This naming convention is genuinely terrible. It's as if they took a slide out of an old Microsoft marketing PowerPoint. When will we see the ID.Silverlight, part of the .NET family of EVs?
I read it somewhat more positively (or at least clear in communications) as “ID. means electric” and “Polo” means what Polo has always meant in the VW lineup: their mini/compact entry-level car in the lineup.
Which seems sensible, honestly; ID.3 through 8 either currently exist or will soon. Who's going to keep track of which is which?
A measure of EVS going mainstream will be that you don't name them anything distinctive. You name them like a car.
Hyundai also seems to have done well with their notably-weird-looking Ioniq series. It seems like, at least for the moment, the markets actually want electric cars to be a bit weird.
Tesla's S3XY is quite bad in that it's a shit joke and there's just a random number instead of a letter because you couldn't make it the Model E. And Cybertruck just completely breaks the form further.
Audi decided to name their cars "t-urd". They also blew their load early, since the first EV they made was just called the "Audi t-urd", and then they had to rename it to the "Audi Q8 t-urd" when they realised that they were going to make more than one EV model.
Mercedes-Benz decided that the electric version of the S-Class should be the EQS, the electric version of the E-Class should be the EQE, the electric versions of the GLS and GLE should be called the EQS SUV and EQE SUV, and that the electric version of the G-Class should be called the "Mercedes-Benz G580 with EQ Technology". Oh, and the electric CLA is just called the CLA.
BMW's lineup is pretty inoffensive in that it's quite logical, as the electric equivalent of the 4 Series is the i4, the electric equivalent of the 5 Series is the i5, and so on. Except that the electric equivalent of the BMW X5 is the BMW iX when the electric equivalent of the BMW X1 is the BMW iX1. Oh, and the BMW i8 isn't even an electric car – it's a hybrid.
BYD's electric cars also make no sense. Why does the same car maker have names like the "BYD Dolphin" and "BYD Seal" next to a car named "BYD Sealion 7" and "BYD Atto 3"? What determines whether or not a BYD model has a number in the name or not? And why is the fully electric one called the "BYD Seal" but the hybrid one is called the "BYD Seal 6 DM-i"?
Rivian's makes sense so far, since they have the biggest R1, the more medium R2 and the compact R3. But going by this logic, the R4 should be an even smaller car than the R3. Either that, or the numbering has no bearing on where in the lineup the car actually falls, just what was released first.
Polestar has that same exact problem that Rivian might have in the future: the Polestar 2 is smaller than the Polestar 3 and the Polestar 3 is bigger than the Polestar 4, and the Polestar 4 is smaller than the Polestar 5. And the Polestar 6 is probably going to be more upmarket than any other Polestar, except the Polestar 1, which isn't an EV. Basically, the number says nothing about the car except when it was first released.
The Toyota bZ4X, which stands for "beyond Zero" (as in emissions) 4 (from the similarly sized RAV4) "crossover", is also just a downright awful name. Same for the Honda E:NY1. I don't know what inspired these two to make such awful and complex names for their EVs.
And finally: the Porsche Taycan Turbo doesn't actually have a turbo. The "turbo" in the name just means "better" in the style of "TurboGrafx-16".
Yes, I could rant about car names all day long. Don't even ask me about how Ferrari names their cars.
For Porsche cars "turbo" meant "more powerful" for like 10 years by now, predating the Taycan. They sell the 911 Carrera and the 911 Turbo, yet both cars have a turbocharged engine.