What's a good name for new multiboxing program?

[Freddie]

too close to Vuhdo (a heal bot clone)

Does Vuhdo break Blizzard's rules? If not, it doesn't strike me as much of a problem.

I don't think the entry in wikipedia about a group disbanded in 2007 should prevent the reuse of Hydra for a mboxing software now...

From the facts in Wikipedia it appears that Hydra was a major effort sustained over ten years by many people. It's probably well known to IT people. It could be brought back at any time. HotkeyNet is used in corporations (it's more than a multiboxing program) and the new program will be the same way. I don't want to handicap the new program with a name that locks it out of corporations.

Voodoo is nice too...but doesn't seem very multiboxing ?

Two points, First, I don't think the name should be about multiboxing.

A product name should sell the product, not the product category.

I think the name should say something about why this particular multiboxing program is good. The name should say things like:

-- powerful
-- helps you win
-- helps you control toons
-- easy

"Voodoo" makes me think of powerful magic.

As an example, there is an old British motorcycle brand called Triumph. The name doesn't say "motorcycle." It implies winning and therefore speed.

Second, I think Voodoo does mean something connected to multiboxing. Voodoo supposedly turns people into zombies and controls them like automatons. This isn't why I like the name, I'm just pointing it out.

[Flekkie]

I don't think it is possible to break Blizzard rules with addons.

Liking Voodoo, sounds like powerful magic not known to many (unless you live in troll villages in WoW?) Has a feeling of esoteric knowledge.

[Whowantstoknow]

im a fan of greek and roman mythology so Chimaera, Cerberus, Hydra are my favs

[Chumbucket]

I like the feel of the name Voodoo. A similar name that wow uses is Mojo. While the spirit of each name feels right it may be too generic to refer to anything in particular. What about attaching a tech type prefix or suffix to them to at least narrow it down a bit, like Voodoplexer, Multijinx or Mojoclone or the like?

[Owltoid]

I'm still liking Mitosis. One cell breaking into many, and it has a nice sound to it.

[Freddie]

Somebody just asked me in a PM how the new program's coming along. I'll reprint the answer here in case anyone's wondering:

.... snip ....

I've done about 100 hours of work on it so far. If you ran it, it wouldn't look like much but internally, a lot of work is finished:

-- Most of the basic structural code from HKN2 and ProgramW has been refactored into a separate engine and separate user-application with a sharply defined interface between them.

Hopefully this will make it easy for other programmers to create new multiboxing programs that use the engine. Programmers won't have to know anything about network communications or keyboard hooks or how settings are stored. The engine takes care of all the hard stuff, and the engine's internal operations are separate from everything that the author of a user-application needs to do.

The threading architecture was changed to match the new division between engine and user-application. That's basically finished. The engine creates its own threads, and the user-application knows nothing about those threads, and there's a fast system (invisible to the user-application programmer) for the two components to communicate back and forth despite the fact that they are running in different threads.

-- There's a whole new system for international language support. There's a new kind of source file that can be written easily by volunteers that contains all of the program's visible text in any desired language. There's a new program included with the package that compiles the language file into source code. (Alternatively, a language file can be loaded at run time by the user without compiling it.) There's a new interface internally in the program that combines stuff from the language files with run-time variables so the program can display dynamic messages in any language.

-- The mouse and keyboard hooks are finished.

-- Internally the program has complete classes for windows, dialog boxes, TCP communications, exceptions, multi-lingual text with dynamically inserted variables, user messages, settings, log files, and some other stuff.

-- Everything compiles with zero warnings at the highest warning level.

-- There are no memory leaks.

-- There are no known bugs. Let's see how long I manage to keep the bug list at zero.

[Freddie]

I just read an interesting book about picking product names. The book can be downloaded for free. It's published by a marketing consultant company that specializes in pcking names.

http://www.igorinternational.com/pro...ming-guide.pdf

One of the book's main points is that a good product name should describe what makes the product different from others in its category. It should not describe the category.

For example, Quicken is a better name than Accounta.

Virgin is a better name than AirJet.

Google is a better name than Infoseek.

The reason for this is that product names are almost always seen in context where the category is known. For example, somebody wiill ask in this forum, "Which multiboxing software should I use?"

Somebody will answer, "People here mainly use Innerspace, Keyclone, HotkeyNet, or XXXXXXX."

(XXXXXX is the new program we're naming.)

To make the new product stand out in that sentence -- to make it appealing -- the name needs to give an idea of what makes that product different from the others. . The name doesn't need to say "I am a multiboxing program" because the person reading the sentence already knows that. The name needs to say, "I will make you win," or "I am easy to use," etc.

The reason I'm explaining this is because I greatly appreciate that so many people wen to the trouble of suggesting names. But unfortunately, most of the suggestions describe the product category instead of what makes this product good.

For example, most of the suggestions with "box" -- and there were lots of them -- describe the category instead of what makes this product special.

I wish I had said this at the beginning of the thread, to save wasted effort, but it only occurred to me as the thread developed.

If anybody still has energy to think of more names, I'm still very much interested.

[aboron]

We don't actually know what makes this product good, since it's new and as yet un-created. So it's very difficult to create a name that reflects the "Win-ness" of this new product without knowing it's underlying abilities.

What do you plan to do that is different from the current product offerings? Is there a specific special feature that the name should be amplifying?

[Freddie]

I'd like the name to convey some or all of the following things:

"I will make you powerful."

"I will make you win."

"I will put you in control."

"I am versatile"

"I am easy to use."

The name should also be easy to remember and easily understood by almost everyone.

Another edit:

And if the name is fun to say and playful, that automatically conveys the idea that the program is fun to use and playful. E.g. names like Google, Roomba .... or Voodoo.

What do you plan to do that is different from the current product offerings? Is there a specific special feature that the name should be amplifying?

Another edit. I didn't really answer your question because I think the name should be aspirational. The program will be open source, so other people (besides me) may take it in directions that I can't imagine.

For the initial release, I'm concentrating on making it incredibly easy to use for WoW. It won't be anything like HotkeyNet 1. It will be like HotkeyNet 2's mouseover feature.

[aboron]

"I will make you win."
"I will make you powerful."
"I will put you in control."

Ok, but... I would hope that every MB software application would try to claim generic things like that. I was hoping for something to differentiate your product.



So: feel free to add (er) to any of these

WinBox(er)
MegaBox
KillBox
SlamBox
JamBox


Boxinator