Hey Folks, we saw this banner on our Coda pages today: ‘Coda is becoming Superhuman Docs.’
While this makes a ton of sense from Superhuman’s brand cohesion and one-org perspective, from the POV of teams using the tool, ‘Superhuman Docs’ is a mouthful, and ‘docs’ is too confusing in a context where teams are likely using either Google Docs or MS Word.
As such, our team will likely keep calling it ‘Coda’, which kind of defeats the point from a branding perspective.
Just thought y’all should know 
-A
Our team has already started saying: Superdocs!
I like that - thanks for sharing! I will try and socialize that name.
Honestly, the idea of looking my coworkers in the face and telling them the platform we use is called “Superhuman” is pretty embarrassing. I think the rebrand is a huge mistake, and I’m incredibly sad about it.
And worse, over the years, I’ve made a bunch of custom icons/banners that are puzzle related to go Coda’s branding. Now my clever (& genius) design skills won’t make any sense! WOE IS ME.
I’m really looking forward to the new Superhuman-Coda. I’m sure it’s coming with a whole package of long-awaited new features—basically Super-Coda 5.0. At least, I certainly hope so. After all, you don’t confuse your entire customer base—and *their* customers—just to change the color and logo (or maybe the pricing model, too). So, it remains an exciting prospect, and everything will turn out fine in the end. I’ve been certain of that for quite a few years now.
You can always go with the unofficial portmanteau, Superdocs! I know that doesn’t solve the puzzle branding, though 
As a suite or company name, Superhuman is fine in the same way no-one says “Microsoft Office/365 Word”, but “Docs” just doesn’t work well as a standalone name. It could have been “Coda by Superhuman” along with “Grammarly by Superhuman” or even just “Superhuman Coda”, but noooooo…
I love super-docs - its less of a mouthful and devoid of any super-race connotations.
Here is my little super-docs super-hero logo (just for fun)..
Will talk to the brass about making this our official new Superdocs logo 
Told’em exactly this. I’m neither a fan of the ‘Superhuman Docs’ name, nor the ‘Superdocs’ name. And I’ll probably just keep calling it Coda until I’m legally prohibited from doing so.
— exactly this. “Atlassian Jira/Trello” or “Mailjet by Sinch” simply exist.
UPD: That said, I agree Superhuman is a strong brand name and could be beneficial for the adoption of Coda. I don’t detest it. I just think renaming Coda to Docs is a mistake. When people hear “Docs” they tend to expect typesetting software like Word, whose purpose is to make text and content look nice when printed on paper. Coda with its two font options and eight font colors doesn’t really fit in the ‘document editor’ image.
I generally don’t like to repeat what others already said, but for this one I will make an exception: docs.superhuman.com is just not easy to communicate.
If we could link our docs (not just published, because that is too limited) to a custom domain, I would be fine with the product called Superhuman Docs.
Having coda.io living alongside superhuman.com would really be best.
For the time being I would like to know if coda.io will keep on forwarding to superhuman.com ‘forever’?
I am neither a fan of the new name , Coda should have stayed Coda like YouTube remained YT inside Google. Besides that I’d like to repeat what I wrote earlier:
That said, I’ll admit upfront: I’m not a fan of the terminology. “Superhuman” carries weight in Europe that the product team may not have intended. The concept maps uncomfortably onto how Nazi Germany appropriated Nietzsche’s work — filtered through a biological lens to draw a line between the superhuman and the subhuman. That history doesn’t disappear because a productivity tool co-opts the word. I’ll use SH as shorthand going forward, but I wanted to name that discomfort once
Anyway I am happy that we still have the Coda Formula Language as an option:
@Christiaan_Huizer, mentions a reason the new brand is in bad taste. I have pointed this out also to several Codans.
The Grammarly brand is trusted by tens of millions, and known to hundreds of millions, associated in the mind with the safe use of AI to help us improve our work. A priceless asset in a noisy trust-starved world?
But the ship has sailed, for good or ill. The millions in marketing spend have been spent.
So now we rally around the products, the vision, the amazing potential for improving the world, the brilliant hard working teams within and without.
Sanctioned officially or not, my clients and I are using the codename “Superdocs” in our communications about the product.
A rose, by any other name, …
Max
Dear Coda team,
First, credit where it’s due: the recent feature updates are impressive, and I remain a committed user after six years of building on Coda.
That said, I want to flag a concrete business problem the rebrand is creating. I’m in the middle of pitching Coda to a new client — a company that was enthusiastic about the product itself. The rebrand has now become a genuine obstacle. The owner would have to stand in front of his team and announce that their new workspace software is called “Superhuman” — and honestly, nobody here can say that name with a straight face.
This isn’t just personal taste. In European business culture, grandiose naming reads as unserious and undermines trust — the opposite of what you want when asking companies to move their operations onto your platform. And to be clear: I’m genuinely excited about the AI direction — I use these features daily and they’re a big part of why I keep recommending the product. That’s exactly why the name frustrates me. It leans into the AI-hype stereotypes that Coda, as a product, has always been better than.
I do understand the strategic logic of bringing everything under one brand — that makes sense. And I can even accept that “Coda” might not be the perfect name for the unified suite (though I’d still argue it’s the better one). Honestly, of the three brands in the merger, “Grammarly” might have been the strongest choice — it’s established, widely known, and doesn’t carry the hype baggage. But I’m just not convinced “Superhuman” is the right one.
Add to that the practical issues others have raised — it’s not short, not catchy, hard to say naturally in a sentence — and I’d urge you to reconsider.
Thank you for listening to the community on this.
@Ruggy-Joesten
I agree with you about not being able to say it with a straight face. The name Superhuman sounds like an investor wanted to call it that, and nobody could say no and they just had to stick with it.
It’s might have been the worst choice of the three (Grammarly, Coda, Superhuman). Ideally they should have just stayed Coda, but changing it to Superhuman doesn’t even make sense because isn’t it a Grammarly tool? Changing it Grammarly Docs, or Grammarly Coda would have made a lot more sense. And I’d say that Grammarly is probably the brand that is the most well known, unlike Superhuman. Really, the name should be Codarly.
I’m usually against the idea of reverting changes because public backlash like this, the company has reasons to think this is a good idea. But I would be so happy if they changed it to anything else.
I gotta say the new Coda icon on my iPhone is also underwhelming and disappointing too. really need to throw some design talent into this rebrand soon.
Seconding this and could not agree more. I voiced this concern on a call a couple of months ago with Coda/Superhuman. I work in the fairly stodgy, but ripe-for-updating, world of facilities and energy. Trying to sell upper management on the tool, and then again on a long-term procurement as a serious business solution, would be more difficult than necessary under this new branding. No matter how good the product is - first impressions matter. And the new naming / branding does not exactly communicate that it is a serious product.
Yep about a million times yes agreed
Yes its terrible - and the coda one was so good
the new one looks like a random sub-menu icon inside an app since it’s so generic
Unfortunately true. Too long , too generic. The update itself is great UX wise and functionality wise…so kudos on that most important aspect. But the rename is unfortunate. All of the people at the office and our clients just continue to call it Coda. Google did a major design rebrand like 20yrs ago…but it stayed Google… Even though it might not have been the greatest name in the history of brand names.
