So what's wrong in just saying that it runs Maemo? Why add another word?

Well the problem is that the rover is the lead device and there are other devices coming at a later stage... (which you wouldn't have an idea about! )

We're talking about naming the "it" here, not Maemo.

At least to me, as an American or English speaker, mah-em-oh just isn't a pleasant-sounding name. May-mo doesn't sound good either.

Also, "saying it runs Maemo" doesn't give it an identity unless you're going to call it "a Maemo" (or "a Maemo phone"). Like Apple in the 1980's didn't just call their operating system "Macintosh," they called the computer "a Macintosh," not "a computer running Macintosh." (And that was OK, but people, or Apple, ultimately preferred the sound of calling it "a Mac.")

Maybe I'd get used to, and like, calling them "Maemo Phones" and "Maemo Tablets." (Like I've said, I thought "Blackberry" was a really stupid name, but it worked and I got used to it.) But I don't think so. It just doesn't sound nice. Ragnar, in the US, like in an advertisement, how do you see Nokia pronouncing "Maemo"?

Additionally, if Maemo is an OS that will be run on non-Nokia hardware, calling the device "a phone that runs Maemo" or "a Maemo phone" doesn't do much to distinguish Nokia's line of Maemo devices.

To me, a well-chosen name helps give the product line an identity and helps market it, and helps unify a particular set of devices in the public's mind.

ThinkPad is a good example, in a number of ways. It sounds good. It links to a very-longstanding tradition of IBM using the word "Think" in its marketing. "ThinkPad" sounds catchier than "an IBM laptop."

Then within the ThinkPad line were very consistent sub-categories. The X-series are small and have no integrated disk drives. The T-series are full-featured, and pricey because made thinner. The R-series is full-size without trying to be made thin or light. Then within those well-defined lines are the various numbers, like the ThinkPad X21, X22, X23, X24, X31, X32, etc. And each higher number is the successor, in a logical order.

I've never understood the Nokia naming convention. To me, calling the N800 and the N86 and the N97 all N-series is confusing. If there is an overall logic to all this, with when a unit gets a letter and when it gets 2 digits or 4 digits and the meaning of higher numbers, it isn't readily apparent.

With Lenovo now owning the ThinkPad line, they distinguished their new consumer line of notebooks from the more corporate line by calling them IdeaPads. Smart move. So "ThinkPad" still presents a distinct, unified image to the public. Likewise, the Maemo line -- especially if it's intended to have a unity to it (like being consistently high-end) -- ought to have its own identity. Even if it's not all high-end, it's definitely distinct from the rest of Nokia's offerings.

I don't know that any of us on this thread have hit on a good name, but I don't think "Maemo" is it, and "Nokia phone running the Maemo OS" isn't it either.

I should say that in a way the issue has changed with the coming of the N900. The Tablets really needed a special name since they weren't even phones, they were a novel concept, and "Nokia Internet Tablets" sure wasn't catchy or simple or distinct.

Actually, they didn't call it "A Macintosh" or "The Macintosh"... they just called it Macintosh

http://www.adaptivepath.com/blog/200...inite-article/

http://www.peterme.com/?p=583

Gotta anthropomorphize 'em all!


PS: Yes, I think Lenovo did a smart thing there.

I must admit that I've never really been impressed by the "Maemo" branding, although the word is bland and "shapeless" enough not to have any negative connotations either.

What comes to branding the new (phone) hardware platform, I'm not sure if it's even wise for Nokia to adopt a single all-encompassing branding unless they can keep the number of different models of varying styles at the bare minimum (or, if they can come up with a single incredibly lucrative "People's Phone" to rule 'em all)

After all, Apple Inc. is simply marketing a single evolutionary line of iPhones (besides the iPod and the upcoming tablet devices which are not phones) while Nokia has number of different segments (incl .geographical ones) to protect or recapture.

I do admit to liking the historically prestigious Communicator brand as something that could work well with the top-of-the-line models...

Avata also has a pleasant ring to it, and it could be something that can be adopted across geographical regions (if marketeted properly). Perhaps that could be the mainstream model so someone grab the domain(s) just in case before you know what... If the Avata name sounds a little alien to the anglophones used to english(esque) product names then just use the english-language Communicator in those markets?

Anyhow I feel that there's room for at least two device lineup brandings (Top and Mainstream) and I don't feel totally comfortable leaving the final decision to Nokia's management...

Hehe. Listen to the first few sentences here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GL2FjDaZfrQ

Yeah, I can't even get it straight.

Tim

If Nokia gets rid of the "a" then I agree with Ragnar. One word. To your average American the word Maemo would be gibberish. They can handle words like Android, Pre, Blackberry, Hero, iThis, iThat, ..., etc.

Can't you just see Morgan Freeman's Nokia commercial:

"Didn't you get the Memo?"

"Introducing the Nokia Memo and Memo OS. Don't miss it."

OK, I'd better expand my comments to mah-eh-mo or may-mo or my-mo

Looks like nokia is going to name every phone for the North American Market without numbers...

Here comes Nokia Twist...

http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/23/s...rizon-accordi/