101–110 of 201 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's more like "x.com" is the canonical name. It sounds like a porn website. I don't think most business owners would want this as their brand, but I guess Elon is special in this way as well.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's more like "x.com" is the canonical name. It sounds like a porn website. I don't think most business owners would want this as their brand, but I guess Elon is special in this way as well.
[flagged]
I was hoping that b.org would be a Star Trek fansite.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can just call it Twitter, in the same way that everyone just says Facebook rather than Meta and Google rather than Alphabet.
I'm just disappointed that people go along with takeovers of useful words: x, meta, alphabet. If one was renamed "aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa" would people still go along with it? What's the limit?
Apple, Blackberry...
One letter domains has the same issue as many of the gTLDs, they aren't particularly useful in terms of brand recognition. X.com is pretty stupid as well, you can't meaningfully use it as a brand. Take bob.builders, it's a perfectly valid domain, but if you see it on the back of a van, even if it's www.bob.builders, it's not recognizably as a website. www.b.com has the exact same problem, even x.com / www.x.com is ju…
> X.com is pretty stupid as well, you can't meaningfully use it as a brand. I don't know that it is self-evident. The open source implementation of the X Window System is provided by the x.org foundation. https://x.org/wiki/
> The open source implementation of the X Window System is provided by the x.org foundation. https://x.org/wiki/
I know way more about the inner mechanics of X11 than the average Linux user (which is saying something), but if you had asked me in a different context what x.org pointed to, I would have had no idea. (And then would have said, "oh, right" as soon as you told me the answer).
That's the tell-tale sign of a bad branding decision. I'm not going to fault X too much for that since they literally predate the Web[0], and because they're targeting a very specialized audience, but any mainstream company that makes the same mistake in 2023 deserves whatever criticism they get for it.
[0] The foundation itself doesn't, but the underlying projects do, and the foundation was formed as a merger so it depends on where you choose to start the clock.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think we really should adopt the name "X". Because Musk took Twitter and turned it into something else, which is not the old Twitter anymore. So giving it a different name is fitting. That said, I don't necessarily like the name "X".
It’s not like Twitter wasn’t a shitshow several years before Musk. Sure he made it way worse but it was already a global dumpster fire.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What meaning do they infer?
That they're going to make a ton of stupid company names and it's their company-name umbrella dad-joke used for tax and legal purposes? We didn't just all get the memo that that's the joke?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not like Twitter wasn’t a shitshow several years before Musk. Sure he made it way worse but it was already a global dumpster fire.
There was plenty of shit there, but it was the best way to get real-time updates on big news events, as plenty official accounts used it as their primary site.