The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> 4 years ago we discussed what to rename the project, since Postgres95
> wasn't considerd a very "long term name" (kinda like Windows2000), and
> PostgreSQL was choosen, as it both represented our roots as well as what
> we've grown into ... we've spent 4 years now building up a market presence
> with that name,
Question: Did it work? Or are people really calling it Postgres instead?
Kind of like Coca Cola. At some point in time they realised people
weren't calling it Coca Cola anymore, they were calling it Coke. So
instead of resisting the inevitable - trying to educate people to ask
for a "Coca Cola", they accepted it, trademarked the name "Coke", and
started putting "Coke" on all their products.
> getting it known so that ppl know what it is ... changing
> it now is not an option. If PostgreSQL were considered a bad name, maybe
> ... look at MySQL with their new "MaxSQL" product ... but it isn't, and is
> growing stronger ...
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tatsuo Ishii||Date: 2000-08-23 01:01:25|
|Subject: Re: Re: lost records --- problem identified! |
|Previous:||From: The Hermit Hacker||Date: 2000-08-23 00:30:59|
|Subject: Re: How Do You Pronounce "PostgreSQL"?|