individual
• instruct
• inform
• inspire

Apple’s adopted the prefix in other product names. The iBook, a laptop computer, was released in 1999, followed by the iPod in 2001. Apple software started to follow suite: iTunes; iCal and iChat, and; the iLife and iWork packages. In 2007, Apple released the iPhone.

Then & now

Apple rethought computing with the iMac: it was the first computer to look beautiful. The iPod and iPhone were equally revolutionary. The tablet has the potential to be an innovative, forward-looking technology. But, the name doesn’t live up to it.

The initial concepts behind the i- prefix — while very philosophical — are too abstract and no longer apply. The idea of the ‘individual’ has transitioned. Individual is clinical, singular, isolated and divided; it’s reserved for individually wrapped and individually packaged, or individual rights. The computer as an instructing, informing and inspiring tool is an antiquated way of looking at things.

Personal is personable and custom, the current direction in technology. Computers are now more personal, and the internet has aided in this. Content is based on personal preference. The web is no longer new, as it was twelve years ago: it is the ubiquitous standard.

iPod + iPhone ≠ iPad

When interviewed on the Apple tablet, Steve Jobs explained, “Plus the fonts look great together … iPod, iPhone, iPad.” Firstly, those aren’t fonts: those are names. Secondly, this is poor justification because the relationship between the portable music player and tablet is fanciful. While the Apple tablet can play music, these products serve entirely different purposes.

There is something to be said for unity in product lines. However, the prefix has been around long enough that software and hardware creators, in an attempt to capitalize on Apple’s success, have adopted it. Many of these spin-off products aren’t up to Apple standards. This cheapens the brand.

A marketing team probably spent months searching for an appropriate word to append to the letter ‘i.’ This seems like a terrible waste because the whole concept has lost its originality. Apple’s motto is ‘Think Different,’ for goodness’ sake! The Apple tablet embodies this: the name iPad does not. An original product deserves an original name.

This entry is an opinion piece and may not represent the beliefs of other Inksie staff members. If you have any insight, please leave a comment.

Brave Delta Desk by Brave Space

I have recently been looking for a table. I’m not actually planning on buying one, but sometimes I like to think, Hey, this will look great in our next apartment! Even though I probably won’t ever be able to throw down $1,500 for a designer table, I still love them. To me they are the epitome of minimalist design.

This table escapade reminded me of some research I recently did on the Castiglioni brothers – two Italian, modernist industrial designers. Thier influential industrial and furniture design impacted the formation of print and graphic work today. To be honest, I never really took the time to learn the real origins of these forms of design. I’ve always been very interested in typography and letterpress but that’s about as far as my historical studies delved. To say that these brothers changed my perspective would be an understatement.

A few of their works that I loved, and some you may recognize:

RR126 Record Player/Radio

If only I could get my hands on this record player. The RR126 (not sure why they named it that, but for some reason it fits) is a playful yet functional piece. I imagine it in Invisible Creatures’s or Grain Edit’s office. The speakers detach and can be placed wherever you would like; it can be configured into one large box, or the speakers can sit on the ground. You can tell that they had fun with this one – it looks like the face of a happy little creature you might find roaming in the woods.

Record Wristwatch by Alessi

The Castiglionis gave their objects minimal names. This wristwatch is called Record, exactly what it is. The numbers are sharply rendered (set in Berthold Bodoni) and constrasted against the white background. Pier Giacomo Castiglioni died in 1968, so Record was designed only by Achille Castiglioni. This watch is so function over form it’s not even funny. The only decoration this watch could possibly have is the ridges on the metal ring that wraps the exterior of the watch. It’s a beautifully-designed watch and is as timeless as any object could ever be.

Arco Lamp by FLOS

The Arco lamp is  the most famous object designed by the Castiglioni duo. I always tell my wife that I’m going to buy this lamp, and she rolls her eyes at me every time. The lamp is absolutely massive, with a span of 8 feet. But, come on; this lamp is awesome. That’s why its used in a bunch of old James Bond movies. The base of the lamp is a giant marble slab. There is a little hole in the base, so one could stick a broom pole through it to transport the lamp. This is another one of the Castiglioni’s extremely functional objects. They realized that many rooms had electrical sockets for lights in the center of a ceiling, but many people didn’t want to place their dining room table right in the middle of a room. This mega-lamp solves this problem by reaching pretty much anywhere and provide suitable lighting. It’s really nice to see that FLOS hasn’t modified the lamp at all. It’s the exact same object as the one that was released in 1962.

The thing that astounded me the most about the Castiglioni designs is how forward-thinking they are. These all look like they could have come out of this last decade but they were all from the 60s and 70s. It’s people like this – the ones that really think outside of the box – that are able to produce truly remarkable objects. Regardless of what people are currently producing, we need designers that can design for the future.