Finding the right name is overrated.<p>The classic story is Apple - After a lot of discussing what the name of their new company should should be Steve Jobs said that if there wasn't agreement the next day he would just call it apple and be done with it. And they seem to have done OK.<p>Often names of companies sound ingenious because they just seem to fit so well to the company, but what people tend to forget is that the reason the name fits the company is because your association of the two are linked. Google is an example - there are probably thousands of names that are just as good, but they don't sound it because they have no mindshare. Google sounds like a great name because you recognise it instantly and associate it with a great company - nothing more.<p>As long as you can get the .com domain (or be creative like del.icio.us) and make sure you don't infringe on trademarks you'll be fine.<p>And you should also google your proposed name just to see what else it means. There is a classic story of an upscale bathroom factory that called their new line of showers for goldenshower. Bad idea.
<p><pre><code> Starting a business with a weak company name is kind of like driving a car — without an engine, it probably isn’t going to go anywher.
</code></pre>
I humbly disagree. Starting a business with a weak company name is kind of like driving a car with a weak company name--it'll run just fine either way.<p>Also, the A-Z thing is cute on motivational posters in grade school. Fitting business advice in such a manner to make it follow a fluffy pattern (and hence invariably involve a lot of repetition and bullshit) is not. "K is for Kleenex"? Please, just get to your point.<p>Edit: After careful thought, I have concluded this is a bad article.
It's like famous first sentences of classic novels - the sentence is famous because the novel was classic; a classic first sentence did not make the novel famous.