throwaway190620

This is very helpful. Thanks a bunch!

Good idea for sure. Unfortunately it's not HxHxHx.

I suspect that yes, they would be actually.

It's one thing to say "Sponsored by Apple" and another "Sponsored, erm, by Q-Z-W-C-K-I, which is actually much better than what its name might imply". The less friction there is, the better. Especially for placements that last mere seconds.

> The two names can co-exist

That's what I'm wondering the most actually.

I think the least intrusive way to do it is to introduce a literal clone of the product under a different name. Make it clear that it is the exact same things as the original.

What I can't find is any examples of anyone doing this. Also, not sure how would the mighty Google react to these shenanigans and if their automata won't decided to delist both products just because it looks fishy.

I can assure you that you are fundamentally wrong. First impression is exceptionally important and the name/icon is the first thing anyone sees.

Might've worked if the thing wasn't sitting on its own site.

Beatles is a pun, it's good because of that.

We have no way to measure this, but common logic would suggest that there _is_ a negative effect there too. Imagine a junior sysadmin coming over the manager's desk and suggesting to use a tool that sounds like someone profusely swearing in Parseltongue.

But that's a secondary concern compared to not being promote product through any channels with an audio track.

This is perfectly pronounceable though - Cue-Bee-Serve.

> But the discovery of most IT apps comes from written communication - blog posts, Google searches, etc.

Well, yeah, precisely the original reasoning behind the name. The problem is that we can't promote through any channels that require pronouncing the name and there are quite a few really good ones.