Great so now I read the post... and I have little to take back from what I
initially posted. I do think that you took the concept out of context.
OOo is free software and you are free to distribuite it any form or
fashion. Having a custom build of OOo for partners should be free to do.
EuroOffice did that same as RedOffice etc. Althought I do question the
fact whenever they gave back to the source tree. LGPL-3 also requires
you to give back your modifications.
Whats the impact of having Java, NetBeans or UNICEF advertising instead of
the gulls banner in the installer of OOo.
http://www.nickhill.co.uk/ooimages/19-installation_wizard_create_server_image.png
Again we should clarify what is the level of comitment we are doing
between advertising in the software or advertising in non critical things
like, website, installer or splashscreens.
Please remind that we are trying to work like this with Mozilla and doing
a cross promotion setup to promote Thunderbird and OOo as compliment on
each other download site.
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 12:39:52 -0600, Alexandro Colorado
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 12:11:10 -0600, Simon Brouwer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi all,
Reading Jonathan Schwartz' blog I am concerned about plans to include
advertisements in the Sun-built binaries.
http://blogs.sun.com/jonathan/entry/the_value_of_distribution_java
I expect many users turning away from OpenOffice.org if they are
confronted with commercial messages when they "print those documents,
fax
them, copy them, project them".
Havent read the blog yet but already make me think you taking things out
of context and extreme. When I think about advertising I remember that
Java runs an add for OOo in their installer and has brought us many new
users checking out OOo.
In the best case they will turn to non-adware builds such as the one by
Novell - I wonder if that is what Sun wants.
Not sure why novell be any different from oxygenoffice, eurooffice, or
any of the OOo installations in the distros. Anyway you can argue that
Sun logo on the bottom right part of the OOo splascreen is advertising.
I think if Sun wants to generate some revenue from their investments in
OpenOffice.org then they should make more work of offering professional
support.
I agree but then again, they are trying that with StarOffice.
Also I would not be opposed to finding businesses wanting to sponsor
OpenOffice.org. They could then be mentioned on the OpenOffice.org
website, and in the about screen and the splash screen of the binary
(but
not throughout the software) and be allowed to present themselves as
OpenOffice.org sponsors in their own websites and publications (this
would
actually amount to publicity for OpenOffice.org ;))
Not sure what "through the software means". The splash screen would
qualify as "through the software", this is an idea that I had for a
while. Why not advertise the OOo community through the software. Like
adding menu items that take you to the community, sign up for support
email list, or other OOo-community related content.
Like an icon that says, "contribute" or "donate" similar way we already
do with things like "extensions".
Being sponsored and publicizing it is somehow different than getting
paid
for advertisements.
I still think that you thinking on having OOo like what Opera used to be
(with banners embeded in the software) as opposed to banners inserted on
the installer.
Java:
http://msmvps.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Blogs.Components.WeblogFiles/spywaresucks/image_5F00_19138326_2D00_f7c9_2D00_4661_2D00_80cb_2D00_cf9fb23bf6dc.png
Opera: http://www.abdn.ac.uk/webpack/images/web/2.6.gif
What do you guys think?
Again, I should read the post first. But this is my first instict of
responding.
--
Alexandro Colorado
CoLeader of OpenOffice.org ES
http://es.openoffice.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
