Comments on: Naming that works: Put yourself in their shoes

By: Tom Moenter

Tom Moenter — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 22:05:27 +0000

I seriously doubt if one single sale will be made or lost by virtue of the product name iPad. You lose sight of the fact that people buy compelling value propositions, not catchy names. Apple is probably the preeminent company in the world at creating compelling value. One look at the name and there is no doubt whose product it is. The product will win because of its inherent excellence and the sure knowledge of quality engendered in the Apple brand. The feminine hygiene analogy is the idle working of small minds that lose sight of the compelling value of the product and the user experience. How about a similar analysis of the name Microsoft…

By: Lisa Merriam

Lisa Merriam — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 19:40:51 +0000

This step should be mandatory for any company of any size. Showing name ideas around to even as few as three people is always so insightful. It is fast, easy and cheap, too. There is simply no good reason for companiesto fail to take the step you suggest.

I remember back almost ten years now when PriceWaterhouseCoopers became “Mondays”. And no one thought to ask if what associations that day of the week had? ?!!

I believe the iPad will have a very cramped future with that name–sorry, had to go there.

By: Andrew Douglas

Andrew Douglas — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 14:31:02 +0000

I think you have a good point about the iPad’s destiny not being particularly linked to its name. Apple has such strong brand awareness that it doesn’t need to create a clever, compelling names.

However, I don’t necessarily agree that the name is harmless to the brand. However lowbrow, the obvious link to feminine hygiene products has made Apple the butt of water cooler jokes for millions of potential customers. That’s taken a bit of shine off the Apple, so to speak.

I doubt there will be any long-term impact on sales, provided the product captures the public’s imagination. But a brand as well-regarded as Apple is compelled to adhere to very high standards indeed: its high standing makes it all the more vulnerable to marketing missteps.

By: Henning von Vogelsang

Henning von Vogelsang — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 21:41:40 +0000

Very interesting thoughts here. I fully support the notion about product names that speak to a broader audience, but not necessarily to yourself. Anyone who gets a job to create a name is usually a creative person, or someone who has some experience in these kinds of things. Strangely enough, those people are usually everyone but the audience the product was made for.

Like logos, names are also somewhat overrated and underrated at the same time. They *can* have a great impact on a product’s destiny (Apple), or simply be bland enough to not get in the way (Microsoft), or even be odd and make the product succeed none the less (Google).

In the case of iPad, it’s a bland name, a name that hurts no one and only creatives and geeks are noting its lack of inspiration. Surely, we think, we would have come up with something more exciting.

But the real question is if that would have shaped the product’s destiny. Because with the iPad, Apple didn’t release just another product, not even just another product line. It kicked off a chisel that may well create an avalanche that has a great impact on our way of life. Think about it: this is not like the invention of the phone, or the cell phone, or an iPhone. This is about doing what you did on a desk, *everywhere but* the desk. Using the iPad on a desk will become the unnatural thing to do. Using tablet computers everywhere else, the 90% of our lives that were not tied to a desk, will become the natural thing to do.

In that perspective, iPad is just right. It’s a simple name, like that baby they called John, when nobody knew he would write a song one day called “Imagine”, long after his rock band had changed music history for good.