Half the posts I see lately are like, "Gleam 2.0. What we learned" and then you go to the homepage and it's "Gleam is a Tribble for your Fork! (Scroll down) See if you qualify for Gleam Enterprise!"
Or perhaps not, if folks who need a Tribble for their Fork achieve instant enlightenment upon reading the marketing copy.
But, I also see a lot of posts that have comments like, "How am I supposed to know what Gleam does when I don't know what a Tribble is? The blog doesn't explain anything! How can someone write an article and not explain these terms that they use so much?"
And the linked blog article is hosted in the Daily Tribble News section of www.tribbleworld.com.
“You no longer have to florp, now you can vorp!”
Big numbers, random charts. 10x 100x 200x!
Who is this for? Just make the docs the home page.
So what comes across as extremely vague, unclear, and perhaps obfuscatory, is actually somewhat properly targeted to someone who needs to decide "is this an appropriate class of purchase for a dev team." They don't need to decide if it's the best technology for the purpose, just that it is a technology for that purpose.
This is especially clear on every single one of the AWS technology top hits. Clearly the product is so vaguely described that an actual user gleams zero usable information on whether it will solve the task they have at hand, or what the capabilities are.
Individual - free Pro - $20/mo Business - $50/mo (mysteriously the same as Pro) Enterprise - contact us
If somebody from hotjar/cintentsquare sees this, I’d prefer if your page was more straightforward about the name change. Maybe try “we’ve rebranded to content square”
(Updated the text as the downvotes indicated people misunderstood what I wrote. I agree about OP's observation)
I wholeheartedly hate that useless infantile names are so normalised in software industry, even libraries are as such, which at some point makes it just insane