I have been doing some work on the wkipedia page and so have been doing my best to allow the natural charms of Genode show through the dry academic language needed for that site. As a result I am reading sentences out to myself to see if they satisfy.
With that in mind, and casting my mind back to when I first became aware of Genode, I think that name sounds high-tech. Sculpt by contrast did not sound especially exciting when I first heard the name, which is unfortunate because that is where novices should explore first.
I understand now why the reason it was so-called, but suggest Sculpt OS in practice is at odds with the popular idea of a sculptor. My brotherās partner is a ceramics sculptor so will actually mould bits of clay onto her works in the manner that Sculpt asks us to do with our desktops. But I think most people, when thinking sculptor, will think of someone like Michaelangelo, chipping away a big block of marble to reveal his masterwork. Michaelangeloās subtractive working is more like the experience of setting up Windows (so I am told!) where the user has to chisel the cruft off to get the usable desktop they want.
Building Sculpt in perhaps like nurturing something and making it grow the way you want. I thought of Germinate as a name, suggesting a sprouting seed (the Sculpt image is a mustard-seed sized 30Mb). And Genode Germinate makes a rather pleasing alliteration (in my mind at least).
Does anyone else have any thoughts about the name?
Fwiw, I agree. When talking about it to my friends I always say Iām messing around with Genode and not Iām messing around with Sculpt.
Perhaps thatās intentional, as my understanding is that Sculpt was originally a reference implementation and still is intended to be a base for your own experiments and not a single definitive build in the way Ubuntu is trying to be.
Otoh: I do like the ring of both together.
As in, not āSculpt OSā but āGenode Sculptā.
I think that is another problem I am experiencing when editing the Wikipedia. I am not aware of it being defined in one place how strictly these names ought to be used. Is Genode the āOS Frameworkā specifically, or is it an interchangeable term that might refer to the company, their framework, and desktop system, etc?
It must be noted such confusion does not seem to have done any harm to Linux which might refer to the kernel or GNU operating system! I am minded to apply the same terminology and refer to our personal OS as Genode/Sculpt.
I guess itās easier to āseeā for those whoāve been reading the C++ code and messing around with it As I see it, the terminology isā¦
Genode Labs (the company)
Genode [framework] (most of the github repo, except the Sculpt OS parts)
Sculpt OS (the part of the github repo that builds upon Genode to make it a usable OS : build scripts that configure the Genode components a certain way, C++ code for components that are specific to Sculpt OS, and so on)
Though the āborderā between the latter two could be called a little blurry in some cases. For example in h/g I use a (forked) sculpt_driver_manager component (if memory serves). Is it part of Genode proper, or of Sculpt OS ? The componentās name in github suggests the latter, but the fact I use it in a (wannabe) OS distinct from Sculpt, suggests the former.
To share a bit of perspective, we never really thought through the name of Sculpt within our team. It started as a mere run script in need of an adequate name. I foresaw the ability to interactively edit the system composition like a live-programming environment. Inspired by the cool-sounding name of an early 3D modeller on the Atari (āCybersculptā), this line of thoughts led to the name Sculpt. Since none of my colleagues really challenged it, it was good enough. Just remember that Sculptās predecessor had the silly name Turmvilla. Sculpt was at least more sensible than that. Thatās about it.
In the meanwhile, Sculpt OS has clearly outgrown its role of a sophisticated working example. It has become central to our project. So I quite clearly see your point: From the perspective of marketing, the name Sculpt cuts too short.
āGerminateā is a really nice suggestion. I like it a lot.
Emerging life instead the (mostly dead) material of a sculpture. Thatās certainly a more positive and relatable analogy.
Drawing a connection to the Fern-like Genode logo. Thatās beautiful. Almost like intended.
Starting with the letter G, like Genode, or Goa. Thatās a plus.
The word is not commonplace and has an interesting (and somewhat confident) ring to it, in my opinion.
So yes, I agree with you that it is indeed much better marketable than the name Sculpt.
While pondering on your suggestion, I wondered, would the prospect of the disruptive change from XML to HDR present an opportunity for adopting a new name? This way, the name change would not be arbitrary but it would be connected with the rebirth of Sculpt as a new incarnation?
I do not oppose the idea of finding a new name for Sculpt. Especially, the idea of combining the renaming with the introduction of HRD sounds quite good in my ears.
But me - a not native English speaker -āgerminateā just reminds me of āgermsā as the root of disease and I seem to be unable to ignore the unpleasant feelings connected to this.
Well, I wasnāt expecting to be the contrarian in this conversation, but I like the name āSculptā. For me, it evokes the full creativity of clay-based (additive) sculpting, where the results can take any form you desire.
I certainly like the positive imagery of the plant-based analogy, but IMHO it doesnāt capture the flexibility angle as well as āSculptā does - a plant will always grow in a predetermined form.
If we need a name change, perhaps we can think of something that captures the shape-shifting aspect of Presets, etc., and the incredible configuration (and platform) flexibility.
Or, to go in a different direction, maybe āGenieā, granting all of your computing wishes. It even starts with āGā (and āGenā)!
I actually like the connotations too quite a bit. Reflecting more, maybe its just that I understand the Genode brand more than the Sculpt one - all the documentation has the iconic genode pyramid, the wallpaper has āgenodeā on it, genode has the Wikipedia page, etc.
So its less that Sculpt or Sclupt OS seems like a bad name to me (I quite like it!) and more that it doesnāt have the same marketing head start that Genode already has and when I think about the project thatās what comes to mind first
I wonder the reason I find the name Sculpt does not roll off the tongue naturally is because it is a verb whereas most products are named for nouns? Of course germinate is a verb too, because I was thinking of alternatives to Sculpt in the same vein.
Germinate would be quite good if STEM education is the core market, as it would suggest a sprouting of interest in computer science.
If asked to identify the OS I would say āGenode Sculptā. To a motorist this is familiar, as when asked to identify a car you would typically say āFiat Pandaā or āHonda Civicā. And of course these will always have the brand logo literally front and centre, with badges identifying the model given a secondary spot.
Still there is plenty of time to discuss branding before the replacement markup is in the OS. Whatever the name, it would be a great time to have a marketing push.
As I see it, the terminology isā¦