At 7/5/02 3:33 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>I've heard a number of people opine that we should go back to just plain
>'Postgres', which is pronounceable by the uninitiate, and besides which
>that's what we use informally most of the time. 'PostgreSQL' is about
>as marketing-unfriendly a name as you could easily find...
What's even worse is that when you do a search for a particular piece of
information about PostgreSQL, you have to do the search twice, because
you don't know whether the Web page or message that you're looking for
would have referred to it as "Postgres" or "PostgreSQL".
Heck, I can never even remember if the username created by the install is
"postgres" or "postgresql".
The fact that so many people don't use the full name "PostgreSQL" seems
to me to be an indication in and of itself that something is wrong with
it. And the fact that they use "Postgres" instead is an indication of
what it should be called (the full official name could be "Postgres SQL
Server").
I see the point of having "SQL" in the name -- it theoretically lets
people know what it does, like "MySQL" -- but in practice, the
disadvantages of "PostgreSQL" seem to far outweigh that benefit.
------------------------------------
Robert L Mathews, Tiger Technologies