What a difference a few billion eyeballs can make.
While some new products lead a pauper’s life when it comes to advertising and PR, Apple’s new tablet will be born into obscene riches. It will become a TV star, a global headline, grace the cover of hundreds of magazines and be analyzed in thousands of blogs. Whatever name Apple gives it — that word will echo across the land.
Naming experts will tell you that even silly names are accepted quickly, as soon as they become familiar. (See Verizon, Virgin and Google.) Clearly the tablet’s name will become familiar with breathtaking speed.
This gives Apple license to be incredibly brave. They can make the name as creative as the product itself. But how brave will they be? If you try to go by Apple history, it will only confuse you. Here, you’ll find two totally opposite examples: iPod and iPhone.
iPod is a classic name for the ages. No one could have predicted it, since it said nothing about the product other than vaguely describe its form factor. It had as little to do with music as the name Macintosh did with computers. But by creating such a magnificent user experience, Apple would soon make the name iPod synonymous with music — and one of the most powerful brand names on earth.
iPhone took a completely different path. The product was hotly anticipated for months, and the prognosticators had already dubbed it the iPhone. The familiar “i” made it an Apple product, and the device would be … a phone. Not Apple’s most imaginative moment.
With iPhone, the category named the product. With iPod, the product named the category.
My hope is that the tablet’s naming will be more in the creative tradition of iPod and less in the obvious tradition of iPhone. Granted, slate describes the shape of the product just as pod did before. The difference here is that the industry is already overflowing with tablets and slates. It was a feisty and original Apple that shook up the music business with the word iPod. It would be great to see that same Apple show up on Wednesday.
The only real argument for iSlate is that it eliminates the need to educate customers. But with all the world’s attention already so intensely focused, I don’t see the need to educate — only the need to amaze.
We’ll soon see which side of the brain won the debate.

