Trips l’offre de voyages de Airbnb – Airbnb Trips | L’ADN

Après les hôtels, Airbnb s’attaque aux voyagistes en lançant une offre de voyages inspirée par une expérience globale.

Source: Trips l’offre de voyages de Airbnb – Airbnb Trips | L’ADN

Les signaux étaient là. Airbnb se diversifiait petit à petit organisait des circuits et des expériences qui laissaient présager une phase de beta-test avant de lancer une offensive plus globale. Cette fois-ci c’est officiel, la marque a annoncé la sortie de Trips « une plateforme communautaire conçue pour rendre le voyage à la fois facile et magique. Trips est lancé aujourd’hui avec trois offres clés – Expériences, Lieux et Logements. Les Vols et les Services seront ajoutés à l’avenir » précise le communiqué. Autrement dit, Airbnb se diversifie pour devenir un voyagiste complet intégrant toute la chaîne de valeur du voyage, du choix de la destination au retour d’expérience en passant par le vol et le logement.

Airbnb Trips présentation

Une nouvelle entrée dans le voyage

La grande originalité de Trips réside dans son approche par thème. Oubliez les « simples » vacances que vous choisirez avant tout pour la destination, le dernier né d’Airbnb mise sur l’expérience comme clé d’entrée pour une meilleure invitation au voyage : boxer à Detroit, apprendre à fabriquer un violon à Paris, vivre l’esprit du marathon au Kenya, atelier Samuraï au Japon, initiation aux voitures anciennes à Malibu, chasse aux truffes en Toscane… En proposant de vivre un centre d’intérêt avec les locaux, Airbnb vise juste pour les voyagistes en quête de sens, d’authenticité et d’expériences.

Airbnb va faire mal aux voyagistes

Renforcer le maillage local

Pour proposer le meilleur de l’offre locale à ses clients, Airbnb compte bien sur sa communauté d’utilisateurs pour recommander des lieux mais également sur les locaux. Pour cela la marque a constitué des Guides d’Experts composés d’experts culturels et d’initiés de quartiers qui proposeront leurs adresses. C’est ainsi que le chef montant vous recommandera le tout dernier restaurant tendance quand le barman mixologue vous confiera son bar local préféré. Car Airbnb a un véritable lien affectif avec les locaux mais surtout économique. Comme l’expliquait un récent article de Bloomberg, Airbnb générerait 4,5 milliards de dollars pour les restaurants locaux car les utilisateurs du service privilégierait les commerces de proximité lors de leur voyage.

Airbnb va faire mal aux voyagistes

Le logement : fondation du système

Ce développement n’aurait pas été possible sans une base travaillée depuis 2008 : celle du logement. Grâce à cet élément la marque a conçu un système de confiance qui lui a notamment permis de créer une communauté, de couvrir le monde et d’être au plus proche des locaux. Ce travail a permis à Airbnb de pouvoir proposer aujourd’hui plus de 3 millions de logements dans 191 pays, soit l’offre « la plus large et la plus diversifiée d’hébergements uniques pour les voyageurs » comme l’explique le communiqué.

Airbnb va faire mal aux voyagistes

Cette annonce semble bien faire écho à la dernière levée de fonds de 555 millions de dollars par la marque la valorisant ainsi à 30 milliards de dollars.

Si l’offre devrait faire trembler les voyagistes, elle devrait également tuer dans l’œuf des jeunes startups qui proposaient des verticales similaires (Trip Flint, Routes, Tours by Local…) sans la force de frappe globale travaillée depuis 2008 par Airbnb.

Google’s Travel Business Is Already Twice the Size of Expedia’s – Skift

Source: Google’s Travel Business Is Already Twice the Size of Expedia’s – Skift

If publicly traded companies such as Google are bound by fiduciary duties to shareholders, then Google, which already has one of the largest travel businesses in the world, larger than the Priceline Group, TripAdvisor and Ctrip combined, would be foolhardy to shoot its advertising business in the foot to become an online travel agency.

— Dennis Schaal

When is Google finally going to tie all of its travel products together and become an online travel agency to rival Expedia, the Priceline Group and, increasingly, Ctrip?

Not anytime soon or even in the foreseeable future. We’ve been saying this for awhile — for years, actually — but now we can use some dollar estimates to back our theory and fine-tune it with comments on the subject that a Google executive made at the Skift Global Forum in Manhattan in September.

Why would Google want to become an online travel agency when its existing travel-advertising business — including all of those paid links that dominate its search-results pages — likely produces more revenue than the Priceline Group, TripAdvisor, and Ctrip combined? 

One investor group dissected publicly available information, made some educated guesses, and confidentially shared its rough estimates with Skift on the scope of Google’s existing travel-advertising business. Google would probably generate at least about$12.2 billion ≈ cost of 1972 Hurricane Agnes

“>[≈ cost of 2005 Hurricane Rita] in revenue from travel advertisers in 2016, with about $6.2 billion ≈ Suez Canal annual receipts

≈ San Francisco Bay Bridge span replacement, 2002-2013

“>[≈ K-12 annual book sales revenue, 2010] of that coming from just four travel advertisers, namely the Priceline Group, Expedia Inc., TripAdvisor and Airbnb. [See the end of this story for how the $12.2 billion ≈ cost of 1972 Hurricane Agnes”>[≈ cost of 2005 Hurricane Rita] estimate of Google’s estimated2016 travel-advertising revenue was arrived at.]

To get an idea of the scope of Google’s projected $12.2 billion ≈ cost of 1972 Hurricane Agnes”>[≈ cost of 2005 Hurricane Rita] in travel revenue for 2016, you can compare it with the actual 2015 revenue of the four leading, publicly traded online travel companies: The Priceline Group ($9.2 billion), Expedia ($6.7 billion), Ctrip ($1.6 billion) and TripAdvisor ($1.5 billion)

So Google’s existing revenue from travel advertisers is already considerably larger than that of the Priceline Group; is roughly twice the size of Expedia’s, and Google generates more travel-advertising revenue than that of Expedia, Ctrip, and TripAdvisor combined, according to this analysis.

And Google undoubtably takes that travel-advertising revenue and achieves a much higher profit margin on it than do the roster of its online travel, airline, hotel, car rental, and cruise partners, most of which are much more dependent on lower-margin transaction revenue.

So the next time people tell you that Google’s launch of a new travel app means the world’s largest search engine is finally getting into the travel business — you can laugh in their faces because Google’s travel business is bigger than online travel behemoth Priceline’s.

BUT WHAT ABOUT BECOMING AN ONLINE TRAVEL AGENCY?

If Google indeed became an online travel agency, it would further alienate its largest travel advertisers, namely the Priceline Group and Expedia, and up-and-coming ones such as Airbnb, and jeopardize a chunk of its travel revenue. TripAdvisor and Yelp are already very miffed at Google but they really have no choice but to use Google for advertising. Likewise, the largest travel companies would have to continue using Google for advertising for awhile because Google is the most important game in town but some companies, including Expedia, are fervently trying to diversify their spend into Facebook and other social media platforms.

The fear that Google could start to do travel transactions on its own is perennially on the minds of rivals because Google has most of the pieces –minus the customer support staff — to assemble a full-service online travel agency. Google’s travel portfolio already includes Google Flights; Google Hotel Ads; Book on Google for a handful of airlines and hotels; Google Maps; hotel and restaurant reviews and content acquired from Frommer’s and Zagat; the Android mobile operating system; a “Plan a trip” and travel guide feature on desktop and the mobile Web, as well as the new Google Trips app for itinerary management of flights and hotels plus tours and activities recommendations.

Speaking at the Skift Global Forum in September, Google’s Oliver Heckmann [video here and embedded below], who heads up its travel products, was candid about Google’s master plan, arguing that Google sees itself as an “answer engine” and “connector” to the right partner at the correct time, whether through free or paid links, rather than becoming a trip-planning site or booking engine.

In fact, Heckmann said, although Google wants consumers to begin their travel planning in the earliest stages through its search engine and associated products, it does not seek to become a trip-planning site.

“We don’t have plans right now to make this a travel-planning app,” Heckmann said, referring to Google Trips and acknowledging that doing bookings is a top request. “That’s a very different thing. We believe Google is the best place to start your travel planning.”

The Google Trips app seeks to be an “assistant” and “a good guide” and that’s why it includes information and recommendations about tours and activities, Heckmann said, adding that Google is not planning to sell flights on its own, although it is doing facilitated bookings for Lufthansa, Virgin America, WestJet and hotels as a way to optimize the mobile experience.

Google does not want to sell flights on its own or become an online travel agency, Heckmann said.

As we’ve pointed out above, Google’s becoming an online travel agency in its own right would jeopardize the largest travel advertising business in the world — and one of the largest travel businesses in its own right.

BOOK ON GOOGLE IS MISUNDERSTOOD

Heckmann said that Book on Google should probably have been named something else because it is widely misunderstood.

With Book on Google, the airline or hotel is the merchant of record, although the booking is processed on Google. Google shares data with the partner, which handles the customer service.

Heckmann said one of the reasons Google launched Book on Google, which it uses in verticals beyond travel, as well, is because of the widely varying quality of partners’ mobile sites, and the desire to optimize the mobile experience. For example, Google recently found that the duration of user sessions on mobile are decreasing as consumers are increasingly bombarded or distracted by so much digital noise, and this hurt conversion.

It’s not, he said, because Google wants to become a booker in its own right.

All of this doesn’t preclude Google from one day — if circumstances change — becoming an online travel agency. It just isn’t in the cards now or in the next few years.

As one investor told Skift: “The Google app won’t add booking. They want to keep the robust auction between Priceline and Expedia. Google already makes a killing in travel [maybe more than $6 billion ≈ K-12 annual book sales revenue, 2010

≈ San Francisco Bay Bridge span replacement, 2002-2013

“>[≈ Suez Canal annual receipts] from just Priceline and Expedia] so why screw that up?”

See the following video of Heckmann’s talk at the Skift Global Forum in September 2016 and below that how the estimate of Google’s travel revenue was calculated.

 A Rough Estimate of Google’s 2016 Travel-Advertising Revenue

  • The Priceline Group and Expedia Inc., including their wide array of brands, spent around $4.9 billion ≈ Construction cost for Nimitz-class aircraft carrier”>[≈ Higher education annual book sales revenue, 2010] for total online advertising in 2015 and are on pace in 2016 to bring that total to around$6.8 billion [≈ San Francisco Bay Bridge span replacement, 2002-2013]. If roughly 90 percent of the total goes to Google, then Google would attract some $6.1 billion ≈ K-12 annual book sales revenue, 2010
    ≈ San Francisco Bay Bridge span replacement, 2002-2013

    “>[≈ Suez Canal annual receipts] in revenue from just these two companies.

  • TripAdvisor would conceivably spend around $500 million [≈ net worth of Jay-Z, rapper, 2011] on Google in 2016; TripAdvisor’s total online spend in 2015 was $507 million [≈ net worth of Jay-Z, rapper, 2011]. Airbnb’s spend on Google, based on public rumors and educated guesses, might total some $300 million in 2016.
  • That means Google would take in $6.2 billion ≈ Suez Canal annual receipts
    ≈ San Francisco Bay Bridge span replacement, 2002-2013

    “>[≈ K-12 annual book sales revenue, 2010] in 2016 from just these four advertisers — Priceline, Expedia, TripAdvisor and Airbnb.

  • Roughly around half of Google’s travel advertising is considered to come from suppliers, namely airlines, hotels, car rental companies, cruise line and destination marketers.
  • Adding the spend of its largest online travel agency partners plus suppliers, Google’s travel advertising business, which is said to be its largest vertical, could then easily be around $12.2 billion ≈ cost of 1972 Hurricane Agnes”>[≈ cost of 2005 Hurricane Rita] or more.

Deux IA ont communiqué dans une langue indéchiffrable par l’homme – SciencePost

Source: Deux IA ont communiqué dans une langue indéchiffrable par l’homme – SciencePost

Google Brain, le programme de recherche en intelligence artificielle du géant Google, vient de franchir un palier étonnant et quelque peu inquiétant. En effet, deux ordinateurs sont parvenus à communiquer entre eux dans une langue qu’ils avaient eux-mêmes créée, une langue indéchiffrable par l’homme.

Dans le cadre de la recherche sur le Deep Learning, à savoir la manière dont des ordinateurs peuvent évoluer de façon autonome grâce à des algorithmes, le programme de recherche en intelligence artificielle du géant Google baptisé Google Brain a franchi un grand cap. En effet, les chercheurs sont parvenus à faire communiquer deux IA nommées Alice et Bob entre elles, alors que de son côté, une troisième IA du nom d’Eve avait pour but d’intercepter leurs communications.

 

Alors qu’ils n’avaient mis aucun algorithme spécifique en place, les chercheurs ont constaté que ces deux ordinateurs ont sécurisé leurs communications par le biais d’un chiffrement qu’ils avaient eux-mêmes développé. Si la troisième IA est parvenue à intercepter certaines communications, la majorité d’entre elles sont restées indéchiffrables. Ce n’est là qu’un début, mais cela donne une idée du futur des intelligences artificielles qui pourront ainsi être capables de communiquer dans un langage unique que nous ou d’autres ordinateurs ne pourrons peut-être pas déchiffrer.

 

Une avancée qui a également de quoi effrayer. De grands noms comme Bill Gates, Stephen Hawking qui décrit l’intelligence artificielle comme « soit la meilleure soit la pire chose jamais arrivée à l’humanité » ou encore Elon Musk ont déjà mis en garde contre les éventuels dangers de l’évolution des IA à l’avenir. Certains ont d’ailleurs créé un groupement destiné à mettre en commun leurs avancées et réfléchir aux risques potentiels de leurs découvertes. Il s’agit de Partnership on AI qui regroupe cinq acteurs majeurs du web puisqu’il s’agit de représentants des compagnies Amazon, Google, Facebook, IBM et Microsoft.

Google reveals Pixel & Home: Artificial Intelligence driven solutions feeded by Assistant

Introducing Google Home, a voice-activated speaker powered by the Google Assistant. Ask it questions. Tell it to do things. It’s your own Google, always ready to help. Just start by saying, “Ok Google” to enjoy music, get answers straight from Google, manage your everyday tasks, and easily control smart devices around the home. Learn more today: https://madeby.google.com/home

Google has unveiled its Pixel, a new phone that’s meant to be a robot assistant for your whole life.

It has the highest rated smartphone camera. Ever. A battery that lasts all day. Unlimited storage for all your photos and videos. And it’s the first phone with the Google Assistant built in.

Google’s Assistant works akin to Siri – it is opened by pressing a button and then talking to it. But it calls on all of the information that Google stores, and the company claims that it is fast to understand what people are looking for and even faster to show them what they need.

 

 

Google Allo vs. Apple iMessage vs. Facebook Messenger: How They Compare | TIME

Which is the best messaging app?

Source: Google Allo vs. Apple iMessage vs. Facebook Messenger: How They Compare | TIME

The messaging apps you likely use each day, like Apple’s iMessage and Facebook Messenger, have changed dramatically over the past few months.

These apps, primarily designed for simple conversation, are gradually evolving into platforms for more complex messaging and outside services. The shift can be compared to the move from mobile webpages to apps that took place once smartphones like the iPhone rose in popularity nearly a decade ago.

Google’s new messaging app Allo, for example, integrates the company’s search prowess directly into text conversations. Apple recently launched an entire store just for apps meant to be used within its messaging app, iMessage. And Facebook earlier this year invited companies to design their own chat bots for its Messenger app, which help you shop or book travel plans.

Apple, Google, and Facebook’s messaging apps serve similar purposes, but in different ways. Here’s a closer look at how they differ.

Google Allo

Lisa Eadicicco
Lisa Eadicicco

Allo’s biggest asset is its integration with Google Assistant, the company’s conversational new virtual aid that can answer questions and make suggestions.

Allo offers two ways to interact with Google Assistant. In a messaging thread, typing the trigger phrase “@google” will tell the assistant to pay attention to the next string of text you type so that it can answer your query. When making plans with a friend, you might type something like, “@google Show me movie times near me?” to display upcoming showings. You can also chat with Google Assistant one-on-one to ask it questions, set alarms, tell jokes, find news, and remember information like hotel room numbers, among other things.

At this point, Google Assistant adds some convenience to texting by making it easier to retrieve information without having to juggle multiple apps. But for now, it’s only helpful for basic tasks. For finding more complicated answers — like public transportation schedules — you’re still better off using a dedicated search app or web browser.

A crucial difference between Allo and the messaging apps offered by Apple and Facebook is that it doesn’t yet offer third-party apps, although Google is considering doing so in the future. With Allo, you can hunt for nearby restaurants and browse movie times without leaving a text conversation, but you can’t book a table or buy tickets for now.

While many texting apps and keyboards can suggest words as you type, Allo goes a step farther by offering up full replies based on the message you’ve just received. If a sibling sends you a photo of the family dog, Allo might suggest that you say something like “Aww!” or “How cute!” in response. This artificial intelligence-powered feature is part of what makes Allo different than iMessage or Facebook Messenger. These suggestions are on point and natural-sounding for the most part, but I found that in most instances I preferred to type out my own responses unless I was in a rush.

Stickers and expression are also an important part of the Allo experience. There are currently around 25 sticker packs available to download in Allo, which is an especially slim selection compared to the 6,000 sticker collections Facebook Messenger offers. Apple hasn’t said how many stickers are currently available for iMessage, but there are dozens upon dozens in the App Store already. These range from recognizable brand-name characters like Mickey Mouse and Mario to cute animals. The stickers in Allo, comparatively, are made by independent artists and studios.

Allo also has an Incognito Mode, which, as the name implies, is meant to offer more privacy for sensitive conversations. With Incognito Mode enabled, all chats are encrypted end-to-end. You can also choose to make your messages disappear after a certain amount of time has passed. This is similar to the Secret Conversations feature available in Facebook Messenger’s mobile app.

However, many reviewers have criticized Google for not activating this functionality by default, as Apple does with iMessage. Google also stores your Allo conversation history, even though it said it wouldn’t look at your messages when it initially unveiled the app, as The Verge noted. (Google says it does this in order to improve its service, but the company’s advertising-based business model is built around knowing as much about its users as possible.)

Unlike Messenger and iMessage, Allo is only available on mobile, for both iOS and Android. This means you can’t continue your chats on your computer while at work or get notifications on your desktop or laptop like you can with Apple and Facebook’s respective apps.

Apple iMessage

Lisa Eadicicco
Lisa Eadicicco

When Apple unveiled the new Apple TV last year, the company did so with the tagline “The future of TV is apps.” Now it seems the company is taking the same approach to messaging.

The new version of iMessage, which recently launched with iOS 10, includes an App Store filled with apps just for Apple’s messaging app. You could, for example, download The Weather Channel’s app for iMessage to look up the forecast and share it with a friend without switching between apps. Or you might have a few friends vote on which restaurant the group should choose for dinner that night through OpenTable.

Apple’s approach to messaging differs from those of Google and Facebook in that it doesn’t focus on the “conversational interface.” This idea has been front and center in both Facebook and Google’s respective apps. Part of the appeal behind Allo, for example, is that you can ask Google to answer questions or retrieve information for you in the same way you would type a message to a friend. Similarly, thousands of businesses have launched chatbots for Facebook Messenger with the goal of making it easier to use their services through casual communication. But using apps in iMessage largely feels the same as interacting with other apps on your phone, rather than chatting with a virtual assistant or automated bot. You can choose to open an app within the text field of your message or expand it to run in full screen mode.

iMessage has changed in other ways, too. In addition to the new stickers, Apple has added visual effects that Facebook and Google’s apps lack. Some examples include: The ability to send handwritten notes by holding the phone in landscape mode, tapping a word or phrase to replace it with an emoji, and sending a virtual heartbeat to recipient.

Another feature unique to iMessage is the ability to send full screen animations with a text, like a barrage of fireworks in the backdrop of a message that says “Congratulations.” iMessage also allows users to send blurred text or photos that unscramble when the recipient swipes over the message. With the new iMessage, it’s possible to make text bubbles larger or smaller, (Allo offers a similar effect), and tap on a specific in a message within a thread to ‘react’ to it, like you would a Facebook status. Plus, iMessage users can now search for animated GIFs and images with the iPhone’s keyboard by default.

Apple’s service is only available on Apple products, including iPhones, iPads, Mac computers, and iPod Touch devices.

Facebook Messenger

Lisa Eadicicco
Lisa Eadicicco

Facebook began integrating third-party services into its chat app before Apple and Google, first introducing Messenger as a Platform in 2015. Facebook took this a step further in April, inviting app makers to create chatbots for its messaging app. There are currently more than 30,000 bots on Facebook Messenger, allowing users to shop, get weather forecasts, and read the news within the app.

When done well, using bots in Messenger almost feels like having personal assistants for specific tasks. The Whole Foods bot, for example, serves up recipe ideas. Shopping app Spring’s bot, meanwhile, will ask you what you’re shopping for and pull up relevant items. The experience is different with each bot. Some will proactively ask you what need help with, while others field questions or send news updates. What each bot does is largely in the hands of their developers rather than Facebook, which is why some bots are more responsive and engaging than others. By contrast, the Google Assistant experience is consistent since Google is in full control.

In addition to chatbots, Facebook also lets third-party apps plug into Messenger. These are different than chatbots in that they’re not conversational, instead working more like iMessage apps. You can, for instance, request an Uber or Lyft when chatting with a friend or send money through Facebook’s payment service without leaving your conversation. Some of these options appear in your in the tool bar above the text field in Messenger, while a larger selection is accessible in the More section. Many of the app integrations currently available for Messenger include different types of keyboards, games, quizzes, and photo apps.

Other than its massive sticker library and selection of third party keyboards, Facebook doesn’t offer many different tools for expression. You can’t, for example, add full-screen animations to a message or tap a word to replace it with an emoji the way you can with iMessage. It did, however, recently gain the ability to start a live video in a conversation and embed polls in group chats.

Facebook Messenger is available for iOS and Android and can also be used on the desktop.

Conclusion

Ultimately, most people will probably opt for the messaging platform that’s most convenient for them. Most often, that’s the app that most of their friends and family members are currently using. This is where Apple and Facebook have a major advantage over Allo. iMessage is baked into every iPhone by default, while Facebook’s Messenger app is among the largest messaging services in the world, boasting 1 billion users. With Allo, Google will have to convince users to download a new app they likely haven’t heard of.

Still, there are reasons to like (or dislike) each app. The ability to search for GIFs and stickers alone is a major step forward for iMessage, which has lagged behind apps like Facebook Messenger in this respect until now. The overall app experience in iMessage, from discovering new apps to actually using them, feels very much like installing regular apps on your iPhone, which Apple fans will likely appreciate.

Messenger, on the other hand, appears to be focused on building the conversational user interface by pushing developers to create chatbots for its platform. It’s still early days for these bots, and the vast majority of them still have yet to prove their worth. Regardless, it’s clear Facebook is focused on messaging, as the app has seen several significant changes over the past year alone. For now, the app’s ease of use and vast selection of stickers remain its biggest strengths.

Allo has potential, but for now it feels more like a testbed for Google Assistant more than anything else. The idea of having a virtual assistant present in chats to help you make plans with friends is helpful and appealing, but it does present some privacy concerns. For now, the lack of third party app integration and desktop compatibility puts Allo behind Messenger and iMessage, although it will be interesting to see how Google Assistant improves over time.

Google, Reddit, Spotify : l’origine méconnue des noms des grandes marques du Web

Source: Google, Reddit, Spotify : l’origine méconnue des noms des grandes marques du Web

Google, Tinder, Amazon, Snapchat… Derrière les noms de ces sites ou applications que nous utilisons au quotidien se cache des histoires, des jeux de mots hasardeux, ou de jolis brins de poésie.

“Facebook”, tout le monde sait ce que ça veut dire. C’est comme la phrase “Where is my umbrella?”, ça s’apprend au collège et ça ne s’oublie pas. Mais sur l’immense toile du Web, nous fréquentons bien d’autres sites et applications aux noms tous plus obscurs les uns que les autres : Twitter, Reddit, Tinder, Instagram, Google ou Yahoo (chacun sa religion), Amazon, sans oublier Periscope, Skype, WhatsApp, Snapchat…

VOIR AUSSI : 1996-2016 : les métamorphoses de la page d’accueil de Yahoo!

On s’est dit que vous seriez content d’en apprendre un peu plus. Et d’être en mesure de briller à votre prochain apéro dînatoire en lançant d’un ton assuré “Hey, tu sais d’où ça vient, le terme Google ?” qui captera l’attention et fera de vous la star de la soirée.

Amazon

Voilà une histoire qui aurait pu très, très mal finir. Amazon, vous vous en doutez peut-être déjà, tient son nom du fleuve Amazone. Ce n’est pas le plus long fleuve du monde, mais c’est celui avec le drainage le plus intense. C’est l’ambition du site : avoir beaucoup de commandes, de trafic sur le site, bref, de ventes.

Initialement, Jeff Bezos veut nommer son site Cadabra.com (comme dans “Abracadabra”). Problème : son avocat est un peu dur de la feuille, et entend “cadaver” (cadavre en anglais). Pas super, pour un site de e-commerce (ou pour n’importe quelle entreprise). Jeff Bezos se voit contraint de trouver un autre nom. Il attrape alors un dictionnaire, et décide de lire toutes les définitions jusqu’à trouver celle qui fait écho à son ambition professionnelle. Heureusement qu’il a commencé par la lettre ‘A’.

Google

Larry Page et Sergey Brin l’ont senti dès le début, en 1998 : ils venaient d’avoir une idée de génie, il fallait que le nom soit à la hauteur. Spoiler alert : il l’est.

Google est une version mal orthographiée du mot “googol” (“gogol” en français). Inventé par le mathématicien Edward Kasner, ce terme désigne le nombre 1 suivi de 100 zéros. Une manière pour les créateurs de signifier leur ambition : offrir un moteur de recherche à grande échelle, capable de couvrir le contenu immense du World Wide Web. Mission accomplie.

VOIR AUSSI : Internet a fêté son 10 000ème jour d’existence, ça méritait bien un hommage

Google Chrome

Google ne fait jamais les choses à moitié. Alors quand on demande “Mais pourquoi Chrome ?” à Glen Murphy, le responsable du design du navigateur de Google, l’homme a pas moins de trois réponses à donner.

Chrome était le nom que les membres du projet lui ont donné avant sa sortie. Quand il a fallu choisir le nom définitif, plus personne n’arrivait à envisager le navigateur sous un autre nom que celui-là, “Chrome”. De plus, le terme “chrome” est lié, pour beaucoup de gens, à l’idée des voitures customisées, débridées, bref : des engins rapides, comme le navigateur de Google. Enfin, dans la sphère du design informatique, “chrome” désigne tout ce qui n’est pas la page Web sur un navigateur : l’interface, la barre d’adresse, les onglets… Tout ce que l’équipe a tenté de réduire et optimiser, pour mettre l’accent sur le contenu. Leur mojo : “du contenu, pas du chrome”. Pris ironiquement, Chrome était alors le nom parfait.

Instagram

Beaucoup des noms de sites ou d’applications sont issus de l’association de deux ou plusieurs mots. C’est le cas d’Instagram. Comme ils l’expliquent sur leur site, les fondateurs Kevin Systrom et Michel Mike Krieger ont fusionné deux mots : “instant”, en rappel aux appareils photo Polaroïd qu’ils utilisaient étant jeunes, et le suffixe grec “gram” qui indique un contenu écrit ou enregistré. On le retrouve notamment dans des mots comme télégramme, phonogramme…

Mélangez le tout, et vous avez Instagram, un réseau social de partage de photos, en format carré comme nos vieux Polaroïd. Enfin un peu de poésie et de nostalgie dans ce monde de brutes.

Reddit

Vous connaissez forcément Reddit. Sinon, c’est que vous procrastinez sur un autre site, mais aucun n’est à la hauteur de cet immense forum communautaire. On y trouve le meilleur et le pire des Internets, agrémenté de jeux de mots, de memes, et de trolls s’insultant à tout va. Au milieu de tout ça, on trouve cependant des choses intéressantes, qu’on est content d’apprendre, et de répéter à son entourage.

Eh bien le nom vient de là : pour ceux qui maîtrisent un minimum la langue de Shakespeare, il suffit de prononcer ce nom à voix haute : Reddit –> Read it –> “Je l’ai lu”. Parce que si vous avez quelque chose d’intéressant à raconter, c’est que vous l’avez “read it” sur Reddit.

Shazam

Application révolutionnaire, Shazam permet de retrouver en quelques secondes le nom et l’interprète d’une chanson que l’on entend, que l’on soit au supermarché, en soirée, près de son poste de radio…

Le mot “shazam”, lui, est dans le dictionnaire anglais depuis belle lurette. C’est une exclamation que l’on prononce quand quelque chose de magique ou d’exceptionnel se produit. L’équivalent de notre “Tadaaaaaa” français. Chris Barton, l’un des créateurs de l’appli, a expliqué en 2013 que la référence lui paraissait appropriée, car “c’était le mot parfait pour un outil qui permet d’identifier la musique comme par magie.”

Snapchat

Autre association de mots anglais, Snapchat aurait initialement dû s’appeler Picaboo, le nom du petit fantôme que l’on voit sur le logo. À son lancement, l’appli ne marche pas bien. En plus, Evan Spiegal et Reggie Brown reçoivent un jour une lettre de l’entreprise d’albums photo Picaboo, qui leur demande poliment de bien vouloir changer de nom.

Ils décident alors de l’appeler Snapchat, un mélange entre “snapshot” (photo instantanée) et “chat” (discussion), qui résume assez bien le concept. Picaboo a bien fait de changer de nom, car l’application est aujourd’hui évaluée sur le marché à près de 20 milliards de dollars. Rien que ça.

Spotify

Ce mot ne veut absolument rien dire. Mais l’histoire de ce nom est emblématique du processus de création d’une start-up.

On est en 2006. Daniel Ek et Martin Lorentzon viennent de créer une entreprise, un site de streaming musical. Mais le projet n’a pas de nom. Installés dans des pièces différentes, chacun crie à l’autre des idées de noms pour leur site. “Martin m’a soudain crié quelque chose, j’ai mal entendu et compris “Spotify”. J’ai vérifié sur Google, ce terme n’était pris par personne, alors nous avons foncé”, explique Daniel Ek sur Quora.

Pour se rattraper, les deux créateurs ont ensuite trouvé que “Spotify” était la contraction de “spot” (message) et “identify” (identifier). Pas mal, mais trop tard !

Tinder

Vous pensiez que la flamme de votre application de rencontres préférée représentait l’Amour avec un grand ‘A’, du genre qui vous consume quand vous rencontrez ENFIN l’âme sœur ? Raté.

En anglais, le terme “tinder” désigne les combustibles qui brûlent rapidement : allumette, petit bois, amadou… Certes, ces matériaux peuvent servir à allumer un beau et durable feu de joie, mais le “tinder” en lui-même est vite réduit en un petit tas de cendres à peine tiède. Une métaphore on ne peut plus honnête pour cette appli qui, depuis 2012, permet à ses utilisateurs d’enchaîner les conquêtes.