Re: Cultural Issue with the Foot Logo
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Sharuzzaman Ahmat Raslan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I come from Malaysia. I do understand about the cultural issue regarding > foot in people especially in the South East Asia area. > > Currently, from my observation, there is no setback from people in Malaysia > with the usage of foot as GNOME logo. Most of the people that are interested > to use GNOME did not really care about the foot logo, but some do ask > question why foot was chosen as the logo. Thanks for the information. Actually, I think people who are willing to accept GNOME can accept its logo. But the problem I've been facing is about introducing it to people who are totally new. And I'd say, almost *everyone* I introduce GNOME to asks me the question, with different levels of reactions. And repeatedly answering the question over time becomes too much for me. I think I'm more happy to answer technical or philosophical questions instead. > As for alternative of the foot logo, maybe GNOME team can come up with a > simple "G" logo, that can be used for community that thinks foot is not nice > to associated with. > > The same logo can then be used in the user interface, documentation, or > other material when you are trying to introduce GNOME to them. Thanks for supporting the alternative logo, and for the suggestion. Regards, -- Theppitak Karoonboonyanan http://linux.thai.net/~thep/ -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: Cultural Issue with the Foot Logo
Behdad Esfahbod schrieb: > > Really? Definitely not in Iran. And not in Turkey as far as the GUADEC > experience could tell. How did you decide it's offensive in Islamic > countries? > Maybe its more in arabic countries. I knew that from different sources and its also in the Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot#In_culture) . I just today asked a turkish friend and she also said that this can be an issue. My guess is that modern and young developers care less about those issues. As I said I think it is worth evaluating - and what I say was based on what I already knew. I dont actually know how each country is different. Regards, Thilo -- Thilo Pfennig - PfennigSolutions IT-Beratung- Wiki-Systeme Sandkrug 28 - 24143 Kiel (Germany) http://www.pfennigsolutions.de/ XING: https://www.xing.com/profile/Thilo_Pfennig - LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/tpfennig -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
OSBC proposal: would like review
I was thinking about submitting something like this as a panel for OSBC. As internet applications become more pervasive, the line between the desktop and the internet becomes less clear. Users may not care if an application is native or SaaS and they may not know where their files end up. It's up to software projects to figure out how best to address this new model. Should your files live on your computer or in the cloud? Where should they be backed up? Does it make any sense for any of your data to be on your laptop? How should the desktop create a seamless environment for the user? And how does an open source software project address this differently than a traditional proprietary project? Come hear what different projects are planning to address the new user experience created by merging desktop and network. Representatives from: - GNOME 3.0 - Online desktop project - Google apps - Maemo - ? Thoughts, ideas? Stormy -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: Cultural Issue with the Foot Logo
> If you want to evaluate the damage of the logo as it is, to have > sufficient data for a decision, you should also evaluate the cost of > changing it (very difficult to do before the change). I would say it is very cheap. As right now nearly nobody in the world knows GNOME. I mean related to real big brands. It gets more expensiove once GNOME is really widely known. My guess is that 0.0001 of the computer users worldwide actually know what GNOME is. Most people that use Ubuntu think Ubuntu is a desktop. > My other view is that (as has been said repeatedly on this list) GNOME > does not have a direct relationship with the consumer - the GNOME > brand is strong among distributors Ok distributors know what GNOME is. I would say those handful important distros could easily handle any logo change, as they either would incorporate an upstream logo change or like Ubuntu still do theior own branding. Actually I think that the GNOME Desktop has a more direct relationship to the users than the distributions have. Not in the sense of branding maybe but in the sense that if they use totem or nautilus they do this on Ubuntu,Fedora, Red Hat, etc. - IF the distributions provide GNOME this is what the users mostly will interact as they also do with Firefox, Thunderbird or OpenOffice.org. FF,TB and OO.org did never go the way to highlight how unimportant their role is to the users - just the opposit. And then they like distributions to be proud to display their software with their brands and accomplishments. I think one of the biggest marketing mistakes that are made currently is to think because distributions are packaging GNOME, that then the distros, etc. are the target group. You need to communicate to those who are using the software or demanding it - this is not the same group as the once that decide what software to package and which not. Or see it this way: If nobody would use GNOME in the distros they distros would stop providing it. So what you need to sell to the distros is that it is good for the users, which means that the users decide. And lets say if a Thai or arabian distribution says it will not provide a software with a logo that offends its users sure its the distribution which decides, but it decides on the basis of what the users think and want. So I think to think that talking to the distros is the way to go would simplify marketing but is not really it. Its like people buy computer with a cool graphic card. The graphic card producers are targetting the users and by that they tell the computer manifacturers, that their users will want their card. That does not mean that one should not talk to distributions - but that is a different level. What I want to highlight is that if the users deny a software or the branding this is what counts and the distributions will follow. Although distros will like everything that makes it easier for them to package or customize the software. Should we continue this discussion or do you think there is no point in continuing? Regards, Thilo -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: Cultural Issue with the Foot Logo
On 30 Oct 2008, at 09:24, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan wrote: You mean something the GPE project is currently using? http://gpe.handhelds.org/ Actually, I'd guess a hand is probably the worst choice, as there are probably more offensive hand gestures than are possible with any other part of the body :) Even an open palm, like the GPE logo, is potentially offensive in some places. (Greece? I think it was something originally used by the Byzantines, anyway...) Cheeri, Calum. -- CALUM BENSON, Usability Engineer Sun Microsystems Ireland mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]GNOME Desktop Team http://blogs.sun.com/calum +353 1 819 9771 Any opinions are personal and not necessarily those of Sun Microsystems -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: Cultural Issue with the Foot Logo
Thilo Pfennig wrote: > Hi Dave, > > Dave wrote: > >> Which countries? >> >> > Besides Thailand and Nepal due to the material online I would add: > Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Saudi > Arabia, Quatar, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United, Arab Emirates and also > Pakistan, Afghanistan and other muslim countries maybe those with +50% > muslim population: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Muslim_world_map.png Really? Definitely not in Iran. And not in Turkey as far as the GUADEC experience could tell. How did you decide it's offensive in Islamic countries? behdad >> When abandoning a logo, you are in essence saying that it has no value to >> you. > > In my view its rather the question of why a worldwide project that > committed itself to internationalization would want to offend parts of > the world. To do this without knowing to do so is acceptable and > understandable - but if iobe becomes aware of a problem the question is > why one wants to keep offending people. What was formerly unconciously > is than conciously. > > I think my view is very different from yours. You are trying to defend a > logo, which has served GNOME for many years. I rather look at what > offends people and therefore holds back GNOME in many countries and > would suggest to change what offends. Both views are possible, but a > compromise is needed. The real question is how much harm the current > GNOME logo does in relation to the benefit for keeping it. > > My view is that if the GNOME logo will keep some countries from even > looking at GNOME as a viable desktop alternative than it does great harm > to the whole project if the goal is to be acceptable in every country. > There are things that GNOME will never fix, such as becoming closed > source for people who are offended by open source - but there are things > that are not essential to the core GNOME like a logo, documentation,... > which can be changed if it seems wise to do so. I would recommend to > think over the conception of "why should it be a problem if I dont have > a problem with it?" Thats the wrong approach - the better question is > "Why should one offend people if this is not what the project is about?" > If one decides to do it conciously then one has to bear the consequences. > > A compromise could be that the Foundation does a real evaluation about > the extend of the problem. I think by just asking of the list one might > not get good answers because those who are offended by GNOME would not > subscribe here ;-). > > Its not always about better software, or better documentation, sometimes > its about how to interact and communicate that makes the difference. > > Regards, > Thilo > -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: www.gnome.org
Hi! Calum Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:15:07 +: (...) > Very true. Unfortunately, of course, its easier to 'hide' poor > quality code, than to hide poor quality translations. > > If something on the user's screen is badly- or wrongly-translated, or > a translation is missing altogether, the user will notice almost > immediately, and the perceived quality of the software is instantly > reduced. > > On the other hand, if the software runs 10% slower than it could > because it's poorly written, or leaks some memory every now and again, > most users probably won't even notice. I agree, only that equivalent of a (say, really) bad or wrong translation is rather a program crash, loss of data, security issue, and so on, than some memory leaking or a poor program performance. In other words, an issue preventing a user from adequately making use of the program. There can be also found non-critical issues in software l10n such as an unsatisfactory stylistic revision of the text, slightly bad wording, small typo, etc. Users may notice these issues, but in most cases, I assume, they don't mind much (especially when the text is not very exposed). Best, Petr Kovar -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: www.gnome.org
On 29 Oct 2008, at 22:58, Petr Kovar wrote: Thilo Pfennig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Wed, 29 Oct 2008 00:33:08 +0100: Petr Kovar schrieb: Otherwise, it seems to be quite controversial and, may I say, disrespectful towards translators, whose work, in my humble translator's opinion, is as good and as bad as any other contributions. Its obvious. Professional translation is a very complex task. The same way as is the professional software development. Very true. Unfortunately, of course, its easier to 'hide' poor quality code, than to hide poor quality translations. If something on the user's screen is badly- or wrongly-translated, or a translation is missing altogether, the user will notice almost immediately, and the perceived quality of the software is instantly reduced. On the other hand, if the software runs 10% slower than it could because it's poorly written, or leaks some memory every now and again, most users probably won't even notice. Cheeri, Calum. -- CALUM BENSON, Usability Engineer Sun Microsystems Ireland mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]GNOME Desktop Team http://blogs.sun.com/calum +353 1 819 9771 Any opinions are personal and not necessarily those of Sun Microsystems -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: Cultural Issue with the Foot Logo
Dave Neary wrote: My view is that if people all over the world are using the GNOME desktop moas their primary computing environment, people in Thailand won't decide not to use it because of the foot. My other view is that (as has been said repeatedly on this list) GNOME does not have a direct relationship with the consumer - the GNOME brand is strong among distributors, Linux application developers, and enthusiasts. Outside of that, the brand people see is Ubuntu, Debian, Red Hat, ... So I'm not convinced that changing the logo will even gain us any new users. I think we can look into how we can reduce the presence of the logo in the actual interface (like with the throbber). I agree that it would be a costly operation to change it, and we might end up designing something that could offend some other cultural group. - Andreas -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: Cultural Issue with the Foot Logo
Hi, Thilo Pfennig wrote: > Dave wrote: >> When abandoning a logo, you are in essence saying that it has no value to >> you. > I think my view is very different from yours. You are trying to defend a > logo, which has served GNOME for many years. I am simply pointing out that (1) the logo has brand value and (2) a change of logo is a costly operation (time, effort, communication, money, loss of brand). All changes as costly as this should be subjected to a cost/benefit analysis of some sort. The benefit is "will not insult some people in those countries where bare feet are insulting". The cost is currently not known, and I don't think that you're considering it. > The real question is how much harm the current > GNOME logo does in relation to the benefit for keeping it. Indeed. Or, to turn it around as I did, what is the benefit of changing it compared to the cost. > My view is that if the GNOME logo will keep some countries from even > looking at GNOME as a viable desktop alternative than it does great harm > to the whole project if the goal is to be acceptable in every country. My view is that if people all over the world are using the GNOME desktop as their primary computing environment, people in Thailand won't decide not to use it because of the foot. My other view is that (as has been said repeatedly on this list) GNOME does not have a direct relationship with the consumer - the GNOME brand is strong among distributors, Linux application developers, and enthusiasts. Outside of that, the brand people see is Ubuntu, Debian, Red Hat, ... So I'm not convinced that changing the logo will even gain us any new users. > There are things that GNOME will never fix, such as becoming closed > source for people who are offended by open source - but there are things > that are not essential to the core GNOME like a logo, documentation,... > which can be changed if it seems wise to do so. It is a mistake to think that because things are not core to GNOME (and I agree that the logo isn't), then changing them is a cheap operation. Changing documentation takes time and effort, changing the website takes time and effort and technical resources, changing the logo takes time and effort and communication resources. If you want to evaluate the damage of the logo as it is, to have sufficient data for a decision, you should also evaluate the cost of changing it (very difficult to do before the change). Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary GNOME Foundation member [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: Cultural Issue with the Foot Logo
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Alex Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If we're looking at a cultural problem in Islamic countries, there is some > precedent there for having separate logos: Red Cross / Red Crescent have > different symbols because the cross is offensive in those areas too (even > through unrelated descent). I believe they're different organisations, and > they also have a third symbol - a diamond - as a reserve. GNOME could apply > the same thinking, though. Exactly what I got as a comment from my friend. At first, I thought about the Debian project which has official logo with the bottle and the other without. But the Red Cross / Red Crescent example also applies. > Would there be a problem using something like a stylised hand-print? It > could be made to look recognisably "GNOME" with a G palm, yet still > obviously a hand. You mean something the GPE project is currently using? http://gpe.handhelds.org/ Regards, -- Theppitak Karoonboonyanan http://linux.thai.net/~thep/ -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: Cultural Issue with the Foot Logo
Thilo Pfennig wrote: Besides Thailand and Nepal due to the material online I would add: Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Quatar, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United, Arab Emirates and also Pakistan, Afghanistan and other muslim countries maybe those with +50% muslim population: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Muslim_world_map.png If we're looking at a cultural problem in Islamic countries, there is some precedent there for having separate logos: Red Cross / Red Crescent have different symbols because the cross is offensive in those areas too (even through unrelated descent). I believe they're different organisations, and they also have a third symbol - a diamond - as a reserve. GNOME could apply the same thinking, though. Would there be a problem using something like a stylised hand-print? It could be made to look recognisably "GNOME" with a G palm, yet still obviously a hand. Cheers, Alex. -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: Cultural Issue with the Foot Logo
Hi Dave, Dave wrote: > > Which countries? > > Besides Thailand and Nepal due to the material online I would add: Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Quatar, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United, Arab Emirates and also Pakistan, Afghanistan and other muslim countries maybe those with +50% muslim population: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Muslim_world_map.png > When abandoning a logo, you are in essence saying that it has no value to you. In my view its rather the question of why a worldwide project that committed itself to internationalization would want to offend parts of the world. To do this without knowing to do so is acceptable and understandable - but if iobe becomes aware of a problem the question is why one wants to keep offending people. What was formerly unconciously is than conciously. I think my view is very different from yours. You are trying to defend a logo, which has served GNOME for many years. I rather look at what offends people and therefore holds back GNOME in many countries and would suggest to change what offends. Both views are possible, but a compromise is needed. The real question is how much harm the current GNOME logo does in relation to the benefit for keeping it. My view is that if the GNOME logo will keep some countries from even looking at GNOME as a viable desktop alternative than it does great harm to the whole project if the goal is to be acceptable in every country. There are things that GNOME will never fix, such as becoming closed source for people who are offended by open source - but there are things that are not essential to the core GNOME like a logo, documentation,... which can be changed if it seems wise to do so. I would recommend to think over the conception of "why should it be a problem if I dont have a problem with it?" Thats the wrong approach - the better question is "Why should one offend people if this is not what the project is about?" If one decides to do it conciously then one has to bear the consequences. A compromise could be that the Foundation does a real evaluation about the extend of the problem. I think by just asking of the list one might not get good answers because those who are offended by GNOME would not subscribe here ;-). Its not always about better software, or better documentation, sometimes its about how to interact and communicate that makes the difference. Regards, Thilo -- Thilo Pfennig - PfennigSolutions IT-Beratung- Wiki-Systeme Sandkrug 28 - 24143 Kiel (Germany) http://www.pfennigsolutions.de/ XING: https://www.xing.com/profile/Thilo_Pfennig - LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/tpfennig -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: Cultural Issue with the Foot Logo
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 2:38 PM, DULMANDAKH Sukhbaatar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As a mongolian, I don't have anything against foot. And neither to > other people. They get interested what the foot and GNOME is. Just > that. Thanks. So, it's not a problem for Mongolian. > Personally, I like it, and everyone who use GNOME also likes it. So do I, as long as I don't try to spread GNOME. And I assume most GNOME fans here like it. Please note that the question is not about you, but it's about your culture in general. Regards, -- Theppitak Karoonboonyanan http://linux.thai.net/~thep/ -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: Cultural Issue with the Foot Logo
> How is a foot interpreted in your culture? Do you have the same > issue I have met? In my culture, showing foot is considered rude. > And the foot is not something to impress people who are totally new > to GNOME. As a mongolian, I don't have anything against foot. And neither to other people. They get interested what the foot and GNOME is. Just that. > I am not asking to replace the foot logo. I just wish to have a secondary > one which can also represent GNOME in my culture. But to convince > people for the proposal, the effect of this issue may need some > estimation. Personally, I like it, and everyone who use GNOME also likes it. -- Regards Dulmandakh -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
