|
From: | John |
Subject: | [DotGNU]A plea for simplicity.... |
Date: | Mon, 26 Aug 2002 07:18:31 -0400 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020815 |
This simplification is why Microsoft has such uncreative names for their products. They don't invent names for the most part. They want names that are instantly descriptive of what the programs do and though there are notable exceptions; Microsoft does, by and large, stick to a common word naming convention. Their mistake has been that they try to /trademark/ the name, and such trademarks are rather weak, precisely because of the common description aspect.
Perhaps DotGNU is in a different situation? We don't need to worry about a brand identity, because we're not likely to trademark our products, and thus I'd argue that the word most descriptive of the function works best? "DotGNU Balance" would be ideal. Instant communication of purpose without the need for knowledge of Western cultural motifs.
Truthfully though, I don't care. I'm just ranting. Call it "Post Hole Digger" for all it means to us. (Isuzu commercial reference)
John Le'Brecage James Mc Parlane wrote:
Stargazer is an okay name, though I'm certain there are a few pieces of astronomy software by that name. If you're going to go for the obscure diety name approach suggested by Gopal: might I suggest Ma'at - the Egyptian weigher of souls, whose crest was the balance weighing a heart in one arm and a feather in the other? Why not Greek? Well, the Greek demi-diety of the balance, as I recall, is commonly called "Justice" and that's not a particularly interesting name, now'sit?How about Atlas? :) _______________________________________________ Developers mailing list address@hidden http://www.dotgnu.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |