Re: Application names in menus

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

snickell stanford edu writes: 
> Having both the suite name AND a not-fully-functional name is excessive
> over-glorification of the software. Its not really helping the user, its
> helping the programmers/marketers/whoever is pushing these sorts of
> names feel better. Personally, I would recommend having "OpenOffice Word
> Processor", "OpenOffice Presentation" (or maybe "OpenOffice
> Presenter"?), "OpenOffice Spreadsheet", etc. The OpenOffice branding is
> much stronger than the branding of the individual components (i.e. than
> the "Impress" or "Writer" branding), and is what user's will probably
> actually be using to differentiate it from other "Word processors". But
> of course, these sorts of things are not within my perogative (they are,
> however, in RedHat's control). So IMO, usually the problem when "Name
> GenericName" becomes a real quirky mouthful is that the people producing
> the software are full of beans and have chosen an excessive name.

If you want to make it worse, it turns out that I can't actually use
"OpenOffice Writer" or "OpenOffice Word Processor" because of some
trademark issue (see FAQ on openoffice.org), it has to say 
"OpenOffice.org Word Processor" *ugh*

The most obnoxious menu issue is what to do with all the _other_ apps
that are duplicates (we have default web browser, then the other 6;
where do those 6 go). Yeah I know the non-crack answer is "nowhere"

Havoc