Leader: Livelier with 3G please, Vodafone

Vodafone Live! with 3G or Vodafone Live! powered by 3G? We've heard both monikers. But how about Vodafone Live! with unnecessary jargon?

It seems a small point but this week's mega-3G launch (you know the one we are talking about), while good for several reasons, took a step backwards in terms of its branding and how it will reach the mass market.

When Vodafone launched Live! a couple of years back this publication and much of the telecoms industry praised the über-operator for its approach. Gone were nasty acronyms and abbreviations that most ordinary people didn't care for. No more WAP this, GPRS that and all manner of m-commerce malarkey.

Instead end users - mainly ordinary consumers - took to an all-in-one portal that just worked. Vodafone's stock rose, albeit mainly metaphorically.

Fast-forward to this week. News of the turbo-charged upgrade to Live! should be more widely talked about in such terms. The industry and, to a large extent, business press understands what 3G should enable. Even mainstream news outlets are excited and nowadays quite comfortable with the term. (Don't ask them about 2G and 1G, or 3G nuances, mind.)

But to most people, adding 3G to the name won't help. We wait to be proved wrong by upcoming campaigns from other operators and it would be understandable if we learnt that executives who have read negative reports for years about money 'wasted' on 3G spectrum and build-outs are eager to let it be known this is the point of returns on investments.

But wouldn't Vodafone Live! Plus or even Vodafone Live! Turbo (from the company that sponsors Ferrari) be more appropriate? Discuss.