4 ms·

> everything is named something like Sony XP-3000-ZXS Pro that is exactly like the XP-300ZXS Pro+ except… This drives me crazy. I don’t get how companies get

by zelos 4y ago

> everything is named something like Sony XP-3000-ZXS Pro that is exactly like the XP-300ZXS Pro+ except… This drives me crazy. I don’t get how companies get this so wrong. I just spent hours looking for a tumble dryer and they’re all like that. Who are the people at these companies who think it’s a good idea to name your product a completely opaque alphanumeric jumble?

otikik 4y ago
Oh I know that one. It’s because they have slightly different models names for differ markets, and they figured out that using their internal code names was easier than paying someone to come up with easy, memorable names. So the model sold in Delaware is the UX-7200-D, and the one sold in The Netherlands is exactly the same item with a different power cord and instruction booklet. But it’s called NT-376xd because the Netherlands branch is actually a different company that was bought 2 years ago and they are still using their old system which has different codes for products.
- IIsi50MHz 4y ago
  I usually have the reverse problem: the "memorable" marketing names are vague and have no clear indication of what's newer or what's better. Sometimes each is trying to convince you it's the best[1], meanwhile the internal engineering designations (sometimes discoverable on or in the product) more commonly have a clear progression[2], despite alphanumeric soup (a 2300X -Q3N is likely older than a 2317X-1A, and both are inferior to a 2600X-PTN-J). Seems to me, Motorola's phone names in USA went off the deep end sometime after the Moto G7, while international versions of many of the same phones retained their nice simple sequential numbering scheme. [1] Don't get me started on people who produce n versions of something then decide to name the next version "One" (or similar) "because its the only One you need, the best One; it's The One!" (when they really mean, "Weird, people can't figure out why they should upgrade when we didn't change anything much!")…which of course just screws them when they next try to get people to upgrade. …Oh, seems I got very thoroughly started. :faceplant: [2] Ignoring Sharp models for their phones and tablets, which can have name elements where a descending sequence in part of the name and an ascending sequence in another part of the same name identify whether this is a higher or lower model. And ignoring Apple, which decades ago decided reusing model IDs over and over is FineTM, forcing horrible things like "Well, it's a late 2015 iBook 15-inch with the <special feature that means you have a different case/keboard/camera/…> and the <special upgrade that means you have a different motherboard>".

by zelos 4y ago

otikik 4y ago

Oh I know that one. It’s because they have slightly different models names for differ markets, and they figured out that using their internal code names was easier than paying someone to come up with easy, memorable names. So the model sold in Delaware is the UX-7200-D, and the one sold in The Netherlands is exactly the same item with a different power cord and instruction booklet. But it’s called NT-376xd because the Netherlands branch is actually a different company that was bought 2 years ago and they are still using their old system which has different codes for products.

IIsi50MHz 4y ago
I usually have the reverse problem: the "memorable" marketing names are vague and have no clear indication of what's newer or what's better. Sometimes each is trying to convince you it's the best[1], meanwhile the internal engineering designations (sometimes discoverable on or in the product) more commonly have a clear progression[2], despite alphanumeric soup (a 2300X -Q3N is likely older than a 2317X-1A, and both are inferior to a 2600X-PTN-J). Seems to me, Motorola's phone names in USA went off the deep end sometime after the Moto G7, while international versions of many of the same phones retained their nice simple sequential numbering scheme. [1] Don't get me started on people who produce n versions of something then decide to name the next version "One" (or similar) "because its the only One you need, the best One; it's The One!" (when they really mean, "Weird, people can't figure out why they should upgrade when we didn't change anything much!")…which of course just screws them when they next try to get people to upgrade. …Oh, seems I got very thoroughly started. :faceplant: [2] Ignoring Sharp models for their phones and tablets, which can have name elements where a descending sequence in part of the name and an ascending sequence in another part of the same name identify whether this is a higher or lower model. And ignoring Apple, which decades ago decided reusing model IDs over and over is FineTM, forcing horrible things like "Well, it's a late 2015 iBook 15-inch with the <special feature that means you have a different case/keboard/camera/…> and the <special upgrade that means you have a different motherboard>".