Re: Changing the name of GUADEC

An, 2005 09 06 14:04 +0200, Dave Neary rašė:
> The main idea to change the name is because it's yet another meaningless 
> acronym which sucks. It's not a good name. The only reason to keep it is 
> because we've been using it for 6 years.

Every other word out there sucks if one doesn't know its meaning,
whether it's Linux, Windows, Aqua, KDE or IBM itself. Try to convince
IBM to change its name into something similar to IntBussMach (the case
with "fooConf"). They don't give a shit about it, the only thing that
matters is the customers respect they earned in the past, and not the
name. The brand doesn't matter, the thing that matters is what's
*behind* that brand.

If I understand correctly, the "GNOME" itself sucks. Average Joe doesn't
know what "GNU Network Object Model Environment" is, "KDE" makes more
sense in this case, since it stands for "K _Desktop Environment_".

I'm for keeping "GUADEC" as it is, if we are going to change it we
actually will HAVE to do the same with "GNOME", because it matches the
same criteria, and is even worse, since GUADEC is easier to explain.

Sorry, but I fail to see the 3rd part of the well known plan model:

	1. Change GUADEC to GConf, GNOMF or whatever.
	2. ... ?
	3. Profit!


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]