<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
On 03/07/2012 03:46 PM, Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:201203071546.32874.boud@valdyas.org"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Wednesday 07 March 2012 Mar, Jaroslaw Staniek wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On 7 March 2012 15:10, Sebastian Sauer <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:mail@dipe.org"><mail@dipe.org></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">The Abacus Spreadsheet Formula compiler:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://code.google.com/p/formulacompiler/">http://code.google.com/p/formulacompiler/</a>
from the Abacus Research AG (1985-today):
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.formulacompiler.org/download/abacus.htm">http://www.formulacompiler.org/download/abacus.htm</a>
I really think we should not rename to Abacus if we do not plan to make some
lawyers even more rich.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
This is going insane if we go this way (Thorsten, please don't click! ;) ):
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/28956/presentation-stage">http://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/28956/presentation-stage</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
Then better don't grep for Words, Flow or Plan :) But see, that is
exactly the point.<br>
<br>
Nobody will name Krita "Calligra Krita" or Kexi "Calligra Kexi"
since they are standalone-names. But all those applications we
renamed are not. They are even so generic that you will very likely
use them when you talk with a friend about something unrelated. They
are very generic to an extend where magazines will be forced to use
"Calligra Words", "Calligra Stage", "Calligra Flow", "Calligra Plan"
or "Calligra XYZ" (where we try to define XYZ atm).<br>
<br>
But Abacus is a standalone name. It's used standalone by the company
I just linked above and by the spreadsheet application which is only
shipped in BSD.<br>
<br>
I think what we really like to have for our spreadsheet-application
is a generic name like *ALL* the other renamed Calligra applications
have too. That is the cooperate Calligra brand. I would even have
loved to see Krita and Kexi in that family too but I do understand
that they have already string brands which we should not give up.<br>
<br>
Those idea of a common brand is very much de-facto for Office
Suites. Think of OpenOffice.org or LibreOffice.org. generic
application-names like Writer, Calc, Impress or Base that should and
are not used standalone. The brand is OpenOffice.org/LibreOffice.org
and not Writer/Calc/Impress/Base. It's even the case that
OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice.org are using the very same names for
there applications and only differ in there brand at the common
name. The same is true for Apple and MSOffice (through there Excel
and Powerpoint are out-of-role and are have stronger brands then
"Office" or maybe even then "Microsoft").<br>
<br>
In any case an application name is very important and we should not
just choose something do have the thing finished and done. Let's
take some time to collect ideas, talk and choose wisely. We may not
get the possibility so easy again or maybe very soon again if we
rush to fast.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:201203071546.32874.boud@valdyas.org"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Abacus is as common term as Spreadsheet. Of course so do Windows is...
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
But abacus isn't descriptive of what calligra tables is. The application is not an abacus; it's a spreadsheet. And that makes a lot of difference.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<font size="-1"><br>
Yes, thank you a lot for that very important point.<br>
<br>
</font>
</body>
</html>