Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Project name
Re: Project name
From: Rob & Liz Ward <wards_at_paradise.net.nz>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 06:27:04 +1300
NukeBox, Rock-on-Box, Go-Box, StorBox, RoxBox, Fox-in-Sox...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Björn Stenberg" <bjorn_at_haxx.se>
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 5:16 AM
Subject: Re: Project name
> bobthc_at_gmx.net wrote:
> > I think rocky isn't very expressive...of the goal
> You're right, but I don't think it is a problem. Nothing we call it will
> make people instantly understand what it is, so they'll still have to go
> to the website to find out. So we can just as well get ourselves a catchy
> name that identifies us among other MP3-related projects.
> Many projects have names that don't say anything about their purpose:
> Mozilla, Gnome, KDE, X, Scoop, Slash, Basilix, Nuke, Python, Wiki, Lame,
> Gnutella, Enlightement etc.
> > Why not 3juk'OS or Free Juk'OS, with "3" call in the same time the 3 of
> > and sounds like FREE...
> Another problem with having a name that describes your project is that is
> sort of fences you in. Sure, this project will always be free. But it's
> not entirely unthinkable (if a bit dreamy) to imagine that in a few years
> ahead it could support another device that is not the Archos Jukebox and
> that plays Ogg files instead of MP3. Then 3JukeOS won't really describe us
> Also, we're not actually making an OS. It's more of an application, albeit
> with some hardware-specific code.
> I appreciate your opinions. I just don't agree with them... :-)
Received on 2002-01-09