Summary of Key Points
Recently, almost all major smartphone manufacturers, including Apple, Huawei, and Xiaomi, have decided to add the “Pro Max” suffix to their next-generation flagship models. This has led to widespread criticism from netizens, who argue that “while we used to complain about Apple’s practice of charging high prices, now the entire industry is simply copying Apple’s tactics.” On the other hand, the AI industry is taking a completely opposite approach, opting for names that are more artistic and mystical, avoiding any simple, unified grading system. These seemingly superficial differences in naming practices actually reflect the different stages of development in the two industries and the best business decisions made by each company, with very practical reasons behind them.
---
Detailed Analysis
1. The “Pro Max” suffix is not Apple’s invention; it has become a universally recognized “high-end code” in the industry
Many people think the “Pro Max” concept originated with Apple, but in fact, HTC released the One Max in 2013, and Meizu had already been using the “Pro” suffix for some time before that. Huawei’s P8 Max also appeared several years before Apple’s. What sets Apple apart is not the invention of this term, but rather its consistent use over the past five to six years, firmly associating the “Pro Max” name with its most expensive and highest-specification phones. Apple has spent billions on marketing to instill in consumers the idea that “Pro Max” equals the best phone: large screen, excellent photography, long battery life, and a high price. Other manufacturers can now benefit from this marketing effort without having to explain the intricacies of their products; simply including the “Pro Max” suffix makes it clear to consumers that they are buying the most expensive model, saving millions in advertising and education costs.
2. The “Pro Max” suffix serves as a “price booster” for manufacturers and can silently increase the overall profit margin of the series
Smartphone manufacturers are facing increasing costs for components such as chips, memory, and sensors. For example, a 12GB+256GB storage module used to cost around 500 yuan but has now risen to 2200 yuan, which is more expensive than even some flagship chips. Manufacturers have three options: reduce their profits and sell at a loss, reduce specifications and risk customer complaints, or raise prices openly. In the past, selling a phone for tens of thousands of yuan would have been criticized as profiteering, but with the “Pro Max” label, consumers are already accustomed to the idea that it represents a high-end product, making such price increases seem reasonable. Moreover, the “Pro Max” suffix acts as a benchmark for pricing; if a standard model was originally planned for 6000 yuan but the Pro Max version is priced at 9999 yuan, consumers may see the 6000 yuan version as a great deal. Even if the Pro Max version doesn’t sell well, it still raises the overall price threshold for the entire series, making the lower-spec models appear more affordable and increasing profits for all models.
3. AI cannot be simply categorized using “Pro/Pro Max” labels because its capabilities are not linear
Many wonder why AI industries don’t adopt this naming convention. The reason is that AI functions are not linear. With smartphones, we expect higher-priced models to be better in every aspect (better screen, better photography, faster performance), so we can use standard, Pro, and Pro Max versions to differentiate them. However, AI works differently. For everyday tasks like organizing tables or sending simple messages, a low-cost, fast model is sufficient, and the experience can be just as good as that of a high-end model with millions of parameters. Only for complex tasks like scientific research or writing detailed reports does a high-end model become necessary. Most AI systems use multiple models for different scenarios, so labeling a model as “Pro Max” could lead to confusion among consumers about the quality of other models. Additionally, such artistic names (like “Astra,” “Haiku,” or “Gemini”) help create a narrative around AI, making it seem more like a futuristic, advanced technology rather than just a tool, which can justify higher prices.
4. The AI industry is still in a competitive stage, and companies are vying for control over naming conventions
The smartphone industry has established a consensus around the “Pro Max” naming convention, but the AI industry is still in a state of flux. No single company (such as OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, or domestic tech giants) has absolute dominance, and everyone wants to set the rules. If all companies used standard names like “standard version, Pro, Pro Max,” consumers would have difficulty distinguishing between products, which would weaken brand recognition. By using unique, artistic names, companies can establish their own narrative about AI and create a perception of their products as future-oriented, advanced technologies. These names also help in charging higher prices, as they suggest a higher level of sophistication.
In summary, there is no such thing as a “marketing department’s aesthetic preference.” All these naming trends are driven by practical considerations: the option that maximizes profits at the lowest cost is what the entire industry will follow.