View Message

[Opinions] Michael
Do you think Michael is far too common to be a nice name nowadays? I live in the UK so it's slightly less common than in the US but still way up there. I just really love the sound and it honours various people also.Do you think Micah is a better alternative? (prn. MYE-kuh) Can you think of any other alternatives with a similar sound?~~~
Archived Thread - replies disabled
vote up1

Replies

It is perfectly sensible, and nice. Micah seems a bit more modern, but that is not to say Michael isn't modern-sounding. I've always been fond of the combos Michael Alexander and Michael Nathaniel, even if they are a tad generic.
vote up1
I'm not a fan of Michael. Not sure why, I like similar names like Gabriel, Daniel, Samuel etc. Michael just doens't do it for me. I find it a bit boring too. It's pretty common where I live. I prefer Micah, it sounds better and I like that it's more biblical.
vote up1
Personally, I love Micah and definitely prefer it to Michael. Michael is still nice though, just a little on the plain side. I work in child care though and haven't met a young Michael for a long time (I live in Australia).
vote up1
I simply love the name Michael. Maybe I'm biased, as it happens to be my son's name. An alternative name is Mitchell, which is another form of Michael.
vote up1
Michael is a nice classic name imo and if that's the style of names you are into then there is nothing wrong with that. Micah is nice too, we have friends with a 4 year old named Micah.
vote up1
I much prefer Michael, which I see as a class while Micah is trendy. I think Michael is very handsome and would be refreshing on a child!
vote up1
Take a look at the popularity statistics for Michael in the US:http://www.behindthename.com/top/name/michaelHow on earth can it be refreshing on a child?Ok, not as bad in the UK:http://www.behindthename.com/top/name/michael/ewbut still.

This message was edited 9/10/2014, 4:08 PM

vote up1
I love Michael. I think it's really handsome, and very versatile. I don't think it's too common at all, I'm in Canada, not the UK but here it's much less common than the statistics would lead you to believe. With all the -Aiden's, and -son's, running around I am always so pleased to meet little Michael's, or Daniel's, or Andrew's.
vote up1
Michael may be very common, but I don't think it'll ever lose its charm for me. There's just something about this name that strikes a cord of being honest, wholesome, and strong. I love it, commonalty and all.Though, all that said, I do love Micah even more! That's just me, though. Either one is perfectly fine. Only other alternatives I can think of are Mikhail, Mishael, Misha, and maybe Marshal.
vote up1
I love Michael. I don't care how boring some people think it is, I think it's a sweet, gentle name, but still very strong. It's my dad's name, so I might be biased, but I will always love it.I don't prefer Micah over Michael. Michael is a man, Micah is a boy. That is how I feel. Use Michael, it rocks.
vote up1
I'm from the UK too and I really like Michael, it feels underused at the moment. I like Micah too but I think I prefer Michael.
vote up1
Michael is okay. I like it better in the middle name position but there are definitely worse names out there. I just know so many Michaels/Mikes it's kind of lost it's appeal to me.Personally, I loathe Micah. I don't like the sound. I've seen boys and girls with this name, and it's just not one I like. It looks and feels flimsy to me. I'd take a Michael anytime.
vote up2
I hate Michael with a passion. I'm not sure to what degree its massive popularity contributes to that. I think if it weren't so popular, I might just dislike it rather than hate it with a passion. When a disliked name is popular for a reason that escapes me, it makes the dislike more intense.Yes, it's too common. Micah is a better alternative.
vote up1
It is definitely very, very common in the US and has been for sixty plus years, and was used regularly even before that. The charts still say it's extremely popular, but as far as I can remember, there hasn't been a Michael in my daughter's classes so far. There is a Micah, and her class list for this year says there's supposed to be a Juan-Miguel, but JM hasn't shown up yet and may have moved. At least one kid does that every year, and it was like that when I was in school.
Speaking of which, there were several Michaels/Mikes in elementary and middle school with me, but I think there was only one or two in high school. So it depends on where you live and at one time period.
My husban'ds middle name is Michael.Michael will never seem dated or faddish; it's one of those names that's well-dressed wherever it goes.Micah's a nice name but it has a very different vibe from Michael, more religious and conservative. Mitchell I supposed could be used as an alternative, but I never liked it because it seems wimpy; even the nn Mitch, which I've heard described as stereotypicall macho, seems wimpy to me.
Miles could also work, and it's a name I like.
vote up2
I think that if you love Michael - use it. It is popular for a reason, and the reason is that it is a strong, timeless name. I think Micah is a nice alternative, as is Mitchell. Mick and Micha would be shorter alternatives.
vote up2
I think it's pretty dated and I've never thought it was a nice name to begin with. I do love Micah and I think it's a way better choice.Other similar names:
Micaiah
Mikko
Miguel
Mikelo
Malachi
Malakai
Mitchell
Makai
Makaio
Malik
MikalaDId you want girl options too?
vote up2