Hey Ann,
thanks for the quick comment. However, the three "disadvantages" you
mention don't have the weight of the 3 advantages I think:

I remember a report on IBDI about a meeting you attended somewhere
together with representants from MySql and PostgreSql, and in your
report you showed significantly more respect for them than you do
now...

Unpronouncable? Well, I'd say it becomes a two word name, just like
MySQL. And it's no harder to pronounce than MySql, only PostgreSql is
sort of pronounced like a single word. Anyway, if you find it hard to
pronounce, you can also simply talk about Firebird and everyone will
know what you're talking about. The formal advantage that it's
indicative for the type of product remains. Guess why other databases
have names like InterBase, SyBase, DB2, ... This has some value!

You think it's ugly? I don't.

But for sure the fact that FirebirdSQL matches the domains is a great
advantage!

Please look at it again tomorrow and reconsider ;)

Best regards
Markus

--- In IBDI@y..., "Ann W. Harrison" <aharrison@i...> wrote:
> Markus wrote
>
> >after some reflexion I have come to the conviction that the product
> >should be named FirebirdSql, rather than Firebird.
>
> >There are 3 advantages:
>
> There is three disadvantages.
>
> 1) It looks like MySQL and the abominable PostgreSQL.
> 2) It's unpronounceable.
> 3) It's indescribably UGLY.
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> Ann