I’m sorry, but Samsung’s foldable phone naming strategy is laughably bad

Galaxy Z Fold, Galaxy Z Fold 2, Galaxy Z Fold 3, Galaxy Z Fold 4, Galaxy Z Flip, Galaxy Z Flip 2, Galaxy Z Flip 3, Galaxy Z Flip 4. Try saying that sentence quickly, and tell me whether those names flow off your tongue as easily as something like Galaxy S1, Galaxy S2, Galaxy S3, Galaxy S4, Galaxy Note, Galaxy Note 2, Galaxy Note 3, Galaxy Note 4.

I’m assuming you’re suddenly wondering how Samsung came up with the surprisingly bad naming scheme for its foldable phones, just like I have been in recent days as we move closer to the launch of the Galaxy Z Fold 2. Of course, no one out there will ever take the names of all those phones one after the other in real life, but I think you get the point I’m trying to put across.

Six syllable names for a phone aren’t a great idea

When the Galaxy Fold launched last year, we assumed Samsung would simply start adding a number at the end for each new foldable phone. We’d get the Galaxy Fold 2, Galaxy Fold 3, Galaxy Fold 4, and so on. Then the Galaxy Z Flip arrived, and Samsung decided to put all its foldables under the Galaxy Z umbrella.

The Galaxy Fold is still the Galaxy Fold, but its upcoming sequel is going to be called Galaxy Z Fold 2, an annoyingly long and ill-conceived moniker. Then, next year, provided Samsung is still making foldables (let’s face it, the company’s got excellent products and a solid lead in the foldable market to even think about stopping), we’ll get the Galaxy Z Flip 2, followed by the Galaxy Z Fold 3.

Galaxy S and Galaxy Note are two easy to pronounce and fairly cool sounding names. Frankly, so are Galaxy Z Flip and Galaxy Z Fold. The problem arises when you start adding a number at the end, at which point they become the opposite of cool. Samsung’s idea behind choosing the letter Z for its foldable series was that it “intuitively communicates the idea of a fold while delivering a dynamic, youthful feel,” but I don’t think the company put enough thought into it when deriving this particular naming strategy.

To be fair, I don’t really have any ideas to offer of my own, except that maybe Samsung should have stuck with Galaxy Fold or Galaxy Flip for its book-like and clamshell foldable phone lineups. However, I don’t get paid to think up fancy names for consumer products, while I’m sure there’s a whole team making money doing just that over at Samsung’s headquarters, and they really should have done a better job.

What do you think? Do you think Samsung’s current naming scheme for its foldables is fine? If you had the choice, what would you call them? Let me know down in the comments!

The post I’m sorry, but Samsung’s foldable phone naming strategy is laughably bad appeared first on SamMobile.

SamMobile https://ift.tt/33emFAW