Slightly surprised by the response, Jitsi seems fine to me. Is it worse than Slack?

I've noticed that a lot of people have an aversion to software that doesn't have a name that's made from English word(s). This is possibly because the most common software out there has this property, and so people subconsciously associate it with quality (exceptions abound, of course, Samsung, Adobe, but I think that you need to reach a certain size to break free from the negative stigma in English-speaking countries).

Come to think of it, this may be why Linux is still seen as an outsider to non-technical people, as though it were less of a serious product than Windows (which has an English word as a name).

Adobe is a an English word though. More people are probably now aware of the software than the bricks, but it has a root there.

The name Linux is not the issue, the fact that it isn't a product might be.

Think of Windows or macOS, pick a version, you can picture what it looks like and what apps run on it. Linux isn't a specific product. You can't install Linux 10.15. You might install a specific kernel version, or a specific distro version, but Linux is more of an assemblage of packages rather than one cohesive end-product. And it's not as easy to picture Linux in your mind. One Linux user will use default Ubuntu installation, one Linux user will boot directly to terminal because window managers, and other Linux user will be using Android which is completely different case as well.

Or Skype? ICQ?

This thread is quite idiotic.

Or “google”

I was wondering about the name too. From https://jitsi.org/what-is-jitsi/ :

SIP Communicator is renamed Jitsi (from the Bulgarian “жици”, or “wires”), since it now also supports audio and video over XMMP’s Jingle extensions and it would be silly to still call it SIP Communicator.

If your boss is thick enough for vague adolescent impressions to be a significant criterion, your job is at risk.

Ironic that you would suggest "Jitsi" as a (stereo)typically bad name with a username of "jimbob". I guess we all have our own prejudices.

Says jimbob45 :D

I don't get a malware/scam vibe from the name, but I'm probably missing something. What makes you think that?

It's a feeling, so not easily rationalizable... I wonder if it has anything to do with being "Gypped" (), but for me even outside of that connotation, the word evokes negative feeling.

() Interestingly, I too have for the first time looked up the etymology and feel uncomfortable; I think because I've only ever heard it before, and assumed it was spelled differently like "Jipped" or something https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2013/12/30/242429836...

I also think it’s a horrible name, reminds me of “Tootsie” and an equally ugly logo to match.

These things are subjective but if enough people hate it, perhaps it’s important to look into it.

I normally complain about terrible open source branding but didn't have a negative reaction to this branding when I saw this post.

Goes to show how important it is to do user research on a broad swath of the population to make sure you have branding that isn't off-putting to a significant subset of people.

Definitely. There is also universal agreement in good branding vs bad branding. I’ve been browsing the top branding blog for over 12 years now: https://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/

Still subjective but let’s compare Jitsi brand with something from https://www.cghnyc.com/

There is certainly a huge difference even though it’s not a quantitative measure.

Jitsi brand just sucks so bad. :(

I think there's some irony in complaining about "Jitsi" and proving a link to "cghnyc".

Again, like the "jimbob" guy above who was objecting to the name Jitsi, I find "dandigangi" to be rather odd and unsettling.

If we're going to make names be the cover of the book, then we must all realize that almost any name will be uncomfortable to some audiences.

compared to a name that invokes the church of the subgenius, or its competitor that invokes the alternative: discordianism?

jitsi seems quite tame compared to both of those.