On Saturday 05 February 2005 07:21, Nicolas Boulay wrote: > The target are not the doom III player. So > we don't need a "violent" name. And for my point of view, it's quite > ridiculous. And if the card is not fast, you could have a counter > effect.
Agreed. What I would suggest to Tech Source is: wait and see how well the card performs and how much buzz it's got in the tech community. If it's looking good on both counts, then use the company branding, i.e., "Open Raptor" or similar. Raptor is a kickass name. Until that time, settle on a _code name_ for the card, and by extension, the project. This doesn't have to be perfectly trademarkable, it just has to have the right cachet and be googleable. This name might or might not become the product name. But for now it would serve mainly as a pointer to the project. By the way, of all the suggestions I've heard so far, I like Harbinger the most, it really sums up the project goals. To make it more googleable, it could be Harbinger One or something like that, with the obvious implication that there will be a Harbinger Two. The point is, it's a working name for the _project_, the purpose of the name is to help sell the _project_. The final branding of the card only needs to be settled by the time it goes to market. Regards, Daniel _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
