Dan Romero on Warpcast

Dan Romero pfp

Why did you rename frames to mini apps? Why not just apps? 1. Apple does not like apps in their app store calling other things apps. 2. It's confusing for consumers -- an app is something I download from the app store and is on my home screen. It doesn't live in another app. 3. New developers were confused by "frames", especially since v1 -> v2 frames were so different. This was a consistent piece of feedback. So, similar to Warpcast -> Farcaster simplification for consumers, we chose to frames -> mini apps (the thing that's comparable to Telegram, World, WeChat, etc.) 4. Again, there's a cadre of folks on Farcaster who are obsessed with names. Single syllables, "catchy" names. They don't matter. Google, Airbnb, ChatGPT were all phenomenally successful despite bad names (they sound fine now because you're familiar with them). * See note in next cast 5. Future: I suspect we will see companies that have an 1) app and 2) mini app. Use mini app to onboard and build habit and then upsell to the next app.

34 replies

28 recasts

244 reactions

Dan Romero pfp

* Note "But if names don't matter, then why rename Warpcast to Farcaster? Ah ha -- trapped you in a contradiction!" Different issue. 1. Farcaster has 10-100x the brand recognition vs. Warpcast. So changing the name is not about "the better name" -- arguably both names are nerdy and a bit weird to begin with -- and simplifying to a single name that more people have heard of. 2. Reducing from 2 to 1 name solves the confusing question for consumers -- "What's the difference between Farcaster and Warpcast?" -- and is easy enough for developers to figure out when reading the docs, similar to Uniswap. A way to think about this is ChatGPT 4o vs. ChatGPT o3 vs. ChatGPT o4-mini-high. ChatGPT the name is fine at this point -- it's fast approaching a household name for AI in the same way Google was for search. But the model subnames are really confusing. I suspect they just simplify to ChatGPT and auto-detect which model to use in the background for normal users.

11 replies

13 recasts

94 reactions

alex pfp

@proxystudio.eth

Makes sense It’s chill, if they’re good they’ll rip

1 reply

0 recast

8 reactions

derek pfp

1. Names definitely matter. 2. Google, was and is, a great name 3. You’re right everywhere else. 😂

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

Miguelgarest pfp

@miguelgarest.eth

1) why does everyone have to always play by Apple's rules 😮‍💨

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Mmd 🔵 pfp

i still calling them frames

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

Matthew Fox 🌐 pfp

Matthew Fox 🌐

1 reply

0 recast

5 reactions

Sinarahmati pfp

I had a singer friend and someday he turned to me and said ‘i’m thinking of starting over with a new name to see if i can make that name bold again.’ there was a lesson in what he said to me: It’s we and our work(product) that make the name famous and catchy, not the other way around.

0 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

flick the dev 🎩📦 pfp

flick the dev 🎩📦

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

tldr (tim reilly) pfp

tldr (tim reilly)

"Google, Airbnb, ChatGPT were all phenomenally successful despite bad names (they sound fine now because you're familiar with them)." ^ this is the crucial insight. Any name that doesn't get in the way of itself will be absolutely fine, as long as the product gives lots of people something they genuinely want. (I remember everyone thought "Twitter" was weird too. Even when it was making its transition to being featured in mainstream news. But that quickly dissipated.)

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

Jimmy😼 pfp

transition from frames to mini apps is perfect

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

m00npapi.eth pfp

why not “fwames”

1 reply

1 recast

10 reactions

Justin Hunter pfp

@polluterofminds

Good notes! FWIW I don't actually care. I just like to make memes when I can.

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

CHRIS DOLINSKI pfp

fwiw naming is tricky and extremely important good to see the consideration

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Prashant pfp

i like the word « cadre »

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Diji 🦉🎩 🔵 pfp

Diji 🦉🎩 🔵

A name really matters?!!!

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Mark Carey 🎩🫂 pfp

Mark Carey 🎩🫂

"Apple does not like apps in their app store calling other things apps." <-- this is a good point I had not thought about.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

KMac🍌 ⏩ pfp

🙌💜 wrt #5 by this logic… wen wc/fc eg telegram ‘mini-app’ or WhatsApp Flow that onboards users to the real main not mini wc/fc app‽ gc & serious as a heart attack Might write more about this later today. The proposal will be between the lines. ✌️💜 Keep going! Feels soooo close to cracking it. Slight change in perspective might help.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

mark mollé pfp

what about referring to mini-apps as mapps? everyone loves mapps! mapps orient you and help you find your way to value in a new domains reposting what i noted to @christopher on his naming thread i would drop a couple more letters to make mini-apps way more mini dapp has established the [first letter] + app precedent. mapp = mini app wapp = web app and we already have dapp = decentralized app dapp has established the [first letter] + app precedent. and we can make like mel robbins and “let them” at app(le) can keep just plain ol app they who have such voraciously hungry eyes for big tech IPs even in the big apple (surprised they don’t try to take that one away from NYC) including but not limited to Design Patent D712,067 for the NYC Fifth Avenue Glass structured Apple Store (and other ip like the patent for a glass box store)

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Steve pfp

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction