[ramkarthikk]

There was a period where this confusion was there with Teams (Classic) and Teams (New).

There was the whole .NET Core/.NET (while having .NET Standard for libraries) confusion. Even now many people think .NET requires Windows. Maybe they should have named it .NET Open?

[EvanAnderson]

I won't copy/paste the comment, but awhile ago I ranted Microsoft product naming and got some nice replies: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40419292

[omnibrain]

Or when they renamed Lync to Skype for Business, which had nothing to do with Skype.

[daveslash]

And then they have OneDrive, SharePoint, Office365, and Teams as ways to share files... which are all the same thing/infrastructure under the hood.

[DoctorOW]

Missed opportunity to name it .ORG

[camcil]

The confusion persists in job requirements, especially when those requirements are translated from technical stakeholders through HR.

[hypeatei]

What confusion? "x years of .NET experience" is what I see and it should suffice unless your whole career has been in an archaic version of .NET framework then you should have no issues working with either.

[jimbob45]

Do they just not let marketing into the important meetings? Naming isn’t a solved problem but marketers are usually pretty good at knowing when to avoid confusing situations like these.

[tatersolid]

In my experience Marketing causes most product and feature naming issues. Technical folks want to name it something obvious, and marketing overrules them.

[Jenk]

CoPilot takes the crown of most overused moniker now.