3 ms·
I'm saying that if CockroachDB came up in discussion frequently, people would lose interest in complaining about its name, because after a period of time, the n
by bshimmin 9y ago
I'm saying that if CockroachDB came up in discussion frequently, people would lose interest in complaining about its name, because after a period of time, the number of people who'd been exposed to it and previous conversations about its name would have eclipsed the number of people thinking, "Gosh, what an awful name! I wonder if anyone else has had this revelation, I better post about it right now!"
- cocktailpeanuts 9y agoYou're missing my point, because you're talking about AFTER this reaches that status. I'm saying these people are doing their own technology disservice by making the brand difficult to talk about and take seriously. It's their choice, but there's a difference between "stupid names don't matter, look at Google!" and "stupid names don't matter, look at FuckDB! RapeDB! CockroachDB!" (I know i'm going extreme with this but just trying to get the point across, that "stupid" names and "offensive" names are completely different things) If you still disagree with me, I don't really have much intention of trying to persuade you nor care much about this company succeeding. I'm just saying it's a bad business decision to make it hard for your customers to advocate for your product. If there was a company with the same technology and they had a normal name, they would probably get much better traction (assuming that their tech is unique and useful).