Colleagues, There are some very excellent points being made and this is a healthy discussion but there are few fundamentals that we should keep in mind.
A few thoughts: When engaging my class of 55 students yesterday for the first time i asked how many have heard of Linux. --2 raised their hand When I asked how many have heard of open source software: --0 raised their hand When i ask my neighbors if they have heard of open source software/Linux practically none have heard of it. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that there is an education problem. Dell, HP and Lenovo are not helping things by hiding and/or not providing this information on their web sites---since the regular folks that i deal with find out about technology when they go to buy a new PC online. Further, none of my students had any idea that it was possible to have a computer installed --no only with an operating systems but hundreds of programs that are immediately available for download by clicking them using the add/remove programs program in the menu. Further, they had no clue that if any of the software installed had an update that they would automatically be notified ---in other words a 100% maintenance of all of the software installed. They are used to on their windows and Mac PCs of having to look around the Internet for various programs--download them --then double click them to be installed----once installed they have no idea if a new version has become available. Once told of how life is in a Linux distro--their face said it all---they had no idea that such a computing experience could be possible since Mac and windows PCs do not do this. Net--net---- Why Dell, HP and Lenovo are not flashing information about the ease of computing given these facts raises some serious questions----either they don't get it or they don't want to do it because of Microsoft---you can decide. Also, my contact at Computer Sciences Corp---he is director of technology---did not know about the 100% maintenance of software on Linux PCs either---so i would guess corporate IT management (IT decision makers---no techies) do not know either. I believe a breakout group of folks with business expertise to discuss these issues would be helpful at the gathering in Austin. Something to consider. don On Jan 23, 2008 7:52 AM, Thilo Pfennig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Am Mon, 21 Jan 2008 12:07:18 -0600 > schrieb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > I'll further state that while I believe choice is good, it hinders our > > ability to make decisions. If you're going to offer choice, make the > > choice obsolete ( Project Portland / PackageKit ). > > I think one of the mistakes that were made in Linux "marketing" in the > past, was that marketing was not aggressive enough. And although most > Linux software vendors agree on some basic principles of cooperation > there is still a lot of redundancy just for the sake of it? > > I think some very important points are mostly not visible to the public > and are also not really communicated: > > * With every Linux you get a bunch of software with which you can do a > lot of things. OpenOffice.org seems to be the most prominent, but still > this is not identified with Linux because many Windows users use it - > same is true for Mozilla products: The most visible and interesting > alternatives are not Linux-only because Linux has failed to identify > with them, although often those software works better on Linux. > > * From my experience as a customer the support for simple software is > often MUCH better for free software than for proprietary software. I > have never been able to influence any conventional software vendor to > really help me or fix any bug, which on Linux I hand this many thousand > times. This might be different if you have a really costly support > contract, but that's not what most customers and companies want or have. > > * The Software Freedoms - they help to get the first two points working > and many more. This includes the ability to legally use one disc to > install on multiple computers (or on multiple virtual instances). This > requires revolutionary new business models, leaving behind the "buy > one - get one" logic. > > I think one thing is very problematic still: > * The established computer business model is much about buying a > computer and additional software either in a store or via Internet > (Dell, Amazon,...). Besides some exceptions customers still cant really > buy Linux computers and the additional software in these channels. And > you still wont get GIMP for Linux in any shop. Why don't you get it? > Because its available for free through different channels. But this > also means it is not attractive to either advertise it not to offer it > for any amount. I am not saying it should cost something. it could - > but still I think the problem is not that GIMP is bad software or that > people would not buy it - GPL would allow it - but current business > models make it hard to make money with GIMP or other software. > > What I am trying to say is that I think that if we can change the > circumstances and have a market for services around free software and > Linux companies would offer services and (more) people could make (more) > money offering services. They would then carry the ideas of Linux and > free software to the customers. > > So I don't think Linux itself needs better marketing or branding, but > that we need to find ways that make it attractive to open a business > based on free software. Today for a small computer shop its still more > attractive to just offer standard computers with Windows as to offer > free software. > > I have witnessed a lot of discussions especially at GNOME how > marketing should work but I found that mostly people (or developers) > are more worried about how they could advertise their desktop (and > additionally what their employer thinks make sense), while I have not > seen any consistent ideas and strategies. The reason for that is > because most projects think only in the terms of their own projects > (be it KDE, GNOME, a distribution or a company). So all ideas and > actions usually end just there: At what benefits their own projects. > This itself is not problematic - the problem is lack of actions ans > strategies that go beyond single projects. > > This list is one of the few points where such topics can be discussed. > And although many think those discussions are not productive I think > they are often more important as to find a new slogan for a single > project or to meet a deadline. Why? Because if there is a common > understanding of what the issues are and what needs to be worked on the > issues many single projects have can be removed much faster. > > We still have what i would call the "desktop dilemma", which is that > desktop environments like to brand their desktops, while they are not > offering them directly (besides downloading source code and live > images). This is as if Microsoft would not offer Windows. So KDE and > GNOME are brands that cant be bought directly. But if this is the case, > does it make any sense to promote them? And if the answer here is still > yes: What does that mean to marketing? Maybe AIDA principle > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDA) is a bit outdated but still I think > the point where people get interested and they want something like a > Linux computer or a KDE desktop and to the point where they get what > they want must be made more easy. Today if people want a Linux desktop > its still not easy for them to get it. I don't think its all the options > that make it hard to decide - rather people would choose what is most > easy - if there is an offer for a Linux desktop that seems reasonable, > people would buy, like they just do with Dells offers or the EeePc. > > This doesn't dissolve the described "desktop dilemma" but on those > occasion I guess the dilemma doesn't worry the customers that much and > is still up to the desktop environments to think about their strategies. > > My personal expectations on a desktop is that it integrates nicely. I > don't want to start a flame war but I think that's where KDE's Koffice > make more sense as GNOMEs strategy to not offer an Office suite of its > own. I know Abiword and Gnumeric are very good applications but they > are not officially backed by GNOME, so from my perspective GNOME is not > planning to offer a full desktop. > > Another relates issue is that of compatibility between open source > applications. The sad truth is that much more energy goes into the > ability to import Microsoft standards as to be interoperable in the > open source world. Such as between Gnumeric, Koffice and > OpenOffice.org or between Kmail, Thunderbird and Evolution . It seems as > if as long as you use Microsoft's products you are attractive - but as > soon as you choose an open source product you more likely end > in a lock in situation. There are often options to get out of this lock > in, but this is mostly an advanced topic. Here we see again the result > of small thinking - projects think more about how they can get more > users (from Windows) than how their users could switch their data > without a pain. That's where I think OpenDocument comes into play and > can lead to a desperately needed new culture of interoperatibility. A > field where Open Source also needs to adapt some principles. > > Thilo Pfennig > > -- > Thilo Pfennig > Foresight Linux Packager > http://flinux.wordpress.com/ > _______________________________________________ > Desktop_architects mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop_architects > -- "Those who say it can't be done are usually interrupted by others doing it."--James Arthur Baldwin
_______________________________________________ Desktop_architects mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop_architects
