But you must have me confused with someone else when saying in the earlier post -
"Yeah if i am correct you also favor a golden standard like mixed reality to get customers used to it and not confused with all kind of other third party terms"
NOT ! Nothing further from the truth.
Let me sum it all up in a single very long post that I can just refer back to in the future...(indulge me 
)
The only reason HOLO is a thing is because Microsoft choose to use it in part of their PRODUCT BRANDS years ago and HOLO is generic, and HOLO tells the users what they are likely to expect it is, and it is not a limiting term that would sound incompatible depending on it's exact use.
So re-enforced by MS branding, it has a public awareness and multiple forms of use
and was quickly adopted by others. You can not TM 'HOLO' being a generic dictionary word except for perhaps some narrowly defined purpose that would be hard to defend. I have a fair investment in the keyword.
I'm still waiting for others to brand with AR (some have) and MR (very very few).
The need for names with AR & MR are dependent on the need for someone to WANT or NEED to market the products or services with AR/MR in the name. They would be the likely buyers for it.
Compare to "CLOUD" for names demand and product branding for any example research.
If anyone can't understand why cloud became a high value keyword, you will never understand it at all since it is the easiest and most in your face modern simple example.
All be it, the consumers for CLOUD names are more a B2B play with deeper pockets that need to say what they do in a name and keep it short and memorable normally with just 2 words.
We are selling names not a popularity contest for most mentioned in media or by tech co's.
It has nothing to do with what is technically true in definition of formats .
Those that think otherwise should only use google search "RESULTS" to pick their keywords. Good Luck.
Name value is determined by demand for end-use and most often a indicator of advantage to the buyer.
Why else spend the kind of money some expect.
You got a great name, but if nobody wants to use it for a product or service, it has no value.
But the question then becomes how many want it or how deep are the pockets of those that do want it and and how badly, so the advantages of the particular name present over other names that could be used.
When it comes to names, we are just trying to predict that future demand of 'end-use'.
I still see no commitment of use of MR in a brand and I know it is a bit premature but it's not a new thing either. After all.... they are all talking about it aren't they ! Many company's doing mixed reality did not use it in their name. (referring that to the 'cloud' example again).
This x-mas will sport plenty of MR devices so you will not have to wait long to determine commitment because if it comes to be,
it will be on the software experience side for highest demand and later not sooner..
MixedR will suffer from the LACK OF CONTENT in the beginning year maybe 2 anyway.
But that is dependent on how you define Mixed Reality 'Content'...
I'm 'not sure' this Merged/Blended style Mixed content will be compatible with Mixed style of HoloLens or Magic leap's. Nobody knows if ML's will be compatible with anything else.
Could be a problem if all MIXed content can not be viewed on all MIXed devices. A Wait-N-See !
It may be left on Microsoft's lap to make it cross hardware compatible .
But the Merged/Blended style will work with VR/360 content.
New definitions will likely be coming down the road. Along with new terms. Accurate ? I don't care.
This is much more complicated than many will give credit to.
Problem is, they are calling them MERGED and BLENDED and who knows what else may come to play.
Each for a specific reason that you should be doing your research on to understand why.
But they are Mixed Reality Devices by the self created definitions out there, and those 2 names are not MR branding.
So with all the mix-up, you will have to wait for the consumer reactions.
Now some folks have promoted the XR term in blogs and the like and there are also TM's associated with that term. (look them up) and I think the motivation for promotion lies in the owner of one of them
.(just conjecture on my part). It's not on my radar till 3 or more small cap's brand with the term.
That's commitment to the idea, if the TM does not get them. Even that will only have me 'watch for it'.
If you did have a single name to describe it all, someone would quickly have a new one to differentiate themselves from everyone else using it. And that is how we got here.
We have one term to describe it all. VR ! Problem with that is, while some were busy differentiating themselves with AR/MR/Merged/Blended,
they ill-defined what VR was and tied it to a particular hardware type/definition. And that has grown with each new one. There it is and if someone uses the term to describe what some define as DIFFERENT, it is quick to be pointed out.
So one term will never work !
When Intel chose Merged or HP chose Blended, they were making a marketing statement that "what we do is different than the others", And that is how the name game is played. Marketing 101.
One company brand name can not play with others. Holo is a free standing word that is most often used as a syllable or a adjective and MS brands it HOLOLENS not HOLO. It really is a different keyword since you can view a hologram in any format tech and it means "whole or complete" with latin/greek roots.
I'm not promoting the keyword because it too is a limited use as the keyword just does not play well with many other words. But it is quite different than AR/MR, not necessarily better. Just pointing that out.
We all should know there will be some limited generic use on the hardware side of names for any format of it and I would expect 'some' software use of the term MR in 'generic branding' sometime.
If they don't brand with it (make it part of their name like Oculus VR)
, who you going to sell it to?
But it needs to be in the mind of and on the tongue of the
likely consumer first (also see cloud example).
I don't care what terms come to be for it but I'm not playing more than a couple till there is a indication they are indeed domain keywords that likely will be used by end-users. The more 'likely buyers' I see with deep pockets, the more I will buy of any keyword. And I don't care which one's they are !
I do have opinions on what is best for the industry but it has no weight on how I value names.
It's just wishful thinking and I am just a spectator in the game. I react to the results.
And I do not promote one keyword over others. I play it as I see it. We can't/don't create keywords.
I have said it many times... Domaining is about the marketing of others.
But some end-users are better marketer's than others and it shows in the names they choose and what they are willing to pay for them. Doing well with domain's is understanding marketing.
Something all my tech knowledge does very little to help with in this niche.
Sorry for the long one.
But next time, I will just refer to this post... ...LOL...
Here is a new one for ya... Synthetic Reality...... No hardware required... Just LSD !
