166
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 12 points 2 years ago

LibreWolf

Why are privacy/copyleft advocates so bad at naming?

[-] HK65@sopuli.xyz 22 points 2 years ago

They usually don't have marketing departments or focus groups.

[-] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 7 points 2 years ago

You obviously don't need those to come up with a good name; just some taste. Signal is a great example. Ladybird and Servo are good browser names if you want to stick to that. LibreWolf? Jesus, come on guys. Forgejo is another terrible name I heard recently. Apparently it's Esperanto, like that makes it ok somehow.

[-] HK65@sopuli.xyz 11 points 2 years ago

Apparently it’s Esperanto, like that makes it ok somehow.

God forbid some non-anglophone culture enters our collective consciousness.

[-] FrostyPolicy@suppo.fi 12 points 2 years ago

What would you call it instead?

We already have (had) Iceweasel, IceCat and Waterfox among others. All nice word plays on the original Firefox name. LibreWolf follows along the same path.

[-] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 3 points 2 years ago

You don't have to use the exact same naming scheme. But even if you did it's pretty trivial to come up with better names. I bet even ChatGPT can do it. Here's the list it came up with for me:

  1. Thunderwolf
  2. Breezefalcon
  3. Stonehawk
  4. Blazeleopard
  5. Rainlynx
  6. Frostowl
  7. Lightningpanther
  8. Shadowraven
  9. Solarfox
  10. Cloudtiger

Ok most are pretty trash but Stonehawk is good. Maybe Thunderwolf. Still better than LibreWolf.

[-] sukhmel@programming.dev 14 points 2 years ago

everyone could do it

…proceeds to not do it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[-] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 1 points 2 years ago

You don't think Stonehawk is a better name than LibreWolf? Kind of proving my point there.

[-] sukhmel@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago

No, I don't, does that also prove your point?

[-] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 3 points 2 years ago

the largest problem with librewolf is the difficult pronunciation, I think, just as with forgejo. stonehawk is easy, as is not a terrible name either. maybe "stone" is not terribly interesting, though. but it still seems to be an improvement for me.

what is your take on it? why do you think it's not better?

[-] sukhmel@programming.dev 1 points 2 years ago

I just think that they are pretty much same interest-wise, and LibreWolf at least tries to convey some meaning

[-] declination@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago

don’t sleep on frost owl. Owl heads are kind of round so it would make a good icon.

[-] andioop@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

As someone who doesn't mind this name, what makes it bad?

EDIT: Someone below said difficult pronunciation. So talking about it in real life would be difficult.

It also might be relevant that I am very bad at naming things myself.

[-] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

Difficult pronunciation and it also sounds like a lame "cool" name that a super nerd would think of.

this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2024
166 points (100.0% liked)

Privacy

1374 readers
1 users here now

Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS