The iPhone. We all love it and it hasn’t even been released yet. Doesn’t it seem like years ago when we were all obsessed over whether Apple could even use the name, “iPhone”? Cisco and Apple have since reached an agreement over the name but one thing still bothers me. I am convinced Apple made a huge marketing and branding error in naming this new device the iPhone. I contend, rather, that the smart thing for Apple would have been to name it the iPod Mobile. Here’s why:

Go with the hot hand
The term “iPod” has commanding penetration in the popular culture and the lexicon of everything “hip” in this world. Sure, there are a few of anti-iPod flag wavers but in the end, you won’t lose points in popularity if you sport an iPod.

Apple garnishes so much attention with every new release of the iPod that the same hype and hysteria would have been generated had Steve Jobs announced the iPod Mobile in January.

The term “phone” is too limiting
One of the major issues I have with the name “iPhone” is that the term “phone” is way too limiting for the potential of the device. Apple was smart when they name the iPod. They easily could have named it “iMusic” but instead, stuck with a more ambiguous title. iPod did not necessarily mean music. It meant portable media. This allowed great flexibility when evolving the iPod to pictures, podcasts, and then to video. It would have equally easy to then take it one step further to phone capabilities.

You see how something as simple as naming software, “iTunes” could create some disconnect of services. After all, iTunes plays more than just “tunes” now and the iTunes Store sells more than just songs.

Consumer confidence
Although silly when you really think about it, consumer confidence in Apple “getting it right” as it pertains to the phone would have been greater had it been called iPod Mobile.

Adding an entirely new product name opens up Apple to a whole level of scrutiny. Simply saying, it is the same ol iPod video now with phone capabilities would have changed the entire focus of this product launch away from the overall mobile phone market and more safely in the iPod/Apple circle.

Convergence is inevitable
It’s inevitable that as the iPod evolves it will eventually converge with the capabilities of the iPhone. All rumors point to the new iPod being widescreen, and with full touchscreen. By naming the iPhone it presents a whole slew of challenges down the road when the iPhone is basically the same thing as the iPod. For instance, eventually the iPhone will pack more memory in it’s tiny frame basically voiding out all benefit the iPod Video currently has on the iPhone. What then? Disconitnue the iPod? Rename the iPhone? 

Is it really a phone?
I’m not liking the recent naming conventions of Apple’s products. Up until a couple of years ago, you could always count on Apple to approach the naming of their products with a level of creativity. The ipod was a great example of that. No one knew what an ipod was but they liked it and they knew what it did. Apple owned that name and they owned the feeling that went with it. They could have called the iSight an iCam but they decided to get a little creative. Same with the Airport, the Newton, and the eMate. But lately, they have taken the easy way out, probably assuming, as they venture into consumer devices, that the general public can’t handle the abstract naming.

Take Apple TV for example. Is it even a TV? Nope. Poor choice of name. The iPhone walks this dangerous line too. Is a Blackberry a phone? It certainly makes calls. But it’s a Blackberry not a phone.

By adding onto the already dominating lineup of iPods, Apple would not have missed out on the exciting announcements of visual voicemail, multi-touch, and OSX Mobile. They would have just given the iPhone the greatest chance for success.