horrible name. assuming you do get enough traction with it otherwise, it's going to cause nothing but confusion when talking about. "opens" you to other naming problems in the future if you try to expand the brand to other products Example: the Open Gradebook -- is it open, or is it owned by the Open company -- do you prosecute everyone other website or software with Open in the name? can of worms is "opened". :)
Comments
horrible name. assuming you do get enough traction with it otherwise, it's going to cause nothing but confusion when talking about. "opens" you to other naming problems in the future if you try to expand the brand to other products Example: the Open Gradebook -- is it open, or is it owned by the Open company -- do you prosecute everyone other website or software with Open in the name? can of worms is "opened". :)
my two cents
We're exploring other names and we certainly understand the issues associated with 'Open'.
I agree Open is too generic. Open should serve as a qualifier for a name that is more describing of what the software does.
'Open Learning' is one idea we've been playing around with
I agree that 'Open' is really generic.
Maybe 'Transfuser', as in 'Knowledge Transfuser' :-) ?