One aspect of Web 2.0 that continues to entertain is the strange, sometimes awful, names that startups come up with to promote themselves. Some of them turn out to be successful - e.g. del.icio.us - but others prove to be ineffective. Some web 2.0 names have been compared to Star Wars characters and there's even a Web 2.0 Name Generator, in case you need inspiration.
The R/WW authors had a pow-wow on Basecamp and we've come up with a (fun) list of the worst 10 names in Web 2.0. But you're bound to disagree with some of them, or we've missed some obvious ones, so please jump into the comments to add others. In no particular order...
1. Fairtilizer
- an online music service we recently reviewed.
The service is great, but the name attracted a bit of attention, for example Valleywag suggested (rather
subtly, given their rep) that Fairtilizer re-brand. And The Name Inspector posted about
it. Although even he seemed lost for words, starting off with: "Oh dear. The Name
Inspector doesn’t even know where to begin." He eventually concluded that it is a
bad pun, which has some unfortunate connotations. In case the penny hasn't dropped yet:
the name is basically a pun of fertilizer. And while fertilizer makes things grow, it is
also translates as 'a pile of shit'.
2. Profilactic is a social network product, which
aggregates and mashes up feeds. It sounds like a cool product, but the name is just
bizarre. It could be a way of getting attention, because they've proudly listed on their
homepage some criticisms of it. For example Marc Canter is quoted as saying "Profilactic
sounds so - so - so named by a young person. How can that be a product?". Nuff said.
3. gravee is a
community-powered, social search engine that personalizes results according to users'
interests. The name is a pun on gravy, but uses the web 2.0 standard of two 'e's.
4. LicketyShip is an e-commerce service that
delivers goods within a couple of hours of ordering. It's a reasonable pun on lickety
split, but seems like a hard domain for people to remember.
5. Oyogi is a
community built around questions and answers. The name would connote spiritual peace of
mind... except there's an 'o' in it.
6. Layoffspace - this is a social network for the
unemployed, so this name is contextual and even slightly witty. It is mainly on this list
because it's an unwieldy attempt to copy the MySpace name.
7. iStalkr - it's
a web app that allows you to create a lifestream tracking all your RSS feeds for services
you use, like Digg, Del.icio.us, Ma.gnolia, etc. It creates a time line of your
activities. The name is a good fit, it's just a bit scary ;-)
8. Agester -
a community where you can guess people's age, find out how old you look, and meet new
people. It's on this list because it's a lame use of the "ster" cliche (Friendster,
Napster, Dogster, etc).
9. hoooka is an
online store for sharing videos, photos and audio. OK it's pretty witty and appropriate
for its target audience. Maybe the extra 'o' threw us (we seem to have something against
extraneous 'o's...Zooomr is another cuplrit).
10. Qoop is a
service allowing users to create and sell content. It's a meaningless word, a naming
tactic that has become common in web 2.0 - pretty harmless really. We only selected it
because it sounds too much like "goop".
So there's our list - which 'bad' startup names would you add? Remember that this is just a fun list; we're not implying that the web apps themselves are bad.
Top image generated by Web 2.0 Logo Creator
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Top 10 Worst Web App Names.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2360
Una lista de los peores nombres para aplicaciones web 2.0. Como por ejemplo profilactic. Visto en digg.com Read More
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all Read/WriteWeb posts
I have to vote for iSnailer as one of the worst.
Posted by: Ali | July 16, 2007 1:06 AMAm I the only one that thinks doostang is a name better suited to describe something that smells bad or a venereal disease?
Posted by: Tim Case | July 16, 2007 1:09 AMHmm...some nice new comment thingy's you got going on here Richard.
Posted by: Ali | July 16, 2007 1:09 AMMost of these names are just awful. Probably because so many other names (Google, StumbleUpon, Digg, Flikr, etc) have been successful, many people now come up with names that, in some cases are ridiculous or too awful.
Posted by: Daniel | July 16, 2007 2:39 AMLove the web 2.0 name generator... it just generated 'myopia' for me.
Posted by: Dylan | July 16, 2007 2:41 AMI think you'd be better off trying to list the good names instead.
Posted by: Rami Kayyali | July 16, 2007 3:09 AMYou should check TechCrunch company index for a terrible list of names. Here's a sample:
- Zixxo / Waxxi (can you tell which does what?)
- YesNoMayB (they just *had* to omit a vowel)
- viddyou (try explaining that over a phone)
- tun3r (which reads tune-three-er)
- Cluztr (not one, but *two* letter alteration)
PS. I pressed Submit Comment before finishing my comment above. My mistake.
Posted by: Rami Kayyali | July 16, 2007 3:17 AMAny site that uses a -ster, -space or -r ending to their name should be ignored out of principle.
Posted by: Andy McLoughlin | July 16, 2007 3:50 AMDamn, so close to winning it all!
Profilactic really isn't *that* bizarre if you consider that, in addition to aggregate your content, it also aggregates links to all of your web "profiles."
On our FAQ, we explain the name like this:
"Why did you pick such a stupid name?
We could ask your mom and dad the same question, but that would just be rude, wouldn't it? We wanted to pick a name that had something to do with the word "profile," was memorable and showed that we don't take ourselves too seriously. Mission accomplished."
Profilactic isn't for everyone. We wanted a name that would weed out people who don't have a sense of humor or who take themselves too seriously. That's why we included Canter's quote...
So, other than the name, what do you think of the service?
Posted by: smorty71 | July 16, 2007 4:43 AMhttp://www.profilactic.com/mashup/smorty71
Vote for kijiji ...
Posted by: Holmes | July 16, 2007 5:03 AMI've just spotted something on another blog called "Foodio54". What?!
Posted by: Andy | July 16, 2007 5:13 AMWhat do you think about my new web 2.0 site www.WhoseFan.com? bad name or ok? :)
Posted by: George S. | July 16, 2007 5:53 AMI'd have to say Bessed is the worsed.
Posted by: Adam Jusko | July 16, 2007 7:39 AMWhat about having a list of web apps with great names?
Posted by: JP Checa | July 16, 2007 8:06 AMOne site with a horrible name that comes to mind is Orkut. The first 10 times I saw the name, I thought "What the h is that?" and had to check it out to see what it was. Now I know it is a province in Russia. No wait...it's something to do with Google...hold on while I check the website again. Ohhh, it's a social networking site. Hmmm, everytime I hear the name, I have to check out the website. Maybe it's not such a bad name after all.
Posted by: D Welen | July 16, 2007 8:21 AMSince when does a Q sound like a G?
Then again Richard can me DICK!
Posted by: Phil | July 16, 2007 9:28 AMWhen I first heard about Fairtilizer, I heard it as "Faretilizer" and thought it had to do with airline tickets... then I couldn't stop thinking it was "Fartilizer" and had to do with toilet humor. ;)
Posted by: Josh Catone | July 16, 2007 9:32 AMWufoo - great company, awesome product but not so sure about the name.
Posted by: Josh 2.0 | July 16, 2007 9:45 AMNice post - but honestly, I prefer "daring" or potentially ridiculous names to self-important, dull, pseudo-corporate names for start-ups, such as "Global Mobile Technology Innovation Experts 2.0, Inc." (just made that up - that would be two guys selling used mobile phones over the Internet) or any dull name suffixed with a "2.0". In the niche sector I spent some time in (localization), start-ups (or new products) always use those "OMG, look at how corporate, serious and professional we are" sort of names, and I consider it a good sign that many in the Web 2.0 entrepreneurs crowd don't take themselves that seriously. Then again - maybe, they ARE serious about these names (runs screaming)...
Posted by: Christian Flury | July 16, 2007 12:18 PMI thought Profilactic was quite clever.
Posted by: engtech @ internet duct tape | July 16, 2007 12:31 PMWhat about having a list of web apps with great names?
That would be great.
Thanks, Dugg.
http://www.ebooksbay.org
Posted by: eBooksBay | July 16, 2007 12:44 PMNext up, a list of great names.
I see I've already upset at least one company (sorry Qoop). Once again the idea wasn't to insult, but to have a laugh. I'd actually argue that Read/WriteWeb isn't an ideal name, as a) it's hard to pronounce, b) it has a '/' in it. But then again I chose it 4-5 years ago and I thought it was clever at the time ;-)
So to any startup listed above who feels slighted, you can give me some grief for the R/WW name ;-)
Prolilactic, I actually like the name -- altho it is still bizarre :-)
Posted by: Richard MacManus | July 16, 2007 2:00 PMwamily needs to be added
Posted by: Mike Downes | July 16, 2007 2:20 PMI think there is 2 reasons for such bad domains:
1) So many registered domains
2) Lack of domain search tools
Recently I built http://www.bustaname.com to try and solve the second. If anyone hasn't seen it, it might save you from choosing one of these domains.
Posted by: Ryan | July 16, 2007 2:35 PMWhat about the music service nuTsie? http://www.nutsie.com
Posted by: Charlie | July 16, 2007 2:49 PMI don't see why profilactic is all that bad. As someone (I think from profilactic) above said, it links to other web "profiles". And you do know that it's a play on words of "prophylactic" right? And prophylactic is an awesome word, just slightly worse than "prophylaxis". As for the attempt at bashing it by saying it sounds like a teenager came up with it, what about all the other Web 2.0 names?! How many teens know what prophylaxis is ... wufoo or qoop sounds like they've been made up by young minds... which isn't all that bad. Welcome to the 21st century.
Posted by: Ashton | July 16, 2007 3:04 PMP.S. I've never been to or heard of profilactic... just didn't think it deserves to be on this list.
Actually, Oyogi may be Japanese for "swim". It didn't connote anything spiritual to me, at least.
Posted by: Andy | July 16, 2007 3:14 PMI agree that Fairtilizer is perhaps the worst of the names listed above. Web 2.0 has given us plenty of terrible names. Instead of purchasing good names from domaineers', new startups seem to try and be clever but fail time and time again!
Posted by: Paul Bradish | July 16, 2007 3:23 PMYou left out MajikWidget.com
Posted by: Rick | July 16, 2007 3:27 PMOne of the worst if Bliin.com ... sounds like spleen. Need i say more.
Posted by: Harry | July 16, 2007 3:50 PMMaybe QOOP are afrikaans or dutch speaking? The afrikaans word for buy is "koop" (and koop.com is already taken) so replacing the K with a Q makes sense.
Posted by: Bren | July 16, 2007 3:57 PMMeebo.com
Posted by: Amir | July 16, 2007 4:12 PMWhat about this one that I came across - it's like Digg, but for internet deals: www.shlogging.com
Posted by: Dan | July 16, 2007 4:21 PMTo me, Qoop looks like co-op intentionally spelled incorrectly, not like a non-word that strongly resembles goop.
Posted by: Kai | July 16, 2007 4:23 PMHi Charlie... did you notice that nuTsie is an iTunes anagram?
-Bob Wise
Posted by: Bob Wise | July 16, 2007 6:08 PMVP Engineering
Melodeo, Inc.
http://www.nutsie.com
Ashton, #26, where I come from prophylactic is another word for condom. So whenever I see the startup name Profilactic, I think of that -- and wonder why a company would name themselves after a condom?
But maybe that is a kiwi or british term??
Posted by: Richard MacManus | July 16, 2007 7:35 PMThose names suck. "Profilactic"??? Well at least they caught your attention, but obviously the creators of this pages couldn´t think in long term results.
Posted by: jose | July 16, 2007 7:35 PMMy "old" favorite was Jobby, which literally meant .. well .. crap (at least in Scotland)
Posted by: Zoli Erdos | July 16, 2007 8:04 PMQoop's a strange one. How to you explain it on the phone: "like coop but with a q instead of a c?" Isn't that co-op? I suppose they have that down by now.
Posted by: Ed Kohler | July 16, 2007 8:29 PMSoonr: First of all, it uses -r ending we've all known to hate. Secondly, their headquarters are not even located in Oklahoma like you would expect!
Thoof (The Name Inspector brought this one up): This is sound one makes falling out of your chair from realizing how bad the name is.
Posted by: Chris | July 16, 2007 9:36 PMMine would have to be www.espew.com
Posted by: Leminnes | July 17, 2007 12:28 AMhuh, it's sucks yow !!! :p
-IT-
Posted by: Irvan | July 17, 2007 1:46 AMThere are so many bloody domain squatters that it is near impossible to find a good name these days. Hate the squatters. Hate them.
Posted by: Daniel | July 17, 2007 2:13 AMIn terms of the line, "web 2.0 standard of two 'e's." Isn't the word "standard" a little two strong here. I mean its not like del.icio.us and flickr are out of spec.
Posted by: Bill H. | July 17, 2007 8:34 AMI thought this was a web app list.
Quite honestly, the idea for the article is great but your comments are unimaginative and not very entertaining.
Posted by: Umm | July 17, 2007 9:42 AMI would like to add ebay's new kijiji to the list
Posted by: AW | July 17, 2007 10:35 AMBrings me back and had to look up this list to share - sure most of you have seen tho - The top 10 unintentionally worst company URLs
Posted by: Ron | July 17, 2007 9:23 PMI can talk becuase I called my site: omadsense.com .
Posted by: W.Medina | July 18, 2007 5:51 AMIt's basically a break down of - Online Money Adsense, I took the o the M and adsense.
I thought it was cool and interesting. Besides, all the names I wanted were taken.
GoChongo is the worst, hands down.
Posted by: DMC | July 18, 2007 9:13 AMI run across these naming nightmares a lot when branding new companies... for many of the reasons already mentioned above (i.e. the good domains are taken, there are trademark issues and the company wants something totally clear, they don't want to pay a "squatter," it means something in Latin, the company president had a dog with that name, etc.) I wrote an article in Entrepreneur to help avoid some of these common naming mistakes. http://www.entrepreneur.com/startingabusiness/startupbasics/namingyourbusiness/article76958.html The most popular mistake is the "train wreck."
Posted by: Phillip Davis | July 18, 2007 9:21 AMWhile not a Web App, I saw an interesting Web award today.
"the 2007 list of AlwaysOn top 100 private companies..."
Is it just me, or is that an odd name...?
Posted by: Charles Knight | July 18, 2007 2:36 PMWeb Script Labs takes an Ajax loader generator, Favicon generator and a Web 2.0 Domain Name Generator and places into one, nice location for you to generate some Web 2.0 goodness
Posted by: nicolas | July 20, 2007 4:53 PMprofila... is a terrible name :s I couldn't see the connection or the pun, and it took me a while to read it everytime.. prof[eee]lactic or prof[aaay]lactic? too many syllables
Posted by: Mariam Ayyash | July 21, 2007 6:52 AMsomeone said those are better than safe and boring ones, yes they are, but you know what? in a world full of great unsafe successful names, those copy cats represent the SAFE ones... if it works with Flickr, it must work for us... not so brave!
Hi
Interesting topic
For our new web2.0 app - in beta - new version this week - we have used a shape based URL set of 200+ circles eg erfcxs.com 43wsdr.com ujko98.com or the ridiculous URL www.type-any-circle-of-six.com
Sorry !
Simon
Posted by: Simon | July 21, 2007 10:27 PMThis is interesting.
Posted by: SorenG | July 22, 2007 8:00 AMI think Qoop is indeed Dutch. The Dutch word for 'to buy' is 'koop'. 'Qoop' is just a variation, probably to give it a twist. It is pronounced just like 'koop'. Nothing really strange there then.
Posted by: Xaphire | July 24, 2007 1:26 PMHow about efluent.com? Do you really want a CRM product whose name essentially means "sewage"? What kind of data flows out of this program? Yikes!
Posted by: Anonymous | August 1, 2007 4:00 AM