Re: [ubuntu-marketing] Announcing the Unified Ubuntu Branding Project
Tim Morris wrote:
Marketing Team Members (and lurkers),
Speaking as someone who gets paid to do market research, the problem
here is clearly one of unclear direction from the client on the target
market.
Is the *-buntu product and brand targeted at consumers (students,
mothers, etc.) or at business (SMB, corporate) or government agencies
(schools, libraries) or is it targeted at hardcore linux programmers
(specifically to attract their support and contributions)???
a brief comment:
An aspect of *Ubuntu which has helped characterise the product (brand)
for me as a new user, has been the shipit facility. I would have
thought this was aimed at the ambitious home user (ahu), mostly a
linux newbie. Businesses might use shipit, as might linux experienced
users, but only the non-linux newbie would be -most- attracted to a
shipit item. At my Demo displays ('Infopoint', for Open Source), the
Shipit CD is the item attracting the most newbie interest. This
suggests to me that there is a deliberate strategy which at least
includes ahu's.
--
ac
--
ubuntu-marketing mailing list
ubuntu-marketing@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-marketing
Re: [ubuntu-marketing] Announcing the Unified Ubuntu Branding Project
On 7/26/06, Tim Morris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Corey Burger wrote: snip In the long run we may ultimately end up with some form of separate community branding and corporate branding, similar to Red Hat/Fedora and the Novell/SUSE/Open SUSE evolving monster. Mark very explicitly does not want this to happen. There is not going to be an Enterprise version of Ubuntu. My understanding of what SABDFL has said is that there will never be an enterprise version with additional features available only at a charge (the Red Hat model). I wasn't suggesting that a for-cash enterprise version was in the pipeline, rather that the brand (and more specifically in this case the brand design architecture) may not support multiple diverse audiences. Given Goldman Sachs and [EMAIL PROTECTED] and blank piece of paper I wouldn't go through a brand development process and come to the _exact_same_answer for both. To word it differently, imagine two parallel products - *-buntu Corporate LTS (out-of-date, rock solid, stable platform for corporate applications/server) and *-buntu Community (the new new bling bling) and where both are free and both share the same underpinnings. As far as I am aware, my hypothetical *-buntu Corporate LTS could even emerge as Cannonical Linux. The work being done to simplify the re-branding of ubuntu for derivatives (eg Guadalinex) also makes sense for corporates (eg JP Morgan Linux) or a split of the branding message. Please note: I am not specifically proposing or supporting these outcomes, just suggesting that similar pressures on existing computer operating system vendors targeting the same customer segments has led to targeted branding in most of the cases that come to mind. Numerous examples can also be cited from the non-computer world (branding of cars for consumers vs. trucks for business). Lovely concepts. Now show me why we need this now (or ever). Again, what is wrong with the status quo. Please give me *specific* issues you see our current branding causes. However, for the time being I predict the tyranny of the status-quo. How is the status quo tyranny? I have not yet seen a good arguement about why the current situation is suboptimal. Milton Friedman wrote a book called The Tyranny of the Status Quo. Very roughly, in any system governed by voting (cf government) there are the following outcomes: (1) it is difficult to push the mean other than in a crisis and (2) when the forces for change (the top end of the bell curve) and the forces for no change (the bottom end of the bell curve) are both small, the great middle sides with no change. I was about to talk about government handouts to small special interest groups (cf the US sugar industry), but I realized I was drifting off topic. (Google James M Buchanan) My point was that in a voting/community system change is hard without perception of a crisis, and that in this cases there is no perception of that crisis, therefore there will be no change. This goes double for a soft issue like branding where the results are difficult to measure, but unlike, say, a proposed change to the kernel code where performance can be explicitly measured. If we don't adopt John's proposal, we can never know how many installations we missed out on because they didn't happen. So basically democracy doesn't move very easily? Umm, Ubuntu is very much not a democracy. It is a meritocracy. We don't have the issue of being stuck because we do have strong goverence. However, this is a total tangent, as it has nothing todo with the matter at hand (looking at a new branding initiative). Corey -- ubuntu-marketing mailing list ubuntu-marketing@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-marketing
Re: [ubuntu-marketing] Announcing the Unified Ubuntu Branding Project
Corey Burger wrote: On 7/26/06, Tim Morris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Snip Lovely concepts. Now show me why we need this now (or ever). Again, what is wrong with the status quo. Please give me *specific* issues you see our current branding causes. I don't actually think there is much wrong with our current branding, assuming the target market is computer enthusiasts and linux programmers. The current branding - in fact the whole name, philosophy, design - works nicely with this group in my opinion. So, again, I don't think there is anything wrong. That said, if the objective of the branding were target corporate decision makers (aka suits) by (1) building higher brand awareness and recognition with this group and (2) generating the soft fuzzies around low risk respected company safe decision then the direction that John has taken is textbook stuff. Specifically I am thinking of Wally Olins Corporate Identity. Specific issues - again from a corporate branding POV: 1. The current brand architecture does not create a simple, clear and coherent brand message to the corporate consumer. It is instead a form of line extension. Instead of rallying the flag around the Ubuntu brand, we have 5 seperate brands, which all other things being equal split our forces/mindspace/mindshare/awareness and create confusion: Ubuntu Kubuntu Xubuntu Edubuntu nUbuntu as well as derivatives (Guadalinex based on Ubuntu) source: http://www.ubuntu.com/download/derivatives Within these we also have sub-brands in the form of numbers in the form of: code names (Breezy Badger) coded dates (X.XX) acronyms (LTS=long term service) specific platform claims (Server Edition). While this is not as bad as where the competition is going... (http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_editions.asp), it can clearly create confusion and splitting of the message. Should I install Kubuntu 6.06 LTS Dapper Drake Server Edition or edubuntu 5.10 Breezy Badger? Can I get nUbuntu 6.06 without the LTS option but as a server edition? For a book reviewing the well documented dangers of line extensions, see anything by Ries and Trout (eg The 22 Immutable Laws of Marketing), which specifically and directly addresses the issue at ahnd.. The simplified the Brand architecture John has proposed around a single name (Ubuntu), is directly addressing this issue. 2. The current brand and brand architecture create an impression which is non-corporate. Corporate branding is about staid safe trusted brands (what is the first thing that comes to mind when I say: IBM vs. iPod vs. Napster.) The elements in the current branding that are non-corporate include: (a) The colour brown (b) the touchy feely slogan I am what I am because of who we all are (c) various cues in the various websites I don't have the time to provide detail. If you want to confirm, please compare: http://www.kubuntu.com/ with http://www.ibm.com/us/ http://www.sun.com/ http://www.redhat.com/ http://www.novell.com/ http://www.oracle.com/index.html Again, what John has done is the first step towards addressing these issues assuming we are targeting the corporate user. However, what I was saying in my original post was, speaking as a market researcher, the target market was undefined and I believe this is causing the current disagreement. - - - - I just want to emphasize that I have no problems with the current branding or architecture, and I am not calling for change because (1) I think the brown, anti-corporate, neo-communist, new-new, school project, benevolently dictated collective image works with the people I think are actually making the decision to install *buntu today [including me] and (2) I don't think corporate users are the logical target. Anyway, good work John. Right solution to the wrong problem. Tim ps I may need to trademark brown, anti-corporate, neo-communist, new-new, school project, benevolently dictated collective -- ubuntu-marketing mailing list ubuntu-marketing@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-marketing
Re: [ubuntu-marketing] Announcing the Unified Ubuntu Branding Project
My understanding of what SABDFL has said is that there will never be an enterprise version with additional features available only at a charge (the Red Hat model). I wasn't suggesting that a for-cash enterprise version was in the pipeline, rather that the brand (and more specifically in this case the brand design architecture) may not support multiple diverse audiences. Given Goldman Sachs and [EMAIL PROTECTED] and blank piece of paper I wouldn't go through a brand development process and come to the _exact_same_answer for both. To word it differently, imagine two parallel products - *-buntu Corporate LTS (out-of-date, rock solid, stable platform for corporate applications/server) and *-buntu Community (the new new bling bling) and where both are free and both share the same underpinnings. As far as I am aware, my hypothetical *-buntu Corporate LTS could even emerge as Cannonical Linux. We have two parallel distros: the standard Ubuntu releases, which are supported for 18 months, and the LTS, supported for 5 yrs (servers) and 3 yrs (desktop). This way of providing to different needs is much better than the two separate products, business and community, which sounds like the Red Hat / Fedora fudge. It's five years from now. Corporate Q Suit has called a meeting to consider upgrade options and Techy J Harddrive says: We could use *buntu. That's the free one isn't it? Isn't our competiton using that? What are the options? Well there is a Standard and a LTS version. Which one is the corporate version? LTS. How much is a support package? Well Canonical - the 'makers' of *buntu - sell one for $XX per seat. I struggle with LTS as a powerful and compelling brand name (that's what it is) in the corporate space. Without having done the research, my gut tells me some form of Ubuntu Corporate Edition would work better for some target markets. -- ubuntu-marketing mailing list ubuntu-marketing@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-marketing
Re: [ubuntu-marketing] Announcing the Unified Ubuntu Branding Project
Tim Morris wrote: [Lots of relevant and interesting stuff about marketing targeting] Again, what John has done is the first step towards addressing these issues assuming we are targeting the corporate user. However, what I was saying in my original post was, speaking as a market researcher, the target market was undefined and I believe this is causing the current disagreement. Tim has some very good points on this. Ubuntu's marketing is very grassroots, bottom-up and organic. As it should be. It's not going to win corporate users by matching other IT companies at being corporate and proper-looking. You'll note that Ubuntu is winning most support among engineering companies such as Sun and Google that are already sympathetic to F/OSS, as well as public sector organizations such as schools, universities and hospitals. I don't think that the typical corporate environment should be Ubuntu's main focus, but rather sympathetic companies and public services that have need for customized versions of Ubuntu. In this regard, Ubuntu being free (both gratis and libre) is essential. And the various derivatives of Ubuntu show not only the diversity and customizability of Ubuntu, but also the fact that it is within the reach of most government and non-government organizations to do. What we might need to focus on instead is that power of diversity within Ubuntu, and how potential users can harness that. But the primary focus should still be on the single home user wanting to give up Windows or Mac with all their Trusted Computing, DRM and licensing (just to name a few of the reasons why they might want to switch). These are the ones who will be interested in the primary, community focus of Ubuntu. I just want to emphasize that I have no problems with the current branding or architecture, and I am not calling for change because (1) I think the brown, anti-corporate, neo-communist, new-new, school project, benevolently dictated collective image works with the people I think are actually making the decision to install *buntu today [including me] and (2) I don't think corporate users are the logical target. Yes! Ubuntu is all about people! (says the anthropologist...) Andreas -- https://launchpad.net/people/lloydinho -- ubuntu-marketing mailing list ubuntu-marketing@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-marketing
Re: [ubuntu-marketing] Announcing the Unified Ubuntu Branding Project
Hi John, On 27/07/06, John Baer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am requesting Team members perform an honest review of the materials Delighted to. As this is such a big proposal, I'm going to be fairly critical. Please don't take it personally, but we need rigorous discussion. First off, it's great to see this sort of considered thought put into a project. I think you raise some important points. I'll take it section by section. Project purpose I know Corey has mentioned this, but I also feel you haven't identified a problem that will be solved by your proposals. I mean, yeah, there are several different project names and associated brands, but is that a problem? Importantly, I think we need to be careful with tone of voice in this sort of document. A sentence such as, All current and future products distributed by the Ubuntu Community will adhere to this standard, really isn't going to go down well. We're not in a position to either make demands or enforce them. It's clear you feel passionately about what you're proposing but it's worth remembering that it is only a proposal. In a volunteer community, such as this, we need to carefully advocate points of view to one another and to other parts of the Ubuntu world. Of course, nothing with naming etc will happen without the buy-in of the trademark owner - Canonical. Project and community goals I'm interested to know where you've drawn the community goals from. Also, although it's laudable to want Ubuntu and its derivatives to be presented without prejudice, I can't see there's any problem with that at present. Project scope - Again, I'm impressed by and like the structure of the document. I think the assumptions you're making are pretty big. We can't assume acceptance of a proposal, such as this, because the internal marketing required to gain acceptance of such a big change has to be a big part of the proposal. Constraints I agree with. In particular, the lack of marketing plan is important here. Developing a branding strategy without a marketing strategy to inform it is, I think, doing things in the wrong order. Many of the goals, objectives and assumptions that you have based on your own feelings should be drawn from the marketing strategy. The momentum of the status quo may well be strong enough to make the proposal unviable. People know Ubuntu. Those people who need to also know the derivatives. I can not underscore the importance of this effort as it affects the entire Community. I think you should though, as you feel so strongly about it and what you're proposing is absolutely enormous. Certainly beyond the scope of this infant team. I really am heartened to see this sort of structured proposal. I'd love to see the discussions on this list answer many of the questions thrown up by the structure you've used. -- Matthew Revell www.understated.co.uk -- ubuntu-marketing mailing list ubuntu-marketing@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-marketing
Re: [ubuntu-marketing] Announcing the Unified Ubuntu Branding Project
On 7/26/06, John Baer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marketing Team Members, I am pleased to submit this project for your consideration and approval. I won't go into the details of why I feel this is an important endeavor, but I will direct your attention to the Proposal Specification and Charter wiki's below. I am requesting Team members perform an honest review of the materials and submit your approval or disapproval to move forward to the mailing list. I'll use this feedback as an internal opinion poll. If the decision is to proceed, I am looking for a few volunteers to assist in getting the job done. This group of folks will become the Marketing Branding Project Team. I can not underscore the importance of this effort as it affects the entire Community. Proposal Specification is located here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UnifiedUbuntuBranding Project Charter is located here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UnifiedUbuntuBrandingCharter I look forward to your comments and announcing the decision of the Team by Tuesday, August 1. Thank you, John John, Thanks for all your great work on this. I have watched it take shape over the last few weeks on the wiki and have put a lot of thought into it. Simply put: I believe this is the wrong thing todo. Why? For several reasons. Firstly because it dilutes our brand. Yes, there is some confusion between Ubuntu the project and Ubuntu the product, but Ubuntu is our premier brand. The interesting branding stuff you have on the wiki page with regards to company and product. For better or worse, where it counts, the IT press, consider Ubuntu to be Canonicals product. Thus, in the style of your wiki page, we have: Canonical -- Ubuntu Secondly, you would have us throw away the Edubuntu, Xubuntu and Kubuntu brands (I assume, as I don't see them on your wiki page). That is utter insanity. These are strong brands, clearly identifying them with the Ubuntu marque, but clearly seperate. So, in a word, no. It would be throwing away too much without clear gain. Yours, Corey -- ubuntu-marketing mailing list ubuntu-marketing@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-marketing
Re: [ubuntu-marketing] Announcing the Unified Ubuntu Branding Project
Corey Burger wrote: So, in a word, no. It would be throwing away too much without clear gain. John, I hate to say it but I'd have to agree with Corey on this one. But, I have a spin. :-) I agree with Corey that we'd lose brand recognition so the icon rebranding (great icons by the way) I think is out. Ubuntu, Kubuntu, and Xubuntu are products, not sub-cats as you listed. The closest synonym would be Canonical - Ubuntu Canonical - Kubuntu Canonical - Xubuntu However I don't think this does them justice. Perhaps someone smarter than me can work on that structure more. I do agree with your observation that the project page difference in formating, site structure, content, etc. between the brands is very confusing. It would be very nice to maintain a sense of uniformity and cohesiveness between the main webpages. Ubuntu and Kubuntu share similar website features but, perhaps by design to allude to the simplistic interface, Xubuntu does not. I don't think there is any reason why the 3 brands/products cannot be drawn in close to these same basic visual structure from a project page perspective. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- ubuntu-marketing mailing list ubuntu-marketing@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-marketing
Re: [ubuntu-marketing] Announcing the Unified Ubuntu Branding Project
snip In the long run we may ultimately end up with some form of separate community branding and corporate branding, similar to Red Hat/Fedora and the Novell/SUSE/Open SUSE evolving monster. Mark very explicitly does not want this to happen. There is not going to be an Enterprise version of Ubuntu. However, for the time being I predict the tyranny of the status-quo. How is the status quo tyranny? I have not yet seen a good arguement about why the current situation is suboptimal. Corey -- ubuntu-marketing mailing list ubuntu-marketing@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-marketing
