Here are some assorted answers I've compiled from other people's research.

First Names:

* People called James and Elizabeth are seen as the most successful.
* Jack and Lucy the luckiest, and Sophie and Ryan the most attractive.
* Lisa and Brian are the most likely to fail.
* Helen and John are the unluckiest.
* Ann and George are the least attractive.

"Attractive female names tended to be soft-sounding and end with the 'ee' sound, whereas the sexiest male names are short and much harder sounding," he said, adding that names with royal links are seen as successful or clever.

1. SUCCESS

Top five:

Elizabeth — James
Caroline — Richard
Helen — Michael
Olivia — William
Amanda — Andrew

Bottom five:

Julie — Ian
Emily — Lewis
Katie — Stephen
Lucy — Ryan
Lisa — Brian

2. LUCK

Top five:

Lucy — Jack
Katie — Chris
Lisa — Ryan
Sophie — Peter
Emma — James

Bottom five:

Caroline — George
Karen — William
Ann — Richard
Elizabeth — Thomas
Helen — John

3. ATTRACTIVENESS

Top five:

Sophie — Ryan
Rachel — James
Olivia — Jack
Karen — Chris
Katie — Michael

Bottom five:

Caroline — Richard
Elizabeth — John
Helen — Peter
Jane — Thomas
Ann — George

Surnames:

Athough those with common names may feel at a disadvantage in life, the evidence comes down firmly in favour of not standing out from the crowd.

Using a large, computerised database of death certificates, they identified people whose initials formed a positive-sounding word (such as A.C.E., H.U.G. and J.O.Y.), and those that had very negative connotations, like P.I.G., B.U.M. and D.I.E.

Using factors such as race, year of death and socio-economic status as controls, the researchers discovered that men with positive initials lived approximately four and a half years longer than average, whereas those with negative initials died about three years early.

Women with positive initials lived an extra three years, although there was no detrimental effect for those with negative initials. Further analysis suggested that those with negative initials were especially likely to die from psychological causes, such as suicides and self-inflicted accidents.

Publishing their findings in The Journal of Economic Perspectives, they argued that such "alphabetical discrimination" was probably due to the convention of listing authors of academic journal papers in alphabetical order, resulting in professors with surnames towards the start of the alphabet appearing to be more prominent in their field than their alphabetically challenged peers.

I wondered whether the same effect might apply outside the world of economics. After all, whether it is on a school register, at a job interview, or in the exam hall, people with surnames towards the start of the alphabet are used to being first.

Given that we often associate the top of a list with winners and the bottom with losers, could all of these small experiences add up and make a long-term impact on someone's life?

Everyone participating in the Telegraph experiment was asked to indicate their sex, age, surname and rate how successful they had been in various aspects of their life, such as their health, finances, career, and "life in general".

Scores in all these categories were added up to obtain an overall "measure of success".

The results revealed that readers whose surnames began with letters at the beginning of the alphabet did indeed rate themselves as significantly more successful overall than those with surnames starting with lowly, end-of-the-alphabet initials.

It's not that there are some names better than others but people link names with certain stereotypes.
A study in England found that the most "succesful" names were James and Elizabeth but this kind of perception obviously varies depending on culture.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7312412.stm