5 ms·

> Twitter (I refuse to call it X) Same energy as "I refuse to call it Meta"? I wonder why such thinking takes hold in the first place. It is fascinating someon

> Twitter (I refuse to call it X) Same energy as "I refuse to call it Meta"? I wonder why such thinking takes hold in the first place. It is fascinating someone would so invested in products like they'd be in sports, for example.

zeagle 3y ago
I am not the OP, but I just don't have the mental bandwidth or care to invest in these random swings and title changes at the whim of billionaires. I don't use either site, am not in tech, and my social circle will still refer to either as Facebook or Twitter. Maybe a relatable example: There are a couple major roads that have been renamed in the last ten years in my city and everyone still uses the old names in conversation.
bradleyjg 3y ago
I still call it the Tappen Zee bridge, not because I’m a big enthusiast for Dutch and Lenape. It’s not so much being invested as not wanting to give in to the rebranders.
dtjb 3y ago
For most, it's a community more than a product. A lot of people see the rebranding similar to a billionaire buying their town and renaming it.
zapnuk 3y ago
No. Facebook is still Facebook. More like still referring Alphabet as Google. I also find it fascinating how one person can buy the communication platform 450 million people use, only for him to change it for the worst. And somehow all users should go along with it.
- rascul 3y ago
  > No. Facebook is still Facebook. > More like still referring Alphabet as Google. Facebook and Google are still the products. Meta and Alphabet are the parent company names. So it's not wrong. I don't know what X is supposed to be.
  - captaincaveman 3y ago
    A publicity stunt?
    - afiori 3y ago
      Probably more of a narcissistic mistake.
  - DistractionRect 3y ago
    Their point stands, as almost no one refers to Alphabet as such. Google is almost exclusively used when referring to the company. People that work for Alphabet? Googlers, who will all tell you they work for Google Killed by alphabet? Nope, https://killedbygoogle.com/ https://killedbygoogle.com/ Waymo, formerly the Google Self-Driving Car Project. Etc. Frankly, the only time I hear about Alphabet, is in relation to stock price news, nevermore.
    - nrabulinski 3y ago
      To be fair google is a sub-company which does own (and subsequently kill) most of the products, not alphabet itself
    - boomboomsubban 3y ago
      >Frankly, the only time I hear about Alphabet, is in relation to stock price news, You mean the stock GOOGL?
- salawat 3y ago
  No one is forcing you to use it. You can roll your own at your leisure. In fact, everyone probably should if for no other reason than to ensure such communication platforms remain as neutral as possible.
  - matthewdgreen 3y ago
    Software is cheap, but communities built on the platform are hard to replace. That’s precisely why Musk paid $44b for it instead of $44m.
klyrs 3y ago
X is incredibly awkward as a brand. Twitter is still located at twitter.com, the company isn't even dedicated to the namechange enough to redirect to a new domain. What's a tweet now? What's a retweet? Nobody cares. So twitter is now The Platform Formerly Known as Twitter, Attempting to Rebrand to X. And on that platform at twitter.com, people continue to tweet and retweet. Meta is different. Meta is an umbrella company, Facebook is one of its holdings. There's a legal distinction to be made, because Facebook isn't so foolish as to set fire to their most lucrative brand.
- kelseyfrog 3y ago
  Xeet, rexeet.
  - SketchySeaBeast 3y ago
    To paraphrase Lil John, "Aww Xeet Xeet."
  - gunapologist99 3y ago
    Posts: Elon reposted from ...
  - twic 3y ago
    Xitter, xeet, rexeet. As someone pointed out, the pinyin pronunciation of x as roughly "sh" is appropriate here.
    - rapnie 3y ago
      A retweet can be a reex. Nice and short and appropriate. I'd shorten Xitter to Xit, and Xeet to Xed.
      - gremlinsinc 3y ago
        no, Twitter = xitter, when you used to tweet now you take a xit, and retweets are throwing xit.
  - 3y ago
DistractionRect 3y ago
IMO it's mostly incumbency. Everyone knows what Twitter and Facebook are, but I've seen it several times here, other forums, and experienced it in person, where people don't know what X/Meta are. Both seem like scooby doo mask rebrand. Nothing substantial, just a costume over the bad guy. The rebranding is mostly to confuse masses and put some distance between them and what they did yesterday.
TuringNYC 3y ago
I remember calling the Citibank derivatives trading desk and they would answer the phone as "Salomon..." a full 15yrs after it had been purchased by and absorbed into Citi (post scandal, post acquisition) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salomon_Brothers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salomon_Brothers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salomon_Brothers#Acquisition_by_Citigroup https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salomon_Brothers#Acquisition_b... I think the culture, reputation, and infamy of the firm was so huge that people continued to subscribe to that history
- fnordpiglet 3y ago
  Large parts of Goldman derivatives still uses J Aron name spaces and naming, particularly in the SecDB world. These sorts of things reflect a harkening to a time of ascendancy, often emulated, but slowly being strangled out by the hideous bureaucracy of the megacorp.
mcpackieh 3y ago
They renamed Sixth Avenue in NYC to "Avenue of the Americas" 80 years ago. Nobody calls it that. It's Sixth Avenue.
- schrodinger 3y ago
  To be fair the signage, GPS directions, subway stations, mail etc all use 6th Ave. I think that’s more a vanity nickname than a legit attempt at a rename. I believe there are other similar secondary names to streets around industries that flourished there etc.
  - mcpackieh 3y ago
    The signage used to say Avenue of the Americas but they started changing it back over the years. They did seriously intend for people to actually call it that but nobody did.
    - schrodinger 3y ago
      Interesting! I’ve been here 15 yrs and never knew that!
leetcrew 3y ago
you might reflect on why companies do these sorts of rebrands to begin with. it's not usually to put a positive reputation behind them. I don't quite get why people are so emotionally invested in brands like facebook/meta and twitter/x. at least from my perspective, it seems pretty easy to simply ignore them if you don't like what they're offering. that said, I do have fairly strong feelings about comcast. I've lived in a few different places in my life, and in every one of them, comcast has been the only option for >5mbps down. their service and support sucked 15 years ago, and it still sucks today. I realize it has absolutely no measurable impact to their bottom line, but I'm still not going to help them get away from all the bad associations that go with the name "comcast".
rsynnott 3y ago
In general, I don’t take any notice of wholesale company rebrandings; they very, very rarely take, and most will be abandoned within a year or so, or certainly within a decade. In particular, when the UK Royal Mail renamed itself ‘Consignia’ (this actually happened; the early noughties were weird) everyone ignored that. This X business is similar, I think. Just so obviously stupid that most people will ignore it.
duxup 3y ago
Personally I find X to be so generic that it seems meaningless and confusing.

zeagle 3y ago

I am not the OP, but I just don't have the mental bandwidth or care to invest in these random swings and title changes at the whim of billionaires. I don't use either site, am not in tech, and my social circle will still refer to either as Facebook or Twitter. Maybe a relatable example: There are a couple major roads that have been renamed in the last ten years in my city and everyone still uses the old names in conversation.

bradleyjg 3y ago

I still call it the Tappen Zee bridge, not because I’m a big enthusiast for Dutch and Lenape. It’s not so much being invested as not wanting to give in to the rebranders.

dtjb 3y ago

For most, it's a community more than a product. A lot of people see the rebranding similar to a billionaire buying their town and renaming it.

zapnuk 3y ago

No. Facebook is still Facebook. More like still referring Alphabet as Google. I also find it fascinating how one person can buy the communication platform 450 million people use, only for him to change it for the worst. And somehow all users should go along with it.

rascul 3y ago
> No. Facebook is still Facebook. > More like still referring Alphabet as Google. Facebook and Google are still the products. Meta and Alphabet are the parent company names. So it's not wrong. I don't know what X is supposed to be.
- captaincaveman 3y ago
  A publicity stunt?
  - afiori 3y ago
    Probably more of a narcissistic mistake.
- DistractionRect 3y ago
  Their point stands, as almost no one refers to Alphabet as such. Google is almost exclusively used when referring to the company. People that work for Alphabet? Googlers, who will all tell you they work for Google Killed by alphabet? Nope, https://killedbygoogle.com/ https://killedbygoogle.com/ Waymo, formerly the Google Self-Driving Car Project. Etc. Frankly, the only time I hear about Alphabet, is in relation to stock price news, nevermore.
  - nrabulinski 3y ago
    To be fair google is a sub-company which does own (and subsequently kill) most of the products, not alphabet itself
  - boomboomsubban 3y ago
    >Frankly, the only time I hear about Alphabet, is in relation to stock price news, You mean the stock GOOGL?
salawat 3y ago
No one is forcing you to use it. You can roll your own at your leisure. In fact, everyone probably should if for no other reason than to ensure such communication platforms remain as neutral as possible.
- matthewdgreen 3y ago
  Software is cheap, but communities built on the platform are hard to replace. That’s precisely why Musk paid $44b for it instead of $44m.

klyrs 3y ago

X is incredibly awkward as a brand. Twitter is still located at twitter.com, the company isn't even dedicated to the namechange enough to redirect to a new domain. What's a tweet now? What's a retweet? Nobody cares. So twitter is now The Platform Formerly Known as Twitter, Attempting to Rebrand to X. And on that platform at twitter.com, people continue to tweet and retweet. Meta is different. Meta is an umbrella company, Facebook is one of its holdings. There's a legal distinction to be made, because Facebook isn't so foolish as to set fire to their most lucrative brand.

kelseyfrog 3y ago
Xeet, rexeet.
- SketchySeaBeast 3y ago
  To paraphrase Lil John, "Aww Xeet Xeet."
- gunapologist99 3y ago
  Posts: Elon reposted from ...
- twic 3y ago
  Xitter, xeet, rexeet. As someone pointed out, the pinyin pronunciation of x as roughly "sh" is appropriate here.
  - rapnie 3y ago
    A retweet can be a reex. Nice and short and appropriate. I'd shorten Xitter to Xit, and Xeet to Xed.
    - gremlinsinc 3y ago
      no, Twitter = xitter, when you used to tweet now you take a xit, and retweets are throwing xit.
- 3y ago

DistractionRect 3y ago

IMO it's mostly incumbency. Everyone knows what Twitter and Facebook are, but I've seen it several times here, other forums, and experienced it in person, where people don't know what X/Meta are. Both seem like scooby doo mask rebrand. Nothing substantial, just a costume over the bad guy. The rebranding is mostly to confuse masses and put some distance between them and what they did yesterday.

TuringNYC 3y ago

I remember calling the Citibank derivatives trading desk and they would answer the phone as "Salomon..." a full 15yrs after it had been purchased by and absorbed into Citi (post scandal, post acquisition) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salomon_Brothers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salomon_Brothers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salomon_Brothers#Acquisition_by_Citigroup https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salomon_Brothers#Acquisition_b... I think the culture, reputation, and infamy of the firm was so huge that people continued to subscribe to that history

fnordpiglet 3y ago
Large parts of Goldman derivatives still uses J Aron name spaces and naming, particularly in the SecDB world. These sorts of things reflect a harkening to a time of ascendancy, often emulated, but slowly being strangled out by the hideous bureaucracy of the megacorp.

mcpackieh 3y ago

They renamed Sixth Avenue in NYC to "Avenue of the Americas" 80 years ago. Nobody calls it that. It's Sixth Avenue.

schrodinger 3y ago
To be fair the signage, GPS directions, subway stations, mail etc all use 6th Ave. I think that’s more a vanity nickname than a legit attempt at a rename. I believe there are other similar secondary names to streets around industries that flourished there etc.
- mcpackieh 3y ago
  The signage used to say Avenue of the Americas but they started changing it back over the years. They did seriously intend for people to actually call it that but nobody did.
  - schrodinger 3y ago
    Interesting! I’ve been here 15 yrs and never knew that!

leetcrew 3y ago

you might reflect on why companies do these sorts of rebrands to begin with. it's not usually to put a positive reputation behind them. I don't quite get why people are so emotionally invested in brands like facebook/meta and twitter/x. at least from my perspective, it seems pretty easy to simply ignore them if you don't like what they're offering. that said, I do have fairly strong feelings about comcast. I've lived in a few different places in my life, and in every one of them, comcast has been the only option for >5mbps down. their service and support sucked 15 years ago, and it still sucks today. I realize it has absolutely no measurable impact to their bottom line, but I'm still not going to help them get away from all the bad associations that go with the name "comcast".

rsynnott 3y ago

In general, I don’t take any notice of wholesale company rebrandings; they very, very rarely take, and most will be abandoned within a year or so, or certainly within a decade. In particular, when the UK Royal Mail renamed itself ‘Consignia’ (this actually happened; the early noughties were weird) everyone ignored that. This X business is similar, I think. Just so obviously stupid that most people will ignore it.

duxup 3y ago

Personally I find X to be so generic that it seems meaningless and confusing.