Do technology related classifications change over time?

I was thinking in my head about how quickly I was being able to download some episodes from the TWiT network at about 5.5MB/s. I know, to some, that's slow, and to others, that's unimaginably fast. I used to be part of the less than 1MB/s group, so my current speeds are step up, and advertised as "superfast" - despite my long history on significantly slower internet connections, I don't think that's "superfast". Then it struck me - what we classify as superfast today will be seen as slow in five years time, when "superfast" will have a new level (unless we keep superfast to mean whatever speed it currently is and start classifying even faster speeds as lightning fast or ultra superfast...). I know this isn't a groundbreaking or new realization, but it got me thinking.

Back in the days of CRT TVs and even a bit later, was the image we got called Standard Definition? I don't recall, but I don't quite see why it would be. Yes, Standard as in it's what the vast majority of people have, but then why hasn't HD been re-classified as Standard Definition and 480p dropped to 'low definition'. The more I think about that example the more stupid a point I think I'm trying to make, but let me leave you with this thought - 1080p is marketed as "Full HD" (as opposed to 720p, which is HD, but the image doesn't contain as many pixels). Literally, High Definition is... well, high quality. But, 2K, and even 4K, televisions and monitors are becoming more and more popular, and will soon enough become standard. "Full HD" isn't going to be so 'full' anymore, so what will happen to the term, will it be dropped, or brought forwards to a higher resolution?

Really, I guess my question is, why do we tend to classify technology with adjectives now? From names as expirable as "the new iPad" to ... let me stop right there. I really do wonder what Apple were thinking of calling the iPad a few generations ago "the new  iPad". Had the one before not been new when it was announced? And was it going to be the last iPad ever? What would the iPad to follow be - "the next iPad"? (or NeXT... ok, moving on...). Apple is renowned for having products in the pipeline years and years before the public sees them, yet they chose such a ridiculous name. Of course, that hasn't stopped. After a brief return to sensibly numbering things (although Google's Nexus numbering demonstrates how a company can be shortsighted with even the most simplistic naming conventions), they've now gone back to names - Air? That name works fine with the MacBook Air, because the MacBook Airs are distinguished from generation to generation by time of release such as "mid 2013", not MacBook Air 7. Not so much with the iPad - what's to follow, iPad Air 2, or iPad Helium? How does iPad Neon sound to you? Could be a pretty good name for if they ever expanded the color options beyond black/gray and silver/white.

Finally, it occurs to me that there's probably another reason why I never started a personal blog before - most things return to Apple. That's probably why I keep my Apple new blog going, just so I can air my opinions on something I know a lot about. Really, the amount I know off the top of my head about Apple concerns me, as there are far more important things that I can't remember at all. At which point a psychologist says "ah, but you remember what's important to you" - not so much. Yes, I am actively interested in Apple and the products they produce, but back at school I was fascinated by modern history, yet I certainly couldn't remember any of it in a remotely similar level of detail.