The Joel on Software Discussion Group (CLOSED)

A place to discuss Joel on Software. Now closed.

This community works best when people use their real names. Please register for a free account.

Other Groups:
Joel on Software
Business of Software
Design of Software (CLOSED)
.NET Questions (CLOSED)
TechInterview.org
CityDesk
FogBugz
Fog Creek Copilot


The Old Forum


Your hosts:
Albert D. Kallal
Li-Fan Chen
Stephen Jones

Why it's called Silverlight

I'm sure some readers will be interested in the decision making process that we
went through to arrive at the name of Silverlight for our new web runtime
platform. It was a tough choice; we know that WPF/E was much loved by the
community and that acronyms can be both inspiring and evocative, but we really
wanted to try something radical and different.
 
We had some really great alternative choices that we considered before settling
on Silverlight, and I thought now would be a perfect time to share them. I hope
that after you see the other brand names we considered, you'll be happy with our
final choice. So here goes... drum roll, please; here are the top 10 names we
rejected before settling on Silverlight:
10. GrayLuminosity (close, but there was just something not quite right about it) 
9. AJAX - Asynchronous JavaScript And XAML (turns out that acronym was already
taken) 
8. David (Bill Gates vetoed that one himself) 
7. non-Windows Presentation Foundation 
6. Windows Technology Foundation (usually shortened to WTF, of course) 
5. MicroMedia Player (a lightweight web alternative to Media Player) 
4. Microsoft Light New User Experience (shortened to LINUX) 
3. Microsoft 2.0 (big 800lb gorilla? Us? No, we’re your friendly neighborhood
Web 2.0 startup) 
2. Redlight (“Roxanne… ♫ …you don’t have to wear that dress tonight…”) 
1. Microsoft Windows Presentation Foundation Live Rich Client ActiveX Player R2
Ultimate Edition Service Pack 1 CTP (or WPFLRCAPR2UESP1CTP for short)

http://blogs.msdn.com/tims/archive/2007/04/18/how-did-we-come-up-with-silverlight.aspx

Thursday, April 19, 2007
 
 
I read somewhere an Adobe employee asking what is "next generation" about it. It seems that the name is part of it. :-) Maybe another part is that rather than jumping on someone else's bandwagon, Microsoft has created their own copy of the bandwagon and jumped on it alone so far.
Joao Pedrosa
Thursday, April 19, 2007
 
 
"Next Generation" is to the computer industry what "New And Improved" is to the detergent industry: it means nothing, but you have to have it in the advertising so that people will understand that it's New and also Improved and thus Very Exciting.

"Same Old Actors In Lab Coats" or "Another Product, Same Old Hype And Promises of Silver Bullets" just doesn't sound so good.  ;)

(Quality of the product, of course, is rarely correlated with the marketing. It may be wonderful or it may be crap - but it will be called "next generation" regardless.)

Thursday, April 19, 2007
 
 
"I'm sure some readers will be interested in the decision making process that we went through to arrive at the name of Silverlight for our new web runtime platform."

Uh. No.
The Spirit of the Electoral College Send private email
Thursday, April 19, 2007
 
 
Sparkle would've been better.

The name Silverlight sounds like a fake word. Just compare it with some really successful product names: Photoshop, Windows, Office, Google, AutoCAD. Those names invoke some meaning.

I admit that Sparkle is a little too close to "Flash" and they're probably trying to avoid that, but c'mon...it is going to be competing with Flash.

Let's see if I can think of one on my own (Sparkle was the code-name for Microsoft Expressions!)...

Motion. (Introducing Microsoft Motion!! that sounds good.)

Dazzle. (probably taken)

Rainbow.

Argh, I can't think of anymore...coming up with good product names is hard!
Wayne B Send private email
Thursday, April 19, 2007
 
 
> "I'm sure some readers will be interested in the decision
> making process that we went through to arrive at the name
> of Silverlight for our new web runtime platform."

> Uh. No.

Contrary to what your ego might have told you, you don't speak for all humans in existence.
bean
Thursday, April 19, 2007
 
 
>The name Silverlight sounds like a fake word. Just compare
>it with some really successful product names: Photoshop,
>Windows, Office, Google, AutoCAD. Those names invoke some
>meaning.

Umm, how about Macintosh? Yahoo? iPod? Firefox? Acrobat? FogBugz???
bean
Thursday, April 19, 2007
 
 
VisualBasic

Thursday, April 19, 2007
 
 
Yeah, you're right. I guess I just don't like the name Silverlight. Too many syllables maybe?
Wayne B Send private email
Friday, April 20, 2007
 
 
It's called Silverlight for the same reason adding some non .Net stuff to the .Net framework relaunched as .Net 3.0 instead of .Net 2.5.

It looks like Marketing is in charge of MS nowadays, and not the geeks.

PS: don't put hard enters in your post, let the forum software do it for you.  Ever thought what will happen if a software upgrade changes the text width of our posts?
TravisO Send private email
Friday, April 20, 2007
 
 
Gotta love the broken line wrapping of the OP's post. Just like Outlook.
yer mosehhmid
Friday, April 20, 2007
 
 
bean: " > "I'm sure some readers will be interested in the decision
> making process that we went through to arrive at the name
> of Silverlight for our new web runtime platform."

> Uh. No.

Contrary to what your ego might have told you, you don't speak for all humans in existence."

Ummm... The original quote didn't say "all readers" or "everyone on the planet". It said "some readers". If he's got more than a handful of people who read his blog, it's probably a safe bet that a couple of them wondered where the name Silverlight came from. And it was a pretty humorous post , too.
KenW Send private email
Friday, April 20, 2007
 
 
Beam me up Scotty!
NameGoesHere
Saturday, April 21, 2007
 
 
The "silver" reminds me of "silver screen": it plays movies ... but the "light" reminds me of "straylight" from _Neuromancer_.
Christopher Wells Send private email
Saturday, April 21, 2007
 
 
KenW:

You're replying to the wrong guy :P
bean
Sunday, April 22, 2007
 
 
That post is what Joel is talking about when he mentions that he doesn't advise people to "try to be funny" anymore.  I've read nutritional information labels that are funnier than that.
Mr Fancypants Send private email
Monday, April 23, 2007
 
 

This topic is archived. No further replies will be accepted.

Other recent topics Other recent topics
 
Powered by FogBugz