On the Soapbox

Back in 2004, when the Firebird browser ran into naming difficulties and a search for a new name was initiated, I quietly wished for what I knew was a nearly-impossible outcome: that AOL would relinquish all claims to the Netscape name and donate that name to the Mozilla Foundation, so that it could be used for the name of their new browser. After all, Netscape is a browser's name, and if AOL was no longer in the browser business, why would it keep the name?

There were several reasons I wished that Firebird would be rebranded as Netscape. First, the Netscape logo has always been pretty. The elegant N on a starry background and a ship's steering wheel superimposed with the constellations were beautiful and evocative of the idea of "exploring" the Internet--I remember using Netscape 1.0 and how much that branding imagery colored my initial experience of browsing the web. Second, it would be poetic, for Firebird was originally named Phoenix, and if it could be named Netscape, then that would allow it truly live up to to the intent of its name. And most importantly, it was a name that made sense. "Netscape Navigator" gave some hint at what the product does: it navigates the net.

Back in 2003 when Mozilla announced that Firebird would become their new flagship product, they also announced that the final product name would be "Mozilla Browser", and that Firebird was just the project's temporary codename. Branding discussions from that time talked about the need to reinforce the "Mozilla" name (since Mozilla's first objective has always been the Gecko platform) and the need for clarity about what the product does. The "Mozilla Firebird" name doesn't give anyone any clue whatsoever what the nature of the product. It does not matter for people who are familiar with the product, but given that Mozilla is the underdog trying to claw its way up, a name like that made little sense at the time, and even today, it still makes little sense.

But I suppose this was all in line with modern marketing styles where things are given names that have absolutely nothing to do with the function or purpose of the product. What would have guessed that "Song" was an airline? Outside of the tech-savvy minority, who the heck has any clue what "Twitter", "dodgeball", or "del.icio.us" are? On the other hand, "Facebook" and "MySpace" have names that at least hint at what it is that they do. Similarly, Microsoft and Google are consistent with their naming: "Microsoft Word", "Windows Media Player", "Google Earth", "Gmail/Google Mail" are all examples of products whose use of a generic product name helps shift the emphasis to the parent brand name and clarifies what the product itself is. "Mozilla Browser", "Mozilla Navigator", and "Netscape Navigator" are names that would follow that same pattern of sensible product names.

But alas, to my horror, it was announced in 2004 that the official product name for the Firebird project would be "Mozilla Firefox". This was wrong in so many ways. The initial reaction upon hearing that name from many people then (and still today) is, "what the heck is a firefox?!" The name was appropriate for a code name or for an inside joke, but not for a product name. It offered no clue as to what it did. It adds an extra step to the evangelism and marketing of the product because you must first explain to someone that "Firefox" is a web browser. I was also disappointed because I saw Phoenix as the rebirth of the Netscape lineage, and now the final name had nothing to do with Netscape or Phoenix/Firebird, and the metaphor was, sadly, lost.

Epilogue: With the initial success of Firefox, AOL resurrected the Netscape brand and released a couple of browsers based on Firefox bearing the Netscape name, but these releases played second-fiddle to Firefox, and Netscape slid further into obscurity. Earlier this year, the Netscape brand was closed for good. RIP...