Of all the many, many proposals (all of which seem to me to be solutions in search of a problem) "Zib" is the only one I've seen where there's been a real effort to provide the tools and information to make the change - most times the issue is presented as either "all we need to do is... [non trivial thing]" (social problem) or "all the developers need to do is... [non trivial thing]" (technical problem).
Thanks!
Incidentally, the names you say are variants of "microbitcoin" - strictly they're variants of BTC itself, the same way gigabyte is a variant of byte, millilitre is of litre, microgram of gram, etc. Well, the familiar ones are - "crobits" and "eubits" are new to me, and I can't determine scale from the names (which, incidentally, is one thing I do dislike about "Zib" - it uses a new name to replace familiar names).
Sure, but they each derive from "bitcoin" through "microbitcoin"... and so while there's a logical path, they bring the issues with "micro" along with them. (Those issues being: that's a lesser-known, more-confusable SI prefix, because of the m/mu similarity, and implies something that's trifling/invisible.)
Ultimately if believing (like I do) that a handy new one-syllable 100-satoshi unit will help with broad adoptions, the choices are something that brings a lot of baggage through strong existing relationships (like 'microbit' or 'bit'), or a totally-contrived word (like 'zib') that can take on a new, precise meaning after overcoming the initial unfamiliarity.
'Zib' was the result of a search for a word that was as much like 'bit' (in size and sound) as possible... but unburdened with any prior English definition, and with distinctive abbreviation possibilities.