Hi Ron, you've touched on a number of points in your essay
It's true that the XO logo is OLPC's, not Sugar Labs'; they allow us to use it in our visuals, but prefer that we not use it prominently. You may have noticed it on photos of the licensed Android device not running Sugar; I have no doubt this will create confusion for new Learners as to what is and isn't Sugar. Although it is tempting to want to change the name Sugar (I too was tempted back in 2009, since "added sugar" has negative connotations for kids' nutrition), it's important not to underestimate the disruption this would cause in the community for (at this point) only small probability of gain in awareness. If I saw survey or focus group results showing spectacular gains, I might think otherwise, but this remains a moot point when there is no budget for advertising let alone market studies. Perhaps the deeper question is: what is Sugar? We all agree it is the interface, with key features being the Journal, collaboration, and View Source (the free/libre licensing is indispensable for that). What about the technical architecture? In my view, a different architecture with the above features, running over Android for example, would still be Sugar to a Learner. Is that too clever by half? After all View Source showing Python code is not the same as View Source showing HTML5. I would argue that the learning of a computer language is more important than the actual language chosen. Sean. _______________________________________________ Marketing mailing list Marketing@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/marketing