That seems like a very weird branding move to me (dropping the part of your brand name that actually makes it recognizable), but I guess I just don't understand the marketing 4D chess at play here.
Is this some kind of marketing flex? "We are so recognizable, we can afford drop the only thing from our name that makes it make object level sense"?
Other examples: Transferwise -> Wise (despite them still doing transfers as their main business), WeWork -> We (ok, to be fair in my experience not so much work got done there at the best of times) etc.
These things also usually completely kill SEO. Like, how am I supposed to google for the nearest coworking space? "we near me" sounds ridiculous to type into a search engine.
Transferwise makes sense to me. They used to be just about transferring money abroad. By now, they offer full bank accounts including card payments. I guess they dropped the transfer to make people aware that they’re a proper bank now.
I don't get why he didn't rebrand it as "twitter on X", X encompassing the chatbot, job search, group voice calls, etc and "twitter" being an "app" on X
Not the same as Alphabet is the parent company and media do call it so when the parent company is fined for example. Same for Meta. Also, the press does write "X" or "X (formerly Twitter").
Not exactly. I was saying Twitter should be the product, X should be the platform. The current situation would be as if Google renamed Youtube to Google
It’s because X was supposed to become a one app to rule them all like WeChat in China, and that obviously never happened (maybe because he fired everyone?), instead X is just Elon’s personal Twitter.
It's sad but it might eventually. I would imagine to the end of Trump cadence we'll be paying with x-coin in supermarkets, both he and Elon will be making tons of money. Trumps and Elons x-coin will have tariffs built in to it and you won't be paying taxes if you use it /s
There was HBO Go and HBO Now, one of which you could subscribe to yourself, the other of which was an option you could get through your cable provider. There was massive amounts of confusion about the entire situation.
HBO Max was combining the two apps into a single digital streaming platform.
I guess short words are cooler and more expensive. Like Facebook starting as www.thefacebook.com and then getting facebook.com later. Not sure how meta.com is working out for them though. I guess the stock is up.
Meta is a company though, not (primarily) a brand. People don't need to google or remember "Meta"; they'll search for "WhatsApp", "Instagram" etc. (In fact, I suspect that getting as far away in semantic space from Facebook with these other properties was part of the motivation for the rename.)
If OpenAI renamed itself to just "AI" I'd sigh and shrug (and applaud the honesty), but ChatGPT is a product and well-known brand name.
Are they? Have you tried Gemini lately? They might be competing on the services side, but the only two peer competitors in the chatbot space are Anthropic and OpenAI.
They do have a chat ui. It's not as robust afaik, but I don't see why they can't expand on it. It would be a nice addition to their storage/Google one offering
I think they're suggesting that highly popular sites like ChatGPT get a ranking boost beyond regular page rank, making SEO efforts unnecessary.
But I don’t think that’s the case, at least not artificially. These sites tend to rise naturally in search rankings because they have a huge volume of links and media coverage. Which still makes SEO efforts unnecessary.
They could also be banking on the emergence of "chat" as an imaginary external party to a conversation which apparently has started becoming a thing with _the youths_
- Chat, is this real?
- GPT, Being intentionally obtuse: Nah dude, chill
I still think Cortana was the best naming/branding. It's sufficiently unique, has a fun history, probably has enough syllables for voice activation, is an actual name that doesn't sound dumb to call an entity. Too bad MS squandered it.
Every time I go to chatgpt.com I type chat into the address bar and it autocompletes to the correct site. Also when talking to my coworkers it's taken the same status as "googling" something. We just call it "chat". So yes, I also feel it's odd to see chat.com go to chatgpt but it's the shorthand some people are already using.
Examples of what my coworkers and I say at the office:
"What does chat have to say about x?"
"Did you ask chat"
"Did chat find the answer?"
"Yeah, chat scripted that one."
Yeah, me too. And if you squint your eyes and tilt your head you can kind of make the connection. Any large Language Model is made of the "chat" from billions of messages floating around on the internet.
So when you ask chat a question you are in reality asking an algorithmic simulation of mass internet communication.
In my mind the connection works, which is convenient with the new chat.com domain and all...
Kind of funny, because there's another product we use that's just called Chat, so we'd never say that. "GPT" is a better shorthand IMO. It's also not specific but I don't know of any other product that uses it in the branding.
Is this some kind of marketing flex? "We are so recognizable, we can afford drop the only thing from our name that makes it make object level sense"?
Other examples: Transferwise -> Wise (despite them still doing transfers as their main business), WeWork -> We (ok, to be fair in my experience not so much work got done there at the best of times) etc.
These things also usually completely kill SEO. Like, how am I supposed to google for the nearest coworking space? "we near me" sounds ridiculous to type into a search engine.