The media is awash with criticisms of Apple’s new name: iPad. Now, no one expected the product itself to be a technological flop. Apple just doesn’t flop anymore (well, not for a long time anyway). So the only thing left to criticize is their name choice. (CNN has really jumped on the pad = maxipad bandwagon.) But, are the criticisms well-founded, or are they just grasping at straws?

Most likely you’ve seen the 2006 MAD TV spoof of the iPod:

I think it’s hilarious that some people on the internet think that Apple didn’t know about MAD TV’s spoof. That Apple would launch a multi-million dollar product and not know about every possible issue beforehand, well, that’s just absurd. Apple knew everything. You don’t think that they calculated that into their marketing campaign? C’mon, these guys are marketing geniuses, not marketing novices.

And let’s talk about the word pad for a minute. Is it really a horrible word choice? It’s fairly abstract in the way that pod was when Apple launched that product. And guess what? People hated the name iPod back then too. They were convinced it was a naming flop. And now it’s part of our common vocabulary. (And, let us not forget the Wii, which was critically panned for six months as a ridiculous name, until the product hit the shelves. Now Wii is revered as a game-changer product and product name.)

And, what about all the computer uses of the word pad? ThinkPad, mouse pad, LeapPad, IdeaPad, not to mention pad of paper, legal pad, gauze pad, lily pad, etc. Is it so damning that one of the nearly five billion uses of the word pad is related to women’s menstrual cycles? Are we so culturally grossed out by a woman’s reproductive cycle that we must condemn anything that even connotes vagina? I think the answer might go without saying.

iPad is a perfect name for Apple. It recalls their other global mega-hit, the iPod. What’s more, it’s abstract enough to apply to this elusive product category. It’s not quite a netbook, not quite a laptop, not quite an ebook reader, and not quite a tablet computer. What better way to define a new category than by just giving it a proprietary and somewhat abstract name (a la iPod)?

And to toss out some love to our trekkie readers: It turns out that Star Trek captains and crew have been using tablet/pad computers for decades. Captain Kirk and Captain Picard used pad computers for reviewing reports. And DS9 Captain Sisko even had a tablet computer called a PADD that looked eerily like the new iPad. Hmm, first Star Trek’s communicator preceded flip phones by 30 or so years. Then Star Trek’s pad computers gave way to the iPad. To boldly go, indeed!

To summarize, I think this too shall pass. In six months when people are happily walking around with their iPads glued to their hands, no one will even give the name a second thought. In fact, I might even go so far as to predict that feminine hygiene pads might lose their association with the word pad. It’s a long shot, but you never know, what with the power of Apple’s branding power…

Tags: Apple, Apple names, iPad, iPad name, technology naming
Posted in Advertising, Product Naming | 2 Comments

It makes sense that the granddaddy of social networks would try to prove it was hip with one last hurrah. I’m sure the board of directors or the management team has grand plans for how to make Friendster relevant again. But, there are a few problems with their relaunch strategy.

The simple fact of the matter is that no one likes to use old stuff. Especially old technology. You have an original iPhone?! Ew, gross. And social networks come and go every two years or so, and then fade into obsolete obscurity. Sure, Friendster was the shiznit back in 2003/04. But then MySpace came along and rocked poor Friendster’s world. Then Tribe hit certain areas and had its own little cultish following. Meanwhile Facebook swept in and played the social networking game better than anyone else. To think that Friendster can beat Facebook in the popularity contest is absurd. Ah, but therein lies the juicy nugget. Friendster isn’t trying to beat Facebook. Listen carefully again to the ad.

Okay, now that you’ve watched it again… The first 12 seconds are clearly aimed directly at the heart of Facebook: “plain, boring, too common, too generic.” All the while they show pictures of old people. Yep, that’s Facebook alright. Everyone and their mother is on it, which means no more anonymity for teens. If Jane’s buddy tags her in a picture from last week’s kegger, Mom is surely going to find out. In fact, the average age of Facebook users has been steadily increasing as more parents jump on the bandwagon. Teens are bailing out of what they see as an old, boring sinking ship. So, where are teens doing their social networking then?

That’s right, you guessed it: MySpace. You might have noticed that right after the 12-second mark in the video, the gauntlet was thrown down directly in the face of MySpace. “I want my own space. With my own music. My own look. My own style.” Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t that MySpace’s brand positioning, word for word?! Hell, they even said “my space” in the first sentence. MySpace also lets users customize their profile page and is well-known for being the destination for bands and musicians.

I applaud Friendster for knowing who their real competition is. But, dude. Srsly Friendster?! You just copied your main competitor’s brand messaging. And, you didn’t even do it cleverly. It reeks of “me too.” I’m not hearing anything that would make a teenager want to jump ship from MySpace and start using Friendster… again.

And finally, WTF is up with that stupid new tagline?! Connecting Smiles?!?!?! Are you kidding me? What, are you trying to do, attract the Hannah Montana demographic or something? That tagline makes me think of Pokemon and Polly Pocket commercials. Not Lady Gaga and JZ.

Sheesh. Maybe you should’ve hired a real naming firm to help you come up with your new tagline.

Tags: Friendster, internet company naming, internet names, internet naming, social network names, social network naming, technology naming
Posted in Brand Naming, Branding | No Comments

Barnes & Noble is launching Nook, their new e-book reader this week. Will the Nook unseat Amazon’s Kindle? Only time will tell. What we do know is that the Nook has a color touch screen and allows customers to share their e-books, both major competitive advantages over the Kindle.

But what about the name? We here at Catchword are pretty big fans of Nook. The brand name, of course, refers to a sheltered and secluded place, specifically a reading nook or book nook in this case. The connotations are of a small, personalized, private book reading experience. All good things for an e-book reader.

Also, in contrast to Kindle, the name is shorter (one syllable) and keys on a more personal experience of book reading. Kindle is about the general fervor of reading, whereas Nook is about that unique personal connection book lovers have with their books.

There were obviously other possible messages to explore when naming this product. Naturally, the luminosity, colorfulness, sharing capabilities are all key differentiating features worthy of naming exploration. However, these are also all features that will quickly be adopted by the competitive set. Naming a product after a short-term differentiator is okay when you plan on changing the name when version 2.0 comes out, or if you only plan on a 2-year product life cycle. But, we’re guessing Barnes & Noble is in this game for the long haul. This might be their last best chance to compete with Amazon. Thus, Barnes & Noble appropriately picked a lasting brand name that speaks to the meta concept of books and book lovers.

The only pronunciation or negative connotations we could come up with seemed minor in comparison to the positive features of the name. Some folks might pronounce the name “nuke” as in nuclear. Not too much worry there. And, it’s possible some folks might extrapolate to “nookie.” Again, this isn’t likely. And even if “nookie” does get popular, is there anything wrong with making books a little sexier? (I’m reminded of the common sexy librarian fantasy.)

Overall, we like this new name a lot. We’d love to claim that we created this name, but alas, we cannot. We just hope it doesn’t show up on Lexicon’s portfolio page on Friday. Don’t they have enough famous brand names already? Here’s hoping that one of our other competitors came up with this great new name.

Tags: book names, book naming, Kindle, nook, technology naming
Posted in Brand Naming, Product Naming | 1 Comment

Catchword is pleased to introduce its newest company name: Altegrity. We collaborated with our friends at Corebrand to create this new brand name for the holding company that includes USIS, HireRight, and Explore.

After generating thousands of name candidates and screening hundreds, we found just the name our client was looking for (with an available .com domain to boot). Coined from “all” and “integrity” the new name aptly communicates the breadth and strength of this company. The new look and feel (designed by Corebrand) reinforces the data-driven roots of the company, and plays nicely off the name.

A great collaboration, resulting in a great new brand. In the immortal words of Hannibal Smith, “I just love it when a plan comes together…”

Tags: Altegrity, new name, new name launch, technology naming
Posted in Company Naming, Name Launch | No Comments

I follow Stephen Fry on Twitter and he’s loads of fun – he loves languages and actually understand linguistics. He’s in Germany now and offered proof that a mobile phone really is called a “handy”, use of which is both amusing and practical (in my opinion). But he also recorded a short audio clip poking fun at the use of “handy” in a very over-the-top German accent. (Warning: not entirely safe for work, use headphones)




I had my handy, I swear to god!

Tags: mobile phone names, mobile phone naming, naming system, technology naming, Twitter
Posted in Language use, Product Naming | 1 Comment

We are proud parents and we love to tout our naming prowess when one of our creations hits the market. Today we have the not-so-rare opportunity to announce, what we consider to be, a seriously awesome name: BOKU.

Boku is a start-up mobile payments company. Let me explain: Remember the last time you were playing Mafia Wars and you need to buy fancy new virtual duds before you met the Godfather? Nerve-wracking right? Well, Boku can help alleviate some of that stress by making the purchase of those online goods quick, easy, and safe. Phew! Without Boku, you might not have been able to buy that virtual Armani suit and the Godfather would have been tres disappointed.

Thanks Boku!

Tags: Boku, financial naming, mobile payments, technology naming
Posted in Company Naming, Name Launch | 1 Comment

**This post was graciously contributed by Stephen Baird, Winthrop & Weinstine law firm.**

Microsoft is flashing its latest version of bling with its launch of the much anticipated “decision engine” it has dubbed Bing. I agree the new brand name has a nice ring (according to Microsoft, the “sound of found”), with great brevity, rhythm and cadence, but sorry, I’m sticking with the generic name “search engine,” with good precedent for doing so, as Microsoft’s pending trademark applications reference the terms “search engine” and “searching” several times, with no mention of any “decision” thing.

As far as I can tell, Microsoft has not created a new product category here, one that might justify re-naming the underlying generic term for an entirely new category, as Rollerblade attempted to do ten years after-the-fact with “in-line skates”. Here we simply have a new brand name for another “search engine,” Microsoft’s search engine.

Of course, there has been much discussion on how Microsoft came to the “decision” to re-brand its search engine, yet again, with some commentators hoping for more bada bing in the new name. It is too early to tell what the newly branded search engine will bring. Some may wonder if this is just another Microsoft re-branding fling. Or is Microsoft hoping its new name will cause those who use the current king of search engines not to cling? Perhaps Microsoft is hoping that internet users will leave the king to bing(e) on Microsoft’s new brand of “decision engine.”

Word on the street is that the Bing name was actually second string, proposed to play off the bing cherry variety, but no sign of any fruit on the new site, just some beautiful artwork reminiscent of a Ricola® television spot.

In terms of other existing meanings, I’m wondering whether anyone bothered to check Dictionary.com listings for Microsoft’s new brand, since “bing” apparently means a “a heap or pile” (“British dialect”) (no indication of what the subject of the heap or pile might be, but you can use your imagination, and I’m sure British pundits will, if the product doesn’t live up to expectations across the pond). It is also listed as an “obsolete” term for the verb “to go,” so, perhaps Microsoft is hoping to bring that meaning out of obsolescence. Hopefully for Microsoft this re-branding exercise won’t sing a dead note in the way the Nova brand did decades ago for GM in Spanish speaking countries (“Nova” = “No Go”).

Now, from the left brain side, it is interesting that Microsoft went to the other side of the world to file its first Bing trademark application — in New Zealand — back in September 2008. Perhaps the trademark filings down-under aren’t monitored as readily by competitors and critics as they are here, giving Microsoft an extra six months to more discreetly plan and prepare for its public announcement and discussion. Bingo! This strategy, assuming it was one, permitted Microsoft to wait until March 2009 to make its trademark filing public here in the United States while still keeping the earlier September 22, 2008 priority date that it obtained by first filing abroad.

Nevertheless, Microsoft has encountered some issues at the U.S. Trademark Office, with one of its Bing applications initially being refused registration based on another company’s Bing Mobile Inc.® registration for “mobile phone software for a social networking service,” and with another application getting through without any third party marks being cited at all. It appears Microsoft anticipated the Bing Mobile issue, however, as papers to expressly abandon the Bing Mobile application were filed in November 2008, well before the May 2009 refusal. (Wikipedia even has an entry now for Bing Mobile that pings to Microsoft). Double Bingo! Having said that, for some reason the abandonment papers were ignored by the Trademark Office because the registration for Bing Mobile issued anyway in January 2009, and has now been cited against Microsoft. Presumably Microsoft easily can fix that clerical mistake, but how much cha-ching do you suppose was paid for the trademark abandonment and clearing the path for Microsoft’s (hopeful) King Bing?

It may be that Microsoft will have to bring more cha-ching to clear other possible obstacles or to at least own broader rights than it does now, considering the existing crowded trademark landscape. For example, what about Mathew S. Brown’s prior federal service mark registration for Badda Bing, or Dell Computer’s prior service mark application for Zing, or Accoona Corp’s prior service mark application for Twing, both specifically covering “search engines for obtaining data on a global computer network”? Basically, once commercial use is made of Zing and/or Twing, as search engines, and these applications mature into registrations, the priority dates for both will predate anything for Bing. No worries from Yahoo!, apparently, as it abandoned its prior trademark application (and presumably its use) for Bingo in connection with “search engines” back in 2005. Stay tuned, it will be interesting to see how this all plays out for Microsoft.

Anyway, I’m hearing the bell ding, so please ping your thoughts about Bing assuming they don’t sting or make you sound like a ding-a-ling.

Tags: Bing, Bing name, Bing naming, Google, Microsoft naming, search engine naming, technology naming
Posted in Brand Naming, Domain names, Fun stuff, In-the-News, Product Naming | 1 Comment

As I read Amy Zipkin’s article in yesterday’s New York Times about the litany of formerly defunct brand names that have been re-introduced to the market, I kept noodling on the same question: is it easier to launch a new brand name or to reconfigure an old one?

The naming consultant in me would like to think that it is easier to introduce a new brand name. That is, after all, how I make my living. But building brand recognition is expensive, and folks like Sharper Image and Circuit City have spent oodles on their brands over the years. Just because their business models didn’t work doesn’t mean their brands can’t still pull in big bucks. I bet most folks don’t even know that these companies have gone under. I do know these companies are belly up, and yet, if I saw a Sharper Image product on the shelf tomorrow, I’d still give it all the positive associations I had with that brand before they went under. That’s gotta be worth something.

Tags: brand name, naming consultant, Product Naming, reused brand name, technology naming
Posted in Brand Naming, In-the-News | 1 Comment

Yeah, I know the title was a cheap joke, but what the heck.

I knew that GodTube existed, but just the other day I found out they’d changed the name to Tangle. It was originally launched in 2007 a video sharing site, and it set the record as the fastest growing Web site in the U.S. during its first month of operation. It was obviously a reskinned version of YouTube and catered to a Christian audience, featuring sermons, comedy, theological debates, as well as music videos. Over time they added a Christian news service and Godcaster, which allowed any church in the world to stream its services for free.

The site grew rapidly and attracted up to 2.7 million users a month. And then at the end of last year (2008), they announced expansion and forthcoming name change. In February 2009 they announced the new positioning:

Tangle.com has expanded to become the go-to Web site for the family-friendly community to safely interact online through a full social network.

My first reaction was to cock my head to the side like my friend’s dog Jack, when he’s thinking the dog equivalent of “Huh?” So I did a little more research to find out why they heck they thought this was a good idea.

From the Dallas Morning News:

“The old name ‘GodTube’ was a little polarizing. We wanted a name that was more encompassing,” said Jason Illian, CEO. “We don’t shy away from our faith-based community, but we wanted to expand that.”…

But GodTube, like many new Internet businesses, remained in the red. And the obvious imitation of YouTube made some evangelical Christians wince.

“It’s one thing to rip off the product, but to rip off the name itself was a little disappointing to a lot of people,” said Scott McClellan, editor of Dallas-based Collide magazine, which covers media and church life….

He describes a six-month process of picking a new name, working through 10,000 possibilities with the help of focus groups.

“Tangle.com” – suggested early by Illian’s brother Ben, interactive media manager for the site – prevailed because it fit the social networking focus.

“You can not only get tangled up in relationships, but you can get tangled up in all the tools, whether they’re blogs or video or photos or ‘tickertape’ [a line of newsy text that runs across the site's main page],” said Jason Illian.

The site also has a new, light green color scheme, and Illian promised that the next months will see the rollout of various innovations for helping individuals and groups connect.

Tangle.com retains “Christian underpinnings,” Illian said, but projects no specific theology. Rather, it’s meant to be a site that advertisers and users of various faiths (or none) can feel comfortable with, because objectionable images and text are screened out.

You can see Jason Illian talk about some of this in the video he made to announce the name change (which is hosted at Tangle, naturally). What he does say in the video – but which isn’t in the newspaper article – is that “Christians need to be tangled up in their faith”.

I don’t know about you, but I kind of think there’s a conflict between “no specific theology” and “Christians need to be tangled up in their faith”. Well, at least it’s better than the old GodTube terms of service, which prohibited any content “contrary to the evangelization of Jesus Christ and His teachings, or constitutes blasphemy, or is otherwise offensive to our online Christian community”.

I get what Illian is saying about the word “tangle” as a way to express “intertwining” or “drawing everything together”, but aren’t tangles usually bad things? Snarls, knots, jams, snares? A tangle is usually something you want to get out of, not in to. And then there’s the meaning of “mess with” or “provoke” – also negative, and kind of threatening too (do you want to tangle with god?).

There are so many more appropriate metaphors for the kind of involvement that Illian wants to promote; I’d love to see some of the 9,999 rejected names, because I’m sure there were at least 5 of them better than Tangle. This is a classic example of inward-looking marketing: these guys had a metaphor and they were bound to make it work, dammit (should that be “darn it”?), even though no one else understands what they’re trying to say with the brand. I browsed around the intertubes and nobody, not even loyal GodTube users, likes the name Tangle or the idea of “tangling” faith and other aspects of life and social networking. Note to Jason Illian: stop using your employees and your three best friends as focus groups.

While I’m sure they’ll make the brand work, and maybe even turn a profit – they’ve been running in the red since they started up – Tangle has unfortunately saddled itself with a name that’s got an uphill struggle from the moment of launch. Bravo for getting the exact .com domain – but then, aside from Johnson & Johnson, makers of No More Tangles, who would want it?

Tags: GodTube, Product Naming, religion, religious names, Tangle, technology naming, YouTube
Posted in Brand Naming, In-the-News | 3 Comments

More videos coming soon!

Tags: software naming, technology naming, Twitter application names, Twitter application naming, Twitter names, Twitter naming, Web 2.0 names, Web 2.0 naming
Posted in Product Naming, The First Word, Videos, naming architecture | No Comments