Couldn't agree more, it is confusing to the consumer. They should be given model and year designations like how cars had them in the 1980's. There was cachet t

Couldn't agree more, it is confusing to the consumer. They should be given model and year designations like how cars had them in the 1980's. There was cachet to having a 'GL' ford instead of a base 'L' model and you didn't have to know the engine size. The model year and the badge enabled you to know what you needed to know. Nobody 'needed' anything better than the 'L' model to go from A to B but you had to have the 'GL' or better and didn't have to know what 'GL' stood for, all you knew was it was better. These naming schemes changed with the times, probably because the likes of Citroen started complicating it with things like 'GLDTI16' that were getting silly. Some sports variants just had a spoiler and speed stripes tacked on to get an extra 'S' on the badge. They still had the stock lame engine and brakes. The 'GTi' version had real performance benefits. By this way of thinking, Apple could do a 'sports' iPad that just comes in a rugged case. People would fall for that. Same with the 'GTi' moniker, people would pay for a red line around the bezel, the black anodised body and a top yield CPU that was notionally faster. The 'eco' model could be the lame version without the RAM and pixel density and maybe a plastic case, only saving grace being battery life. 'pro' could be the 'air' variant, the base model merely 'deluxe'. 'Max' could be the big screen variant of all the above. I think customers could relate to the auto-analogy names and spend accordingly. Henry Ford only ever wanted the Model T, no GM style built in obsolescence and variations beyond necessary with fancy names. He has probably been rolling in his grave for decades now.