Corebook?

I've been following some of Paul Thurrott's blogs recently. Paul is considered by many mac faithful to be akin to the devil, but really he has some intelligent things to say on his various blogs. His reviews of Vista are excellent and good reading for all who are interested in where the OS's are going.

Sure he's a Windows fan, but he's not afraid to try things outside his MS-based world and to make insightful observations. That's a hard thing to do, really. Recently he bought his wife a Mac for instance, and has blogged pretty positively on that. He's also a big iPod supporter. Apple fans would do well to read Paul's reports!

But I'd like to take issue with a little post made a few days ago suggesting that new Macs might be called CoreBooks and CoreMacs. I think the logic is something like this - Intel now calls their new chips Core Solo and Core Duo. Previously Apple used PowerPC's. So it's easy to make that leap, right? Not so fast Paul. PowerBooks were called PowerBooks when they were first released in around 1991, and used Motorola 68030 (?) chips. The Power in PowerBook has nothing to do with PowerPC - perhaps its the other way even! The PowerBook and PowerMac brand are very important and I really doubt they'll be disposed of in the switch.

And, I also doubt if the first PowerMacs will use the Core Duo branding anyhow. They should be based on next generation 64-bit Intel chips which may carry a different name.

So, I don't expect we'll get CoreBooks to replace PowerBooks. However, I guess it's not inconceivable we could get a DuoBook as a new introduction somewhere in the range?