[GroundUrMast]

Per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slang

Few linguists have endeavored to clearly define what constitutes slang.[1] Attempting to remedy this, Bethany K. Dumas and Jonathan Lighter argue that an expression should be considered "true slang" if it meets at least two of the following criteria:

• It lowers, if temporarily, "the dignity of formal or serious speech or writing"; in other words, it is likely to be considered in those contexts a "glaring misuse of register."
• Its use implies that the user is familiar with whatever is referred to, or with a group of people who are familiar with it and use the term.
• "It is a taboo term in ordinary discourse with people of a higher social status or greater responsibility."
• It replaces "a well-known conventional synonym". This is done primarily to avoid the discomfort caused by the conventional item or by further elaboration.[1]

Slang is different from jargon, which is the technical vocabulary of a particular profession, and which meets only the second of the criteria given above. Jargon, like many examples of slang, may be used to exclude non–group members from the conversation, but in general has the function of allowing its users to talk precisely about the technical issues in a given field.

Just because one or more people are not familiar with a word, name or term does not make the word name or term 'slang'. If it did, then many terms used to describe antennas and OTA reception concepts would be slang. Much of the language used in this and other forums qualifies as jargon. The name of established and widely distributed software certainly does not deserve to be demeaned as 'slang'.

@JC, I agree that terms often need to be clearly explained. However, as you often point out, a simple Google search will quite often yield a great deal of enlightening information.