I hate to post something that seems trivial like this, but does it seem like bad form for Adobe to be snatching the "Catalyst" name given that there's already a Catalyst (<a href="http://www.catalystframework.org/" rel="nofollow">http://www.catalystframework.org/</a>)?<p>I know that in the open-source world, generally people don't care if you name your project off their's in a way that shows that you're doing a similar thing in a different project (think PHP on Trax or Groovy on Grails or the *Unit frameworks). However, Flash Catalyst isn't at all the same concept and it's confusing since the differentiation in name doesn't seem as significant. It sounds like there's Catalyst and some prefix it with "Flash" just like how some people say the "United States" and others might say "United States of America" - the "of America" doesn't denote a different entity.<p>Plus, Adobe already had a name that no one else seemed to be using: "Thermo". It's not a bad name either - instantly recognizable as a word with its Greek root.<p>I guess I don't see why Adobe couldn't go to Wikipedia's disambiguation page for Catalyst (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalyst_(disambiguation)" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalyst_(disambiguation)</a>) and see that there's already a Catalyst software product. Am I just making noise over nothing or did Adobe just grab another project's name?