You've probably opened an app and instantly known where to tap. No hunting, no second-guessing. That feeling isn't luck — it's designed. And one of the biggest contributors to it is something most of us treat as an afterthought: the names we give things.
Naming isn't just for products like iPhone or iCloud. It happens at every level of your app — menus, tab bars, buttons, settings, plan tiers. Each of those small choices adds up to how someone feels about what you built. This article walks through a framework from Apple's session Craft clear names in your app, aimed at helping you make those choices deliberately instead of by default.
Three criteria for a name that works
Before you judge any name, it helps to have something to judge it against. There are three qualities to look for.
It belongs. A name that belongs fits your app at every level — it matches what users expect to find, and it sits comfortably alongside everything else you've already named. A Balance label belongs in a payments app because that's the word that ecosystem already speaks.
It sets the right expectation. When someone reads a name, they're already predicting what they'll find behind it. A good name delivers on that prediction. When the prediction and the reality match, trust builds. When they don't, the user feels tricked — even if the feature is great.
It works everywhere. A strong name travels. It holds up across languages, markets, platforms, and the different contexts where your app lives. A clever pun that dies in translation is a liability at scale.
One important caveat: names won't always check every box, and that's fine. You may have your own constraints too — trademark availability, industry regulations, brand voice. Treat these three criteria as a guide, not a rulebook. The trade-offs are yours to make.
Clarity vs. cleverness: a worked example
Consider Apple Cash. When you send money, the one thing you need to know immediately is how much you have. That value sits right next to the send button, and it needs a label.
Walk through some candidates:
- Spending Power sounds compelling but isn't concrete. Is it a credit limit? A score? In a financial context, ambiguity is exactly what you don't want. Worse, if the value is low or zero, the label stops describing and starts judging — and payment services run entirely on trust.
- Current Funds is accurate but stiff. Say it out loud: "let me check my Current Funds." Nobody talks like that. That gut check alone tells you it doesn't belong in a service people use conversationally.
- Balance wins. It's the industry-standard term — well understood, clear, and neutral. It belongs, it sets the right expectation, and it translates without friction.
The lesson: sometimes the most obvious word is the right one, precisely because it's already doing the job. Here, clarity and trust matter more than brand expression.
But the pull toward something more branded is real, and sometimes justified. Picture a gym app with two subscription tiers: Basic Access and All Access. Clear, easy to choose between. Now imagine renaming them Lightweight and Heavyweight. Fun, on-brand — but there's a learning curve. What do those tiers actually include? That friction makes choosing harder.
So which do you pick? It depends on what matters most where that name lives. Sometimes you lean into clarity. Sometimes you lean into brand. The criteria don't tell you the answer; they tell you what you're trading off.
An exercise for arriving at a name
When you're building something, it's natural to name it after what it does, the technology behind it, or its internal function. But your users don't see it that way. They want to know what it does for them. So the exercise starts with a question: who is this for? New parents? Marathon trainees? Get clear on the audience first.
Then, with that person in mind, ask what they should think, feel, and do when they encounter the feature.
Let's run it on a real example: an Apple Maps feature that remembers places you've been — that café you found last week, the park with the accessible trails.
Think. Grab sticky notes (or the digital equivalent) and write one idea per note. What do you want people to think when they use this? Easy. Helpful. Clever. Don't filter yet — you're hunting for recurring themes, not the perfect word.
Feel. What should the emotion be? Finding a place whose name you'd forgotten feels like a small, fun win. Knowing your data is private and encrypted feels secure. Both matter here.
Do. What action should follow? Find the feature, use it, share places with the people they choose.
Once the ideas are down, step back and group them by theme. For this feature, three themes emerged:
- Ease — finding what you want without effort
- Excitement — the fun of rediscovering a place you loved
- Security — because it was built with privacy in mind, that has to come through
Now generate names against those themes and start cutting. Some candidates won't fit the app's tone. Some feel vague. Some won't translate. Cross them off.
For the survivors, run a quick real-world test: drop each name into a sentence you'd actually say. "Hey, check out Private Memories." "Just search for Private Memories." If it reads and sounds natural, it's worth exploring. If it makes you wince, that's your answer.
The Maps team landed on Visited Places — descriptive, clear, and already at home in an interface that uses "places" throughout. It signals ownership (these are your places, not something Apple reads) and it holds up across languages. It honors the themes and tests well against the criteria. It doesn't have to hit all three, but it's great when it does.
Clear doesn't have to mean literal
The examples so far lean descriptive, but that's not the only path to clarity.
The Photos app has a feature that scans your library and surfaces moments that matter — a birthday, a trip, an ordinary Tuesday that turned out to be worth remembering. Technically, it's algorithmic photo grouping. But the person who just rediscovered a five-year-old video of a laugh they hadn't heard in years isn't thinking about algorithms. They're looking for a memory.
That's why Memories works. It meets people where they are emotionally, in a way a technical label never could. It fits the app's tone and the relationship people have with their photos. It's still clear — but the clarity comes from emotion, not explanation.
Knowing when a name lands: verbs, control, and context
Here's a case that shows the reasoning in motion. Apple Podcasts has a feature that isolates voices and reduces background noise. It lives in a menu alongside playback speed. What do you call it?
- Vocal Isolation comes to mind first — but for a control the user toggles, a verb works better. This is something you do, not something you have.
- Isolate Vocals fixes the grammar but it's an audio-engineering term. It describes the technology, not the experience.
- Clarify Speech gets closer, but it only tells half the story — there's more going on than clarity.
- Enhance Playback puts the feature before the person. Enhanced how? For whom?
- Enhance Dialogue answers both questions — what's being enhanced, and for whom — before you even tap.
That's the one they shipped. It fits the context, sets the right expectation, and delivers exactly what it promises when you turn it on. All three criteria, working together. As a bonus, the same name already appears on Apple TV for a similar feature — more evidence that it belongs.
When the right word doesn't exist yet
Naming with intention doesn't mean you're limited to words that already exist.
AutoMix in Apple Music does what a good DJ does — it handles transitions between songs so playback never stops. Auto: it happens without you doing anything. Mix: it blends songs together. Put together, they form a word that doesn't exist, yet you understand it instantly. AutoMix earns its clarity from its parts, so the invented word doesn't have to explain itself.
Descriptive like Enhance Dialogue, emotional like Memories, invented like AutoMix — the criteria don't change. Only how you weigh them does.
Three things to take with you
Naming is fundamental, not cosmetic. It shapes how someone experiences your app just as much as layout, interactions, and visual design do. Next time you name something, come back to the criteria: Does it belong? Does it set the right expectation? Will it hold up everywhere your app lives?
The best names speak to the person, not just the feature. When what the product is aligns with what the person needs, the name feels like it truly belongs.
Names compound. Every good name makes the next one easier, because names build on each other and over time become the shared language of your app. The clarity, the trust, and the sense of feeling at home all accumulate.
Naming can feel like a small decision in the moment. It isn't. Next time you're wondering what to call something, you have a way to work through it — and your app or game will be better for it.
Top comments (0)