On Feb 11, 2005, at 8:53 AM, Greg Barniskis wrote:
Bart Silverstrim wrote:
Out of curiosity, is Beastie so terrible, a logo, that a business would be stupid enough to base their server decisions based on it? Would you care if a business were that dumb...would you actually *want* them using it?
The problem (from my point of view) really has a lot more to do with having to communicate about an OS after it is selected, rather than the act of selection (which is rightly based on technical merit). I need to communicate about ongoing server operations with boards of trustees, with my immediate customers, and indirectly with their customers. I can't use Beastie in these discussions because I can't afford the time to explain the multiple "inside jokes" re: daemon/demon, the tennis shoes, etc., over and over and over again, and I really, really can't afford to lose a debate about FreeBSD's "appropriateness".
While the amusing subtleties embodied in the Beatie emblem are indeed endearing to the IT community, they are a serious *drag* when communicating to the less clueful.
I suppose if my employers were that close in resemblance to the PHB in Dilbert, I'd probably just not use the logo and use some text version of the OS name. That is, if they care enough to question it. My employers don't know anything about our servers, and they don't care to know about them either, so they don't question it; just my immediate supervisor cares enough to know about the situation.
Maybe as an experiment I should introduce the logo sometime to the administrative staff to see if they question it.
I'm missing the part about the tennis shoes though. I didn't realize that was part of the joke...? :-)
Windows' logo isn't even a logo. It's a flag of a window pane falling apart in the breeze. I associate windows with broken glass. These things don't seem to hinder Windows from getting massive market share.
My board of directors never looked at the Windows logo and said "What the f#$% is that!?". Argue all you like about the fact that people need to be more open and clueful, and how precious Beatie's legacy is (I agree it is), the bottom line is that some rather important people aren't very clueful, and many of them can't ever be expected to be clueful, and I don't have time to educate dozens of people every time I want to compare our organization's use of various OS flavors.
So, I limit myself to indicating "FreeBSD" by text only, and I know that the impact of that on the decision makers is somewhat lower than if I had a stylin' graphic suitable for use in official communications like uptime graphs, scope of use, service dependencies, project activities, etc.
I suppose you could always migrate to OpenBSD. I always liked the blowfish.
My personal approach if stuck without a cluebat would be to just make something up just for your presentations. If you honestly think they are going to run into FreeBSD info out there on the in-tar-net, they're GOING to get exposed to the evil devil like being. And that logo, like it or not, is going to continue floating around out there. It can't be pushed aside like some dark family secret.
Most clueless management have interest spans regarding technology that lasts about as long as the meeting in which they're exposed to the forbidden information. Get the McDonald's logo or get a picture of a stack of pancakes and use that for your presentation. I doubt they'd care about the difference. Why have the world bend to the will of the minority to please a couple PHBs? That's thinking like a PHB...
OK, so now maybe I expect some flamage about bein' chicken, not standing up for what's right, etc. Well, horse hockey. I have a duty to my employer not to waste everyone's time with the deamon/demon discussion (over and over and over again). It would be one thing if we could do it once and get it over with, but that is clearly not the case.
If it's your duty not to waste their time with daemon/demon (etc), why are you bringing it up? Oh, you mean THEY are bringing it it up. After you already explained it. So THEY're the problem, since they aren't listening and remembering. AND they're wasting your time by having you review the material again and rehash issues regarding a *logo* instead of what the meeting is supposed to be about?
Just checking.
Your duty should be to answer their questions and go over pertinent information for the presentation. If they want to know about it *again*, give them the info. If they keep forgetting, print up a pamphlet. There may already be stuff at the FreeBSD advocacy sites ready to print.
-- Greg Barniskis, Computer Systems Integrator South Central Library System (SCLS) Library Interchange Network (LINK) <gregb at scls.lib.wi.us>, (608) 266-6348
You work in a library and yet they don't want to be educated. I always found that ironic.
The best way to punish educated people? Make them read. I found that the longer my email is, the less likely someone is to read it. Even if it has information relevant to them in it. They'll sooner delete the message then call up to ask the very question that message JUST ANSWERED. ARGH.
This is just my $.02. I don't know your position or what you're stuck with, but to me, if the logo is this much of an issue, I'd either try to educate them to get over it or just avoid bringing it up. FreeBSD wasn't "marketed", nor was it "targeted", or meant for a particular market. It's not consumer or salesdrone-driven. It is what it is. Take it, leave it, improve it, use it, pass it on or pass it over...no one forces anyone to use it.
_______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
