Qt4 client needs a name #1669

@laanwj expressed dislike of the current/original Bitcoin-Qt name. The code currently (changed after 0.6) just claims to be "Bitcoin" which is going to further confuse users into thinking "Bitcoin" is a specific software program. Before 0.7 is released, a new name should be chosen (or the name Bitcoin-Qt restored?) and inserted in the relevant places of the software.

No, I didn't express dislike. I don't want to rename anything. Bitcoin-qt is a great executable and internal name. I just don't want it to be shown in the interface (except About and Debug windows) because users have no idea what a Qt is. It is our internal name.

It has always been that way. Diablo was adding -Qt to title bars and menus and such. I did not agree with that. That's the whole scope of this issue.

I want to keep it the way it is. Nothing has been renamed, nothing will be renamed.

Well, it needs a user-visible name. It's not Bitcoin. It's a Bitcoin client, but you don't see Firefox going around calling itself "Web Browser".

That's kind of a bogus concern. We're not calling it "Funds transfer" either. Bitcoin is still obscure enough for it not to be a generic name.

Bitcoind has the same "problem". It calls itself the "Bitcoin reference implementation". This is in no way limited to the UI, just the setup of the project. The UI is "the UI of the bitcoin reference implementation". But that's not a nice user-visible name, either :-)

Maybe in the future when Bitcoin is a household name, getting a distinct name ("Satoshi"?) will be more pressing. I think the ball is on your turf for now as you're the one caring about this. If you can come up with a great proposal (and implementation) for re-branding that convinces all of the dev team then it's fine with me too.

Bitcoin is the name of the blockchain/protocol/rules, not the name of this software. Your analogy seems fundamentally flawed. A better one would be if Google Checkout were calling itself "US Dollar".

bitcoind isn't user-visible, so it's not a concern. The "Satoshi" core of bitcoind and Bitcoin-Qt is the reference implementation of the Bitcoin protocol; but end users don't even know that exists unless they open up Bitcoin-Qt's debug window.

I'm not sure what's wrong with calling it Bitcoin-Qt like it always has been; there are plenty of software products that use Qt (or at least Q referring to Qt) in their names. But if alternatives are wanted, how about "Bitcoin Fortified" or something similar that expresses the fully verifying/secure feature of the client?

At the very least, Help->"About Bitcoin" shouldn't talk about something other than Bitcoin itself (maybe adding a real "About Bitcoin" menu item with a summary about the currency might be a good idea, though!).

We have far more important things to worry about

Not confusing users is pretty important. But I agree we should just pick something reasonable and be done with this...

@laanwj Who is Diablo :-P?

But yes, I proposed Bitcoin-Qt a few times and still think the child needs a better name (proper noun) than just Bitcoin. I also think luke is right when saying "Not confusing users is pretty important." as between all that tech-stuff Gavins grandma should be able to use all this ^^.

@Diapolo, Diablo is someone on IRC but I meant you, sorry for the confusion

I also think not confusing users is pretty important, however of the many things I've heard users complain about, the name is not one of them. I'm also pretty sure that the wx UI simply called itself "Bitcoin" everywhere (but feel free to prove me wrong) as my first draft was an exact clone of that with Qt.

I see users confuse Bitcoin-Qt as "Bitcoin" all the time, and that was with 0.5/0.6 calling itself Bitcoin-Qt reasonably. wxBitcoin's lack of a proper name no doubt was part of the cause of this confusion that already exists, but that was from a time when Satoshi was opposed to breaking the centralized client/team design and having One True Client. I hope we are beyond that now.