My Thoughts on Twitter’s Renaming to X
Today, I wanted to discuss the recent renaming of Twitter to X.
It has been a week since Elon Musk decided to rebrand Twitter as X. This move has sparked widespread discussions, and I’d like to share my perspective on the matter.
Elon Musk’s decision to rename Twitter as X has raised eyebrows, and for good reason, as it involves reimagining an iconic brand.
The question naturally arises: why alter the branding of a platform that was already established and recognized? Twitter served as a platform for individuals to share their thoughts and for journalists to incorporate these thoughts into their content seamlessly.
Musk has elaborated on the rationale behind this change, emphasizing that it goes beyond a mere name change.
However, several issues arise from this renaming:
- X is a rather concise and generic name.
-
A quick glance at the search results:
-
Now, compare it with these results:
Evidently, several concerns emerge at a glance.
-
- Musk’s intention to transform X into an “all-encompassing” app seems forced. This move might not resonate with mosts users, who are content with the existing social media framework.
There’s kind of a illogical reasoning behind Twitter renaming to X, and that straight up confuse users; why bother doing that all for the sake of having some services available under the same name? That just seems like the worst decision for a company. After all, companies typically don’t offer a single app that caters to all needs; they often release distinct apps under the umbrella of a parent organization.
A preferable approach to naming services would be to follow the examples of Proton or Google. For instance, consider the Proton services:
These services possess clear and distinct names that avoid confusion, with the parent organization’s name optionally preceding each one.
In essence, to indicate that a service falls under a parent group, the naming can adopt the format: “parent” - “service,” or even “parent” “service.”
Here’s the core issue: not every service can be suffixed with X, including Twitter. This naming convention might appear peculiar for both instances. Google doesn’t, for instance, use “Alphabet Google” as its name. Instead, it remains simply “Google.” Although the parent entity is Alphabet, the core brand name remains unchanged, a principle also applied to other Google products.
Google possesses entities like YouTube or Blogger, yet we don’t refer to them as Google YouTube or Google Blogger.
So what’s the issue here? The name. X is just a terrible name for a company, and for what Elon Musk is trying to achieve.
Please share this article to spread the word and I’ll see you guys on nostr!