On 8/11/05, Jack Carroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, I hope I'm not muddying the waters by jumping into this > discussion, and I don't want to step on anybody's creative toes either (at > least, not hard enough to pinch).
Jump, step, and keep at it. :) > > First off, I'd argue against Deca. It's too close to a recording > company, and also a British radio navigation system. > During a previous thread on this subject, I suggested that actual > products should have part numbers, and not just names. The part numbers > should have a systematic structure that nails down exactly which optional > features are installed. With only names, trying to keep straight all the > basic product types and their factory options would get unwieldy and > confusing really fast. > So, we might choose one single name for an entire product family to > create strong name recognition, and then combine it with a part number to > identify the specific item. This approach could also help a lot with the > industrial sector of the potential customer base; it feels more adult. This logically makes sense. > Somebody in this thread suggested a name with "Graf" in it. I like > that as a syllable. It's a good-sounding Greek word, and has a clear and > obvious connection to graphics hardware. (It also happens to be a German > title of nobility.) Sounds good. > Opso carries the open source idea, but it's a little long, and > doesn't feel euphonious to my ear. In previous discussions, I suggested > "os" or "ios" to mean the same thing, where the s can connote either source, > specification, or standard, with intentional ambiguity. The i might mean > either industrial or part of I/O, again with intentional ambiguity. I like this too. > Combining these ideas, a couple of possible product family names > would be: > > Grafios > Grafos > > Similarly, > > OSGraf > > Within any of these character strings, it's also possible to play > with capitalization, and I don't think it would sound too much like kid > stuff. > > GrafiOS > GrafiOs > GrafioS > oSGraf > OsGraf Unfortunately, I don't find any of these combinations aesthetically appealing. That's the problem I have with the things I've tried. You engineer the name and it makes sense but doesn't SOUND good. > Along the same lines, > > GrafiCard > OpenGraf > > Another thing that might happen over time is that the architecture > could evolve, without changing beyond recognition. So product sub-families > implementing different derivatives of the ancestral architecture might be > called > > GrafiOS-1 > GrafiOS-2 > > and so on. > > > > > The name is the face for selling a product for the first-time-purchaser of > > > the brand. Then quality kicks in, support, drivers, availability.. bla > > > bla... > > I think this is a primary argument for picking just one name. That > maximizes recognition value for the whole family of potential products. Certainly. Hey, you know, I was thinking that "Trekker" might be a good name, but that's got a number of potential disadvantages. > > > Liberator > > Emancipator > > Barbarian > > Rolling Thunder > > Infinite Justice > Might offend Moslems. > > Badger > > Steamroller > > Violator > > FoxGrafx > Played with this, above. > > Unity > > Harmony > Interesting implications. Hmmm... > > Coolinator > > Coolatron > > Quicksilver > > (Hey, Quicksolver would be a great name for a high-end math app.) > > Paradigm > It's the name of a semiconductor company. > > Singularity > > Feronia > > Ninja > > Duellon > > 42 > > Inari > > What bothers me about most of these is that they sound like they're > cooked up by marketers who don't have a lot of respect for the intelligence > and maturity of their audience. I tend not to give much credibility to > products with names like that. OGP isn't trying to imitate ATI and nVidia, > it's doing serious things that they're not even interested in attempting. > In this category, I'd lean more toward names like: > > Visualizer > Clear Image > Clarity Actually, I like these a lot. I think I like 'Clarity' the best. Someone else also liked 'Unity'. Maybe we could use one and keep the other in reserve. Or maybe the project board gets one name, while the real graphics cards and chips get another? > > > Heleon > > Neneon > > Argeon > > Krypteon > > Xeneon > > or Grafeon? > > > Now, then, the question of product part numbers... > Boards and chips are fundamentally different classes of products, > sold to different customers. So their part number structures can be > altogether different. > For boards, I'd suggest a family root number tied to the bare board, > followed by a coded dash number string to identify the options. Each board > type would probably have a different set of installable options, therefore > its dash number structure would be unique to its own product family. (No > fair trying to anticipate all the options that will occur in all the > product families Traversal will ever market; that way lies madness.) Maybe we could give the different options letter names and just have a list of letters after the name? > The root number structure should probably begin with 2 or 3 letters, > chosen mnemonically. They can derive from either the product family name or > the manufacturer's name. The former is more common. The chips could just have a model number, while the boards have a NAME. So, the chip would be the Traversal X104B, while the board based on that is the Clarity 7ABDFQ. How's that? :) > Assuming for the sake of argument that the architecture family name > is GrafiOS, the first series of board products (the FPGA development boards) > could be the GR1 or GS1 line. Since there are going to be different board > layouts for different buses, the root numbers might go something like: > > GS1A- =AGP > GS1P- =PCI > GS1E- =PCIe > > I don't know what the board stuffing options will actually be, but > let's assume for the moment that VRAM space is variable and the ICs come in > either commercial or industrial temp range. Then the part number for a PCI > board with 128 MB of video RAM and all industrial-grade chips would be: > > GS1P-128-I > > Going by the same sort of number structure, the first production > board family with ASICs would be the GS2 series. It would surely have a > different set of options. For instance, if separate precision DACs are an > option, a PCI version with 256 MB of VRAM, separate DACs, and commercial > grade parts could be: > > GS2P-256D-C > > and it would be described in ads and sales literature as a: > > Traversal GrafiOS GS2P-256D-C > > ICs, on the other hand, usually have a part number structure > consisting of the manufacturer-specific prefix, a number unique to the > chip's features and logical function, possibly some fields for the > performance grade, a package identifier, and a temperature grade. This is > pretty much standard throughout the semiconductor industry. I don't know > how a unique number string gets assigned; there might be somebody at a trade > association who does that. Tim, I could ask around a little if you want me > to investigate that question. Please do. > Let's assume that Traversal gets dibs on 26031 as the root number > for the first ASIC with a GrafiOS architecture. (Maybe Traversal could get > a much shorter number, since the number of IC designs it's likely to crank > out is small.) A Traversal-brand commercial-grade part in a PQFP (will it go > in a PQFP? I dunno.) could then be marked: > > Tr26031QC Ok, I get it. Cool. > > > Of course, I don't mean any of these part number examples to be > taken literally. They're only intended to brainstorm the types of number > structures that might be considered. > One thing I'd be really careful about is using the letters O and I > in a part number. I've seen them cause endless confusion in purchasing > departments and stock systems. They're OK if surrounded by letters on both > sides, or perhaps at the very beginning if followed by other letters. > Similarly, a zero shouldn't be used in the middle of a string of letters. > > The basic idea I'm throwing up for consideration is to pick a single > name for the whole product family, and feature-coded part numbers for the > individual products. Sounds like a good plan. _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
