Re: product lite

Subject: Re: product lite
From: "Susan W. Gallagher" <sgallagher -at- EXPERSOFT -dot- COM>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 1997 10:48:49 -0800

>>Tina Cipolla[SMTP:tcipolla -at- ACCUSOFT -dot- COM] wrote:
>>My company is planning to release a light version of one of our
>>products. Basically it is going to be the original product minus a
>>bunch of features; the advantage being that it will be sold at a
>>reasonable price for the average consumer. (Our regular market is
>>developers.) We are having trouble coming up with a name for the thing.
>> Almost every word I can come up with that could be used after the
>>product name has a negative connotation, which we don't want
><snip>

[prodname] EZ
Easy [prodname]
[prodname] Jr.

Although, I really don't have a problem with "Lite" -- it's
almost worked its way up to being a standard.

Sue Gallagher
sgallagher -at- expersoft -dot- com
-- The _Guide_ is definitive.
Reality is frequently inaccurate.

TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/ or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html


Previous by Author: Re: Convicted for using a non-academic language ? (was: Hot Topics)
Next by Author: Re: Documents before products
Previous by Thread: Re: product lite
Next by Thread: Re: product lite


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads