[Foundation] "Jabber" name again

Shawn Wilton shawn at black9.net
Wed Oct 15 13:53:24 CDT 2003


LOL.  You seriously think they would even CONSIDER such an idea as 
renaming J. inc.???  I'm going to pretend that was a joke and address 
the rest of your concerns. 

JSF would make a great name as we're not changing the name per se so 
much as we're realigning it.  We will still refer to the jabber 
protocol, however it will be headed by the JSF, rather than the Jabber 
Software Foundation.  I believe that jabber has a large enough base that 
we could name it what ever the f8ck we want and it would still do just 
fine. 



Bart van Bragt wrote:

> Harold E. Gottschalk Jr. wrote:
>
>>> The best solution to this would be to make JSF an acronym no more 
>>> and merely make it the name.  
>>
>> I agree.
>
> Eehm, what would this solve?
>
> The problem:
>
> - The 'Jabber' name (or brand) is fairly well known
> - XMPP is not known to many people and IMO it's not a very 
> 'userfriendly' name.
> - Jabber Inc. is a company
>
> Dropping 'Jabber' altogether is nearly impossible and also fairly 
> stupid because it will confuse the heck out of the people that finally 
> know what Jabber is. Also saying 'JSF' instead of 'Jabber Software 
> Foundation' won't solve the problem because people will still refer to 
> the protocol as being 'Jabber'.
>
> The people call the protocol 'Jabber' is no problem to me, IMO that's 
> great even! Sounds a lot better than XMPP and Jabber is a more 
> consumer focussed product (more IM focussed). What is a problem is the 
> fact that there is a company that's called 'Jabber'. It's very easy 
> for people to think that 'Jabber Inc.' is the 
> inventor/maintainer/developer of all the (core) Jabber software and 
> protocols and that it's the primary company if you're looking for 
> commercial Jabber based solution. IMO that's 'unfair competition' for 
> all the other companies out there (damn, my English sucks today :D 
> Need sleep ;)).
>
> Is changing the name of Jabber Inc. an option? I really do see that 
> this is not the prefered solution for the owners/employees of Jabber 
> Inc. but IMO that's mainly because it will reduce their 'headstart' in 
> the Jabber/XMPP market. IMO the products that Jabber Inc produces are 
> more than competitive enough to survive in the market without 
> attaching the Jabber brand to it.
>
> Bart
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Members mailing list
> Members at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/members





More information about the Members mailing list