Re:Spectrum OS: a declarative, reproducible, compartmentaliz...
by w0mbat on Tuesday September 14, 2021 @08:48PM
(#28533645)
Anything called "Spectrum OS" should have something to do with the Sinclair ZX Spectrum. For people who grew up with Sir Clive's cuddly 8-bit masterpiece, the word "Spectrum" has too much history in the context of computers to be casually reused like that.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Spectrum OS: a declarative, reproducible, compartmentaliz...
by w0mbat on Wednesday September 22, 2021 @09:38PM
(#28624317)
...and then Sir Clive died pretty much the next day.
RIP my bearded friend.
Re:Spectrum OS: a declarative, reproducible, compartmentaliz...
by ncmncm on Wednesday September 15, 2021 @03:09AM
(#28536155)
Sorry, no. Rather, nothing should be named "Spectrum". There is a reason trademarks use unique spelling. Projects should use unique spelling. There is no shortage of spellings.
Re:Spectrum OS: a declarative, reproducible, compartmentaliz...
by veltas on Wednesday September 15, 2021 @07:31AM
(#28537756)
> nothing should be named Apple
Re:Spectrum OS: a declarative, reproducible, compartmentaliz...
by ncmncm on Wednesday September 15, 2021 @01:40PM
(#28542077)
Funny choice, considering the amount of litigation over that name. Unless you were serious.
When Apple started, they were sued by Apple Records, the Beatles' label, and settled with a pledge to never have any activity involving music distribution.
Come iPod, they turned around and sued Apple Records.
Re:Spectrum OS: a declarative, reproducible, compartmentaliz...
by veltas on Thursday September 16, 2021 @03:19PM
(#28556048)
It's a good example, you can have recognisable trademarks be common words. The trademark is restricted to particular contexts, of course -- you cannot trademark 'apple' in general.