Isn't "io.js" too generic for a name? #21
Comments
|
Personally, I like it. For me It makes more sense node for nodejs. And it sounds more badass)) |
|
no more generic than "node" :P |
|
But no less. And we finally have an opportunity to fix the predecessor's shortcomings, right? :) |
|
I'd agree that both names kind of suck. I don't think it matters that much though. |
|
io.js remindes me of app.net -- generic to the point of inducing a coma |
|
All Names are generic once you assign tangible symbol(s) to them, for So really it feels like what we are addressing in this thread is whether or |
|
the name does not make the product! sure it can get confusing at first, but after the community accepts the name and uses it in common place, no one will really care. for me, just make node/io/whatever a more stable and robust platform and I will continue to use. best of luck to the new team! |
|
But don't you think that this name would make it difficult to find
|
|
I think it is perfect 👍 |
|
Cool is not perfect. There are way too many search results for "io" and "io error" to make this anything but a pain. And no, people will not type io.js every single time. |
"Perfect is the enemy of good." -- Classic Mozillaism :) |
|
@mikeal It was @sonewman who called the name "perfect" to begin with. IMO it is not even good. It's witty and cool, but it will make it terrible to google for anything. I worked with the Spring Framework for a few years and that was already painful. IO is even more generic and wide spread, even in combination with terms that are clearly related to programming. |
|
|
|
@jden You are assuming it will be spelled iojs consistently, which I think is rather unlikely. Just changing it to io.js already changes the search results drastically, as Google and other search engines ignore punctuation by default. Searching for "io.js" right now includes on the first 2 pages results for: io.js (this project and related news), socket.io, keen.io, tableflip.io, engine.io, appery.io and some javascript related github.io pages. The next few pages bring up even more unrelated projects, some of which are not even related to node. |
|
Yeah but that's bound to change over time anyway |
|
I mean that's like saying I googled node and got confused because all I found was posts related to 'lymph node'. In reality it's all semantics, I liked it because all I would have to type are 2 characters. I mean at it's basis it is a library that does async 'IO' in javascript. But there is nothing stopping me from doing 'alias supercalifragilisticexpialidocious="/usr/local/bin/iojs"'. But hey it's all subjective and everyone's a designer, so I would expect everyone to have a different opinion. If IO is no good how about something more out of the box? Personally I'm more excited about what the project represents! Even if it does need a badass name to go with it. |
|
SEO changes over time. The word “famous” is fairly ambiguous yet if you google it today our framework is the third listing. http://red.bikeshed.com/ |
|
Exactly! |
|
The fact that different spellings of IO already have a meaning in the given context is exactly why the problem is so severe. IO errors in other languages or other toolkits won't go away. Async i/o is nothing unique to this project. Etc. pp. Side note: When I google for "famous", the JavaScript framework is at the bottom of the page. Do not assume that the search results you see for a topic you research regularly have anything to do with those of someone new to the topic doing the same search. The times when "same search term" equaled "same results" are long past. |
|
It reminds me famous Issue 9 of Go Lang with year of discussing and final THIS WILL NEVER HAPPENS word from maintainers. As for me, Node never was an i/o system, being more like core library for V8 implementation of JavaScript. So "iojs" name can be really confusing. If V8 is engine, Node or io,js is crankshaft or flywheel. |
|
bios.js |
|
Initially I thought it was too generic as well, but in only a matter of weeks I've gotten used to it. I bet others will too. |
|
@eddietejeda I agree hence my perhaps too strongly worded No matter what is chosen, someone is going to find some reason to be unhappy about it. So we may as well all move on to other more important threads about the exciting future of this awesome library! |
|
see also #19 (comment) |
|
Doh, there even is another programming language by the same name? And you guys still don't see a problem? Ugg. |
> 'io' === 'io.js'
false |
|
This conversation is getting way to dry now. 3 days on I have heard many people complain about the name, but I'm yet to hear any compelling or interesting suggestions as alternatives, additionally this is undoubtably the most trivial issue in the project. |
|
Well I'd be glad to give some name suggestions from the top of my head:
|
|
That's more like it! Some creativity! |
|
@groovy354 I like the names, but naming anything Rocket would be confusing, since Rocket is the new Docker with open governance model :) |
|
Oh, I can go on:
|
|
@groovy354 lolwebscale.js, perhaps? |
|
@Qard it would be easy to search for :) |
"io" and "js" are so often used in names for various frameworks/libraries nowadays that I've personally developed some kind of "banner-blindness"-approach to them. It's like words "shine" and "volume" on shampoo bottles. Doesn't this noble project deserve something a little bit more recognizable? :)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: