Naming conventions
Posted by: Martin Payne on 08 December 2002
A number of the products in the new range have retained the names they had in the old range (e.g. HiCap, SuperCap, 250).
Whilst it is good that honesty has prevailed, it does make it quite laborious to write comparisons of the new stuff e.g.:-
202/(new) HiCap/(new) 250
Even if they wanted to, it would be pretty confusing to have both 252 & 250-2 in the range.
I would like to propose a shorthand, purely for discussion purposes.
Since Naim seem to have got over the silly idea of calling the new stuff 'Classic' I guess we can now use that label for the old stuff. The only common identifier that I've seen for the new-look stuff is that it is in the 'Tryptych' cases, even though that's slightly misleading for the HiCap and a few others.
Perhaps we could use a T or C prefix to differentiate the model ranges where necessary, e.g.:-
102/cHi/c250
202/tHi/t250
What do you think?
cheers, Martin
Whilst it is good that honesty has prevailed, it does make it quite laborious to write comparisons of the new stuff e.g.:-
202/(new) HiCap/(new) 250
Even if they wanted to, it would be pretty confusing to have both 252 & 250-2 in the range.
I would like to propose a shorthand, purely for discussion purposes.
Since Naim seem to have got over the silly idea of calling the new stuff 'Classic' I guess we can now use that label for the old stuff. The only common identifier that I've seen for the new-look stuff is that it is in the 'Tryptych' cases, even though that's slightly misleading for the HiCap and a few others.
Perhaps we could use a T or C prefix to differentiate the model ranges where necessary, e.g.:-
102/cHi/c250
202/tHi/t250
What do you think?
cheers, Martin