The difference is that "apple" is unrelated to the product space, but "teams" is not.

I don't think the parent comment meant it as some bad evil thing. More like just a factual curiosity, sort of as "huh, damn, pretty interesting how they have managed to do it."

On a personal level, I think the Apple case is a bit different. There is no other technical product that is named Apple, and neither it is inherently the word used to describe what a product or a company does. While Teams definitely falls under the "similar enough" umbrella of words related to the function of the product.

Not that it makes any difference, and, in fact, I think it was pretty clever of MSFT to manage to make that product name work, since I was pretty skeptical of how well it was gonna work at first.

> I don't think the parent comment meant it as some bad evil thing. More like just a factual curiosity, sort of as "huh, damn, pretty interesting how they have managed to do it."

Right. I read it as that too, but I see I may have come off too strong. I was agreeing with OP while mentioning that others have done it as well.

Because people like Apple software. Unlike MS Teams which I hate with passion.