5 ms·

Please consider changing the name - it's already in common use for Windows Apache, MySql and PHP (similar to LAMP).

bestest 14y ago
I'm surprised someone who's working in a web environment hasn't already thought of that. Unless it was done intentionally.
mkohlmyr 14y ago
Indeed, very poor choice of name.
AhtiK 14y ago
According to the footer: "WAMP and the WAMP logo are trademarks of Tavendo GmbH." Possibly the registration is either pending or registered in a non-US country as the only live WAMP trademark registration I could find was a pasta sauce: http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4004:dvjucv.3.3 http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4004:dv... Regarding the name itself: WAMP is the same as the massively popular Windows LAMP stack. Unnecessary conflict. But maybe WSAMP could be a nice alternative. AMP postfix hinting "amplifier". The risk of using WS prefix is the relevance to WebService.
- BerislavLopac 14y ago
  A name or logo doesn't have to be registered to be a trademark. Note that it doesn't say "registered trademarks". It's completely valid and legal. (IANAL)
  - oberstet 14y ago
    Yes, exactly. Currently, it is not registered, but claimed and in commercial use. Note that this is only done to protect the integrity of WAMP over time .. "if you fork it, thats cool, but don't call it WAMP". WAMP is an open protocol, free to anyone!
pooriaazimi 14y ago
(Just to be perfectly clear: I'm not the creator, and it's not a 'Show HN' type of post - I just thought it was cool and wanted to share it. Your point is completely valid nevertheless. Actually what caught my eye in the first place was its name and it struck me as odd that they've chosen that name!)
mootothemax 14y ago
Please consider changing the name - it's already in common use for Windows Apache, MySql and PHP (similar to LAMP). I'm also a bit surprised that they didn't first type "wamp" into Google and see what came up. Given the number 1 result for me is wampserver.com, it seems a particularly unwise decision.

I'm surprised someone who's working in a web environment hasn't already thought of that. Unless it was done intentionally.

mkohlmyr 14y ago

Indeed, very poor choice of name.

AhtiK 14y ago

According to the footer: "WAMP and the WAMP logo are trademarks of Tavendo GmbH." Possibly the registration is either pending or registered in a non-US country as the only live WAMP trademark registration I could find was a pasta sauce: http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4004:dvjucv.3.3 http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4004:dv... Regarding the name itself: WAMP is the same as the massively popular Windows LAMP stack. Unnecessary conflict. But maybe WSAMP could be a nice alternative. AMP postfix hinting "amplifier". The risk of using WS prefix is the relevance to WebService.

BerislavLopac 14y ago
A name or logo doesn't have to be registered to be a trademark. Note that it doesn't say "registered trademarks". It's completely valid and legal. (IANAL)
- oberstet 14y ago
  Yes, exactly. Currently, it is not registered, but claimed and in commercial use. Note that this is only done to protect the integrity of WAMP over time .. "if you fork it, thats cool, but don't call it WAMP". WAMP is an open protocol, free to anyone!

pooriaazimi 14y ago

(Just to be perfectly clear: I'm not the creator, and it's not a 'Show HN' type of post - I just thought it was cool and wanted to share it. Your point is completely valid nevertheless. Actually what caught my eye in the first place was its name and it struck me as odd that they've chosen that name!)

mootothemax 14y ago

Please consider changing the name - it's already in common use for Windows Apache, MySql and PHP (similar to LAMP). I'm also a bit surprised that they didn't first type "wamp" into Google and see what came up. Given the number 1 result for me is wampserver.com, it seems a particularly unwise decision.