Repository navigation
Isn't "io.js" too generic for a name? #21
Description
"io" and "js" are so often used in names for various frameworks/libraries nowadays that I've personally developed some kind of "banner-blindness"-approach to them. It's like words "shine" and "volume" on shampoo bottles. Doesn't this noble project deserve something a little bit more recognizable? :)
Activity
askbeka commentedon Dec 4, 2014
Personally, I like it. For me It makes more sense node for nodejs. And it sounds more badass))
mikeal commentedon Dec 4, 2014
no more generic than "node" :P
kuba-orlik commentedon Dec 4, 2014
But no less. And we finally have an opportunity to fix the predecessor's shortcomings, right? :)
Qard commentedon Dec 4, 2014
I'd agree that both names kind of suck. I don't think it matters that much though.
Brade commentedon Dec 4, 2014
io.js remindes me of app.net -- generic to the point of inducing a coma
blakmatrix commentedon Dec 4, 2014
All Names are generic once you assign tangible symbol(s) to them, for
instance I can believe that my name,
Farrin, is generic if I choose.So really it feels like what we are addressing in this thread is whether or
not we all believe
io.jsis a good name for those of us that tend toignore certain arrangements of symbols or are reminded of other
technologies. I echo Stephen's sentiment that I don't think it matters, I
feel the name is very fitting, and very concise--It is short and to the
point and let's us focus on the opportunity we now have before us.
mikeerickson commentedon Dec 4, 2014
the name does not make the product! sure it can get confusing at first, but after the community accepts the name and uses it in common place, no one will really care. for me, just make node/io/whatever a more stable and robust platform and I will continue to use.
best of luck to the new team!
kuba-orlik commentedon Dec 5, 2014
But don't you think that this name would make it difficult to find
documentation and other help on this project in search engines? I think
that for the sake of the future users we should pick a more unique name -
at least to make the process of searching for support easier.
On Dec 4, 2014 11:27 PM, "Mike Erickson" notifications@github.com wrote:
sonewman commentedon Dec 5, 2014
I think it is perfect 👍
tkissing commentedon Dec 5, 2014
Cool is not perfect. There are way too many search results for "io" and "io error" to make this anything but a pain. And no, people will not type io.js every single time.
I thought Spring Framework was the worst name ever, but you guys are proving me wrong.
mikeal commentedon Dec 5, 2014
"Perfect is the enemy of good." -- Classic Mozillaism :)
tkissing commentedon Dec 5, 2014
@mikeal It was @sonewman who called the name "perfect" to begin with. IMO it is not even good. It's witty and cool, but it will make it terrible to google for anything. I worked with the Spring Framework for a few years and that was already painful. IO is even more generic and wide spread, even in combination with terms that are clearly related to programming.
junosuarez commentedon Dec 5, 2014
iojsis a fairly unique string for the purpose of search and discoverability, imho - surely much more thannode. I'm +1 on the name.tkissing commentedon Dec 5, 2014
@jden You are assuming it will be spelled iojs consistently, which I think is rather unlikely. Just changing it to io.js already changes the search results drastically, as Google and other search engines ignore punctuation by default. Searching for "io.js" right now includes on the first 2 pages results for: io.js (this project and related news), socket.io, keen.io, tableflip.io, engine.io, appery.io and some javascript related github.io pages. The next few pages bring up even more unrelated projects, some of which are not even related to node.
It's your fork and you can name it whatever you want, but don't pretend this name is user-friendly. It is not.
sonewman commentedon Dec 5, 2014
Yeah but that's bound to change over time anyway
5 remaining items
junosuarez commentedon Dec 5, 2014
bios.js
</thread>eddietejeda commentedon Dec 6, 2014
Initially I thought it was too generic as well, but in only a matter of weeks I've gotten used to it. I bet others will too.
sonewman commentedon Dec 6, 2014
@eddietejeda I agree hence my perhaps too strongly worded
"perfect"comment.No matter what is chosen, someone is going to find some reason to be unhappy about it.
So we may as well all move on to other more important threads about the exciting future of this awesome library!
Fishrock123 commentedon Dec 7, 2014
see also #19 (comment)
sonewman commentedon Dec 7, 2014
@Fishrock123 👍
tkissing commentedon Dec 8, 2014
Doh, there even is another programming language by the same name? And you guys still don't see a problem? Ugg.
rlidwka commentedon Dec 8, 2014
sonewman commentedon Dec 8, 2014
This conversation is getting way to dry now. 3 days on I have heard many people complain about the name, but I'm yet to hear any compelling or interesting suggestions as alternatives, additionally this is undoubtably the most trivial issue in the project.
tkissing commentedon Dec 8, 2014
@rlidwka Actually, from Google's point of view "io js" === "io.js".
Alas, although I disagree with the categorization of "trivial", @sonewman is right, this is getting dry.
Good luck with that name, you might need it.
kuba-orlik commentedon Dec 8, 2014
Well I'd be glad to give some name suggestions from the top of my head:
They are much easier to pronounce, too :)
On Dec 8, 2014 4:45 AM, "Timo Kissing" notifications@github.com wrote:
sonewman commentedon Dec 8, 2014
That's more like it! Some creativity!
mbonaci commentedon Dec 8, 2014
@groovy354 I like the names, but naming anything Rocket would be confusing, since Rocket is the new Docker with open governance model :)
kuba-orlik commentedon Dec 8, 2014
Oh, I can go on:
And my favourite:
On Dec 8, 2014 7:50 PM, "Marko Bonaci" notifications@github.com wrote:
Qard commentedon Dec 8, 2014
@groovy354 lolwebscale.js, perhaps?
kuba-orlik commentedon Dec 8, 2014
@Qard it would be easy to search for :)