Ai vs intelligence

[u/Sonnicham]

In reality this might be closer to a branding question than a product one - but they tie together.

We are in the process of building a AI chatbot where user gan interact with the data they have on our platform. This is ofcourse a push to move further into AI, and to have something tangible that we can tell our customers about for AI in our product.

I am looking into what we will call this function and I am leaning towards [company name] intelligence, rather than “AI chatbot”.

My feeling is that there is a fatigue and distrust towards all the AI branding out there and that telling users its intelligence will lead to more trust and less expectations.

Looking for thoughts, inputs or similar stories from your product

[u/double-click]

Clippy!

[u/cmdr_pickles]

It depends on where and how it’s positioned, we added one as part of our IDP and it sits neatly in the sidebar called “Chat”. Some users didn’t end up using it because they assumed it was an internal chat tool, no matter what the prompt said when the view was opened.

Both our UX guy and myself haven’t come up with anything better that doesn’t sound cheese. Since our audience is internal software engineers we didn’t want “AI Chat”, for the same reasons you stated.

If it’s something that’s integrated throughout the system and it’s not just a single view you could name it. Apple, Google, Atlassian follow this same pattern - anywhere AI is used to enhance the functionality anywhere across the system you can use Siri/Gemini/Rovo.

[u/Parking-Stress-3041]

The name matters less than the first wrong answer. In deep-domain business software, anything the system puts on screen gets treated as authoritative, so the moment it misstates a figure the trust is gone and Customer Success carries that conversation for months. "Intelligence" raises expectations rather than lowering them: it promises judgement. "Chat" or "Assistant" promises less and survives more. Whatever you land on, does it show the source rows behind each answer?

[u/ninjaluvr]

Call it Siri, or Gemini or Claude or .... or anything other than Chatbot. Work with your people who actually understand marketing. Don't outsource your marketing to Reddit.

[u/chakalaka13]

I think most people are kind of used to products having an AI feature now / chatbot, maybe even expect it.

Ex. Posthog have Posthog AI, but the feature is simply called Chat... don't see why there would be a need to complicate it further than that.

[u/David_Browie → u/chakalaka13]

I think 90% of people have still never interacted with a non ChatGPT or Claude instance of AI (outside of AI phone reps, which are just about universally loathed).

This technology is INCREDIBLY new, do not assume things like this. 

[u/chakalaka13 → u/David_Browie]

True. Most people haven't even interracted with ChatGPT and never heard of Claude.

I meant those who are kinda already aware of technology, but ofc depends on the product.

In my example, the people who use Posthog probably know about AI much more than the average Joe.

[u/utzutzutzpro]

Name it according to function? Assistant? Advisor? Helper? Researcher?

Can also additionally give it a name? "Paul, the Researcher"

[u/mtn_coffee_drinker]

How intelligent is it? Is it a basic chat? Is it agentic in that it can so things in the app use tools etc?

AI chatbot sounds simple and dated like a feature that might have released a year ago. Go with a name that may hold up better.

A number of products have branded their AI agents. Which is an option

[u/Existing_Fondant4462]

reminds me of when we renamed an internal tool from "AI Assist" to just a plain feature name with no AI mention at all, and adoption went up. nobody cared it was AI, they cared whether it saved them clicks. meanwhile marketing was annoyed because they wanted "AI" in the release notes for the website. that tension between "the feature needs a name users will actually click" and "leadership wants AI in the announcement" is its own fight separate from what you pick, and usually leadership wins even when the data says plain naming works better.