[scotttrinh]

Scott from Gel here. I suspect for everyone we talked to in the "So, this is a database for Edge computing?" camp there were a dozen people who thought that and just kept moving even if they were our target audience. It's hard to quantify just what the cost have having a name with such a strong connotation (which has arguably gone up and down in the hype cycle over the lifetime of EdgeDB) has been.

Gel doesn't have any really strong existing computing connotations, so maybe people might make a stretch that it's about some non-computing-related domain and maybe we miss reaching them. But that just seems far less likely than trying to continue to push against the overwhelming feeling that "Edge" just has too much baggage and was working against us.

Personally, I think it's fine if people find the name confounding or just personally dislike it. I think products like Supabase, Neon, Drizzle, CockroachDB, Django, Flask, Express, etc etc kind of prove that if your name is general enough, you'll overcome that reaction eventually via recognition for the value of the product itself.

[pcthrowaway]

For every person who passed on EdgeDB on the suspicion it was related to edge computing, someone may have clicked it for the same reason entirely and found something else compelling.

Personally I think EdgeDB was a much better and descriptive name than Gel. I haven't used EdgeDB/Gel yet, but have been looking at it with excitement for years now waiting for the opportunity to use it.

I am worried that the rename will work against you since you've built such an excellent brand around EdgeDB with so many glowing testimonials.

[halfmatthalfcat]

I don't want to pile on but it seems like a lot of "going on feels" versus any quantifiable justification.

[scotttrinh]

That's fair, but I think going on _just_ the quantifiable stuff was still enough of a justification for us. My feels are that the cost of our confusing former name is higher than we know, but the known cost was still great enough.