[openbeos-cdt] Re: Names

  • From: Rob Jones <senojbor@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: openbeos-cdt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 17:33:55 +0100 (BST)

Some thoughts on the problem of choosing an OS name.
No real ideas to present, just mulling over the issues
and thinking about what has already been used.
The two most common small computer systems are
Macintosh and Windows. Windows uses the name of a
feature of the interface with which all users will be
familiar but Macintosh has no obvious meaning or
relevance. However, it shortens nicely to Mac and this
has been widely used as a prefix (MacWatzit,
MacDoodah) which has helped with the fanatisism
associated with it (I speak as a Mac user).
Then there was "Next", which I suppose was
"forward-looking", but it did not last long.
Then there have been some using "OS", notably IBMs
OS2, which never caught on and BeOS, which has had a
secure and enthusiastic "niche" usership but not been
Then there has been Amiga and Atari - almost any
Japanese or Chinese word tends to sound good to
English speakers ears, whether it has appropriate
meaning or not.
There is Sun and Solaris which are fine, simple,
positive sounding and a bit "obvious".
Then there are all those UNIX things with names that
are meaningless, difficult to say and not very
inspiring - IRIX, xFree86, etc - and then Linux,
mixing UNIX with that blokes name.
Most of these names have no relevant meaning except
for "Windows".
Most of the obvious useable names have already been
copyrighted, trademarked, used as domain names or are
"associated" in some way with something. Whatever we
decide on there will be a possibility of some plonker
trying to make a legal issue of it.
Finding something that simply has a ring to it might
be best, even if it is "meaningless".


Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts

Other related posts: