CNET Top 5
Worst named techTech product names you won't forget, for all the wrong reasons.
Seems that naming tech products is like finding a .com address: Ã¯Â¿Â½The good ones are all taken.Ã¯Â¿Â½ IÃ¯Â¿Â½ve got proof. IÃ¯Â¿Â½m B.C. with the Top 5 Worst Named Tech Products, Pt. II: The list has grown since the last time we did this. #5 is Cisco Cius. ItÃ¯Â¿Â½s kinda clever in a cloyingly cute sort of way that eventually makes you mad the third or fourth time someone asks what youÃ¯Â¿Â½re carrying and you have to say it. ItÃ¯Â¿Â½s a tablet that is centered around Cisco telepresence, WebEx meetings and Ã¯Â¿Â½transformative business software applications and software managementÃ¯Â¿Â½ which sounds awfully boring for something called Cius. #4 is George. Now, if youÃ¯Â¿Â½re of a certain age or familiar with rat pack slang, you think IÃ¯Â¿Â½m talking about your Bird. In fact, itÃ¯Â¿Â½s something bigger: A really good iPod dock music system from the also clumsily named Chestnut Hill Sound. IÃ¯Â¿Â½m told that Ã¯Â¿Â½GeorgeÃ¯Â¿Â½ was chosen because this was their first product, like Washington was our first president. Clever. Or not. #3 Casio GÃ¯Â¿Â½zOne. Wow, what a mess. I still donÃ¯Â¿Â½t know how to pronounce it, so IÃ¯Â¿Â½m guessing G ZONE. But IÃ¯Â¿Â½m probably wrong and it probably doesnÃ¯Â¿Â½t matter since nobodyÃ¯Â¿Â½s in the market anymore for phones that look like G.I. Joe accessories. #2 is the Tivoli Audio iYiYiYiYi. These guys usually make some nice looking, well named, understated gear. This is none of that. Our review calls it attractive, but thatÃ¯Â¿Â½s back when we had a blind guy doing audio reviews. It has no bass & treble controls, and goes for $400. ThatÃ¯Â¿Â½s how they get you to say the name. #1 has got to be Qwikster, NetflixÃ¯Â¿Â½ overnight debacle. First of all, why would you take the SLOWEST of your two video platforms and call IT Qwikster? Second, why would you name a DVD video service something that makes no reference to movies, DVDÃ¯Â¿Â½s, video, television or your existing globally known brand name? And third, why would you not check first if the twitter account of the same name isnÃ¯Â¿Â½t already owned by some guy with a pot smoking Elmo as his avatar?