I have a piece of furniture named Samantha. It is easier to say something like, "it's on Samantha" than "it's on the brown thing next to the front door."
I have two pieces of luggage named Big Green and Little Green. It's easier to say something like, "Hey kid, slide Little Green over here" than "Hey Kid, slide the small green luggage over here".
Names are convenient.
Which operating system is newer: Focal Fossa or Sequoia? Gingerbread or Wheezy? Calendar versioning is pretty useful for some things. Major/minor revision versioning is useful for others. Codenames worked for Ubuntu during the first alphabetical run, but they started out non-alphabetical with WW, then HH, then BB, then DD-ZZ,AA-QQ, and now the second RR. The third WW will happen before the second CC. Codename versioning can work within one product line to denote relative age, but only if done properly. They're mostly marketing. When 'nix-heads chat about Ubuntu or Debian, they mention Ubuntu's calendar version or Debian's major version. Mac-heads, while numbered versioning exists, focus on the names and get confused about the relative ages of anything other than current.
Naming discreet things like servers not in a cluster which don't need to have relative comparison to one another? Sure, ST:TNG up your rack space. But software is a different matter.