Not only that, but the author made extremely tenuous claims that there was impossible unless we were willing to break ABI, that it might have to wait until Swift 6 and even then probably wouldn't meet the bar for breaking changes. I immediately called that out as being inaccurate, and that has now been confirmed.
Personally, I favour the name Timestamp. It is claimed that there are arguments against it, but the only argument I can find from the pitch thread is this:
Which I find to be just as flimsy as the ABI claims. That wikipedia article makes clear that there are many forms of timestamps, including literal rubber stamps, and its example section includes precisely the kind of epoch-relative timestamps which Date represents. The article's section on "Digital timestamps" refers to the article "Timestamping (computing)", which it defines as "the use of an electronic timestamp to provide a temporal order among a set of events." Which is a perfectly fine definition.
The entire idea of changing the name has been met with nothing but hostility from the Foundation team.
It is rather disappointing. I'm sure we'd all rather not fight over this, but at the same time, the rest of the community seems to unanimously consider the name Date to be unacceptable.