Robert Treat wrote:
> Unfortunatly I took a fair amount of sales and marketing classes in college,
> so I guess I have to chime in here. The argument against it is weakening the
> brand, and adding confusion to the market place. . We already suffer from
> this now, and promoting two names only makes this worse.
>
The only major problem I see with this argument is that the RDBMS is
called any of: PostgreSQL, Postgres, Pg, etc. Postgres is arguably
*already* a stronger trademark of this project than is PostgreSQL
because most people who are lazy type "PostgreSQL" as 'Pg' and pronounce
it "Postgres."
I guess my concern is that we already have this problem. If we want to
be consistent, we need to name things more consistently. PgDay needs to
become PostgreSQL Day and needs to be written as such consistently. The
arguable reason why is that "PostgreSQL" (while a great excersize for
children learning to separate sounds to make words) is fairly
labor-intensive to write and speak, so people don't do that.
It would be better to have *one* trademark would clearly be better. But
given the fact that we now have a number of unofficial trademarks which
are arguably stronger than "PostgreSQL" I am not sure that this case
makes as much sense.
Best Wishes,
Chris Travers