Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's In A Name?

2011-06-13 Thread Paul Sutton 
On 13/06/11 19:24, Avi wrote:
> Grant Sewell wrote:
>> I realise that a large number of (quite vocal) people did move over to
>> Apple with the release of Windows Vista, but was it enough to have a
>> significant impact on the market?  If so, I certainly didn't notice
>> it.
> 
> Hm, perhaps I'm just in the middle of a few unique demographics. I seem
> to be surrounded by non-technical people who have gone out and bought
> macbooks.
> 
> Macs certainly 'feel' a lot more mainstream now than they did, say,
> five years ago.
> 

I see macs quite a lot on tv, presenters using macs rather than windows
laptops.  This must have an effect however I notice as I am into
computers, when i was in canada in 2006 i noticed that the local tv
station had red hat, as there was a desktop in the background that had
the red hat logo on the kde menu. or it at least looked like a red hat
logo,

Paul

-- 

Paul Sutton Cert SLPS (Open)
http://www.zleap.net


Open Mic nights - Wednesday 8pm to 11pm (14+) Free entry
Breakin' Ground - Street dance for young people (8+) Wednesday 6pm
(starts May 11th)

The Lighthouse,26 Esplanade Road, Paignton
01803 411 812 or e-mail  i...@devonmusiccollective.com for more info.

17th September 2011 - Software freedom day


-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's In A Name?

2011-06-13 Thread Avi 
Grant Sewell wrote:
> I realise that a large number of (quite vocal) people did move over to
> Apple with the release of Windows Vista, but was it enough to have a
> significant impact on the market?  If so, I certainly didn't notice
> it.

Hm, perhaps I'm just in the middle of a few unique demographics. I seem
to be surrounded by non-technical people who have gone out and bought
macbooks.

Macs certainly 'feel' a lot more mainstream now than they did, say,
five years ago.

-- 
Avi

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's In A Name?

2011-06-13 Thread Grant Sewell 
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 08:44:32 +0100
Avi Greenbury wrote:

> Grant Sewell wrote:
> > I would dispute this.  Not the part that says that people won't turn
> > to Linux - I agree (at the moment) with that wholesale.  I disagree
> > that people will turn to Mac.
> 
> I thought it was generally accepted that Apple won big-time on the
> 'personal' desktop/laptop front from Vista? It was a coincidence of
> some genuinely good products from Apple, some good marketing from
> Apple and a universally despised product from MS.

Maybe I should have been more explicit.  I do not believe that enough
people would chose to move to Mac to cause any real problems for either
Microsoft or those shops providing Microsoft-only PCs.

I realise that a large number of (quite vocal) people did move over to
Apple with the release of Windows Vista, but was it enough to have a
significant impact on the market?  If so, I certainly didn't notice it.

Grant.

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's In A Name?

2011-06-13 Thread Avi 
Carlos Ferreira wrote:
> the former require (supposedly) more user-friendliness and more
> eye-candy (not to mention OEM contracts), while the latter are into
> command-line love and the feel good factor associated with fiddling
> your way through numerous work-arounds.

No, they both require user-friendliness, it's just different sorts of
users.

The former require new-user friendliness where things are obvious,
the latter require traditional user-friendliness, where things are quick
and easy. The two tend to be quite exclusive in the general sense, hence
it being difficult to manage the expectations of both. 

Unix (and, by ancestry, Linux) has long aimed to be good rather than
popular, and appreciated the fact that most users spend more time being
'normal' users than they do new users, so tends to pander to the former
rather than the latter. In fact, many things follow this trend (there
is nothing intuitive going on in the front of a car or around a sewing
machine for two examples).

I don't think anyone *likes* fiddling their way through workarounds,
they just appreciate the fact that the system allows them to work
around problems.

-- 
Avi

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's In A Name?

2011-06-13 Thread Paul Tansom 
** Carlos Ferreira  [2011-06-13 14:42]:

> So, perhaps it is interesting to discuss whether or not names and other
> idiosyncrasies of free software are important. After all, when I recently
> suggested that my students (first year undergraduates) use a certain Firefox
> plug-in to manage their references, I got asked in short succession what a
> plug-in was, what a Firefox was, and why did I need a browser to access the
> Internet at all...
** end quote [Carlos Ferreira]

That is a worrying state of affairs, even my 10 year old son is aware of
different browsers; well, I guess he may have a head start having me as a Dad,
and I may have made sure he understood after he came home from school on day
asking if we had the internet. He was looking for "the big blue E", so he got
the full explanation of the fact that he had already been using the internet
from home for some time using Firefox or Opera - I won't carry on with the
explanation, I'm assuming we all understand on this list ;) I had the same
sort of conversation when he was looking for Word, then Excel and Powerpoint,
explaining about OpenOffice (it was pre LibreOffice which we have now migrated
to), Protext (ancient history!), etc.

That said, back when I did my degree I had to adjust my way of thinking
somewhat after spending the first lesson in the computing section of the course
pressing the keyboard and seeing what happened! This is going back to 1986, but
even so I was amazed that some of the students hadn't touched a computer
before, and it turned out that those from schools further north didn't have BBC
Micros or any other form of computer in their schools or colleges (or it they
did they'd never seen them). Still, my 'head start' also meant that instead of
having to book a computer in one of the labs to do coursework on I could work
at home on my trusty Amstrad CPC6128 with Protext on ROM and Turbo Pascal
transferred from 5 1/4" to 3" disks - happy days :)

-- 
Paul Tansom | Aptanet Ltd. | http://www.aptanet.com/ | 023 9238 0001
==
Registered in England  |  Company No: 4905028  |  Registered Office:
Crawford House, Hambledon Road, Denmead, Waterlooville, Hants, PO7 6NU

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's In A Name?

2011-06-13 Thread Carlos Ferreira 
While I agree that some of the discussion on the denomination of software is
only a distraction, I hope we are not collectively throwing the baby out
with the bath water. As far as I can perceive, Ubuntu and other distros are
in a weird position, trying to increase their mass appeal (have a look at
Mark Shuttleworth's recent call for 200 million users by 2015) while keeping
die-hard fans on board; the former require (supposedly) more
user-friendliness and more eye-candy (not to mention OEM contracts), while
the latter are into command-line love and the feel good factor associated
with fiddling your way through numerous work-arounds.

So, perhaps it is interesting to discuss whether or not names and other
idiosyncrasies of free software are important. After all, when I recently
suggested that my students (first year undergraduates) use a certain Firefox
plug-in to manage their references, I got asked in short succession what a
plug-in was, what a Firefox was, and why did I need a browser to access the
Internet at all...

Carlos Ferreira
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's In A Name?

2011-06-13 Thread Liam Proven 
On 13 June 2011 11:48, Sean Miller  wrote:
> I think the year.month release numbers are very useful... if somebody says
> to me "I have OS-Something Version 1.5" I have absolutely NO idea whatsoever
> whether that release is bleeding edge or deprecated.  If I read "Ubuntu
> 11.04" I know that is up-to-date: on the other hand, if I have somebody
> saying "can you help me with my Ubuntu 7.10 because it won't mount my memory
> stick?" I don't even have to think before saying "That's almost 4 years old,
> I think you might need to upgrade to a more recent release!!".
>
> No, I think the numbering system works well, and I would like to see it
> maintained.
>
> As for development codenames, they exist in most operating systems.  As
> others have said, you can't create a YY.MM release number until you know
> when it is going to go live, though with Ubuntu that's SLIGHTLY less of an
> issue because of the strict six-monthly release cycle.

This. Definitely - WHS.

But also... Considerations nobody's mentioned:

[1] The thing is, with Linux, a single version number isn't very
meaningful. All the different bits are developed by different people.
Do you go by the kernel, or x.org, or GNOME, or what? Ubuntu decided
to sync its releases to the semi-annual GNOME 2 releases but now it
doesn't even use GNOME any more.

[2] International tastes vary widely. Brits prefer numbers, others do
not; e.g. my Kawasaki ZZR1100 is a ZX11 in Japan and a Ninja 1100 in
America. My Sharp CL-5500 was a Zaurus in America, and so on.

[3] Version numbers are a marketing fiction anyway & most people know
that these days. At least the year/month thing contains useful
information, unlike, say, Windows "7", which is either v6.1 or NT v5
or Windows v10 depending on how you count - anything but v7.0.


-- 
Liam Proven • Info & profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/lproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lpro...@gmail.com
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 • Cell: +44 7939-087884 • Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AIM/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven • MSN: lpro...@hotmail.com • ICQ: 73187508

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's In A Name?

2011-06-13 Thread Sean Miller 
I think the year.month release numbers are very useful... if somebody says
to me "I have OS-Something Version 1.5" I have absolutely NO idea whatsoever
whether that release is bleeding edge or deprecated.  If I read "Ubuntu
11.04" I know that is up-to-date: on the other hand, if I have somebody
saying "can you help me with my Ubuntu 7.10 because it won't mount my memory
stick?" I don't even have to think before saying "That's almost 4 years old,
I think you might need to upgrade to a more recent release!!".

No, I think the numbering system works well, and I would like to see it
maintained.

As for development codenames, they exist in most operating systems.  As
others have said, you can't create a YY.MM release number until you know
when it is going to go live, though with Ubuntu that's SLIGHTLY less of an
issue because of the strict six-monthly release cycle.

Sean
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's In A Name?

2011-06-13 Thread Alan Bell 

On 13/06/11 11:18, Avi Greenbury wrote:

Tony Scott wrote:

"Since the actual release date is not known until it's ready and
humans tend to prefer names rather than numbers, a set of codenames
are used by developers and testers during the buildup to a release:"


I particularly like here the implication that the courtesy of bending 
to the preference of humans need not be extended beyond developers and 
testers as far as the users :)


yeah, well seeing as this discussion started with the point that users 
prefer "cool" names like "7" and not silly code names then it seems 
about right.


Alan.

--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's In A Name?

2011-06-13 Thread Yorvyk 
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 23:15:57 +0100
Nigel Verity  wrote:

> 
> Hi Guys
> 

> 
> Anything that helps to give Ubuntu the image of being "mainstream" can only 
> be of help. Quirky release names suggest that Ubuntu is perhaps intended only 
> for people "in the know".
> 
Which of the following sets of code names would you prefer?
http://royal.pingdom.com/2010/05/27/the-developer-obsession-with-code-names-114-interesting-examples/



-- 
Steve Cook (Yorvyk)

http://lubuntu.net 

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's In A Name?

2011-06-13 Thread Avi Greenbury 

Tony Scott wrote:

"Since the actual release date is not known until it's ready and
humans tend to prefer names rather than numbers, a set of codenames
are used by developers and testers during the buildup to a release:"


I particularly like here the implication that the courtesy of bending to 
the preference of humans need not be extended beyond developers and 
testers as far as the users :)


--
Avi

--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's In A Name?

2011-06-13 Thread Avi Greenbury 

Alan Bell wrote:

On 13/06/11 08:44, Avi Greenbury wrote:



it is called "Ubuntu 11.04", it is *not* officially called "Ubuntu
Natty Narwhal". Mac was codenamed "Snow Leopard" until it was
officially released, where-upon it became "OSX 10.6".


Really?

yes, really.
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DevelopmentCodeNames


Ah yeah, I came across that in a post-email Google. The 'codenames' do 
still manage to pop up all the time post-release, though. It just seemed 
a bit of an odd policy, as well as one that's not really being followed.


--
Avi.

--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's In A Name?

2011-06-13 Thread Tony Scott 
Codenames are not designed to survive post release:

"Since the actual release date is not known until it's ready and humans tend to 
prefer names rather than numbers, a set of codenames are used by developers and 
testers during the buildup to a release:"

from

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DevelopmentCodeNames


--
Tony Scott
http://tonyscott.org.uk | http://twitter.com/tonys | 
http://2011.portsmouth.wordcampuk.org | http://lpd.bectu.com | 
http://orangecoconut.com


>
>From: Alan Bell 
>To: UK Ubuntu Talk 
>Sent: Monday, 13 June 2011, 10:54
>Subject: Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's In A Name?
>
>On 13/06/11 08:44, Avi Greenbury wrote:
>> 
>>> it is called "Ubuntu 11.04", it is *not* officially called "Ubuntu
>>> Natty Narwhal". Mac was codenamed "Snow Leopard" until it was
>>> officially released, where-upon it became "OSX 10.6".
>> 
>> Really?
>yes, really.
>https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DevelopmentCodeNames
>> I thought both 'Natty Narwhal' and 'Snow Leopard' are names intended to 
>> survive post-release. Certainly Apple is talking about 'OSX Lion' in the 
>> store, though I've just noticed a distinct lack of 'Natty' on ubuntu.com.
>> 
>
>
>-- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
>https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
>https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
>
>
>

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's In A Name?

2011-06-13 Thread Alan Bell 

On 13/06/11 08:44, Avi Greenbury wrote:



it is called "Ubuntu 11.04", it is *not* officially called "Ubuntu
Natty Narwhal". Mac was codenamed "Snow Leopard" until it was
officially released, where-upon it became "OSX 10.6".


Really?

yes, really.
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DevelopmentCodeNames
I thought both 'Natty Narwhal' and 'Snow Leopard' are names intended 
to survive post-release. Certainly Apple is talking about 'OSX Lion' 
in the store, though I've just noticed a distinct lack of 'Natty' on 
ubuntu.com.





--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's In A Name?

2011-06-13 Thread Avi Greenbury 

Grant Sewell wrote:

I would dispute this.  Not the part that says that people won't turn
to Linux - I agree (at the moment) with that wholesale.  I disagree
that people will turn to Mac.


I thought it was generally accepted that Apple won big-time on the
'personal' desktop/laptop front from Vista? It was a coincidence of some
genuinely good products from Apple, some good marketing from Apple and a
universally despised product from MS.

That said, a brief search on Google turns up nothing to support this 
claim, but I do remember it being made repeatedly at the time.



it is called "Ubuntu 11.04", it is *not* officially called "Ubuntu
Natty Narwhal". Mac was codenamed "Snow Leopard" until it was
officially released, where-upon it became "OSX 10.6".


Really? I thought both 'Natty Narwhal' and 'Snow Leopard' are names 
intended to survive post-release. Certainly Apple is talking about 'OSX 
Lion' in the store, though I've just noticed a distinct lack of 'Natty' 
on ubuntu.com.


--
Avi.

--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's In A Name?

2011-06-12 Thread Grant Sewell 
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 23:15:57 +0100
Nigel Verity wrote:

> 
> Hi Guys
> 
> It's been very interesting to read all the different takes on the
> Ubuntu name. Whatever the wisdom of its original selection,
> everyone's familiar with it, and to change now would probably be a
> retrograde step. However, the individual release names must seem a
> bit odd to non-Linux users. What's wrong with, for example, just
> calling the versions Ubuntu 11, Ubuntu 12, etc? That would describe
> the sequence, which is all that really matters. Whether the version
> is released in April or October shouldn't impact on the numbering
> convention.

I suppose there would be no problems calling it 11.1 and 11.2, but then
it feels more like "version numbers" than "release numbers" - where
release indicates (or at least it should) when something was released.

> Anything that helps to give Ubuntu the image of being "mainstream"
> can only be of help. Quirky release names suggest that Ubuntu is
> perhaps intended only for people "in the know".

Remember that they are "codenames".  Are they necessarily any
"quirkier" than the "codenames" use by other parties?  Does anyone
really refer to running "Windows Blackcomb"?  Or "Mac Tiger"?

> Other recent threads have pointed out that the vast majority of
> Windows and Mac users have never installed an operating system and
> would be extremely reluctant ever to do so. Until Ubuntu, or any
> other Linux distro for that matter, is widely available pre-installed
> on new hardware in high street shops, we're never going to make that
> all important big step.

There is, however, a big problem with that approach.  It is a chicken
vs. egg scenario:
10. Ubuntu won't be "widely" available pre-installed until the market
demands it.
20. The wider market won't demand it until they see it in use in the
wider market already.
30. GOTO 10.

> As things stand at the moment, if MS ever
> release a really flawed version of Windows or suffer a huge security
> embarrassment, it will be Mac OS that people turn to as the
> alternative, not Linux.

I would dispute this.  Not the part that says that people won't turn to
Linux - I agree (at the moment) with that wholesale.  I disagree that
people will turn to Mac.  For the most part, the general public are
lazy.  If there is a Windows release that really grates hard, the
public will still roll over and take it.  Look what happened with
Vista.  An absolute smorgasbord of problems with very few people
actually enjoying the Vista experience compared to the XP experience...
and yet, in the overwhelming majority of cases, they just put up with
it.

And you can't say that Mac didn't have the exposure... 10.x was
released at around the same time as XP.  10.5 was released around the
same time as Vista.  People knew about Mac.

> The diversity of distros which is such a strength of Linux is also a
> major barrier to its mass-market adoption. Consider the position of,
> say, PC World. If they took a policy decision to offer Linux
> pre-installed, how would they decide which distro to use, when there
> are so many and the relative merits of each change from month to
> month. At least with Windows you get the same very narrow version
> options wherever you buy your computer.

Never forget the incentives given to include a given operating system
with the hardware.  PC World, using your example, do not choose Windows
as the operating system out of either laziness or out of some level of
perceived altruism towards the customer.  They are in business to make
money by whatever means they can... that is the very nature of
business.  If you want Ubuntu to compete with Windows, in the same
manner as Windows and on Windows' own turf, then we would have to find
some way of incentivising (I really hate that word) retailers and OEMs
to choose Ubuntu over Windows, or indeed over some other Linux distro.

> Don't get me wrong, I want Linux to go mainstream. It is better than
> Windows in practically every respect but, for all that, we appear to
> be unable to literally give it away as far as general desktop users
> are concerned.

That all depends on what front you are looking.  I have had *some*
successes, as have many on this list and further.

> This indicates the strength of the MS marketing
> machine as much as anything.

It is not all down to marketing.

> Since we can't hope to match that in
> financial terms we have to take every opportunity to broaden the
> appeal of Ubuntu. Ditching daft release names could be one step in
> the right direction.

What would your suggestion be?  And I realise that sentence can be read
in a retaliatory and inflammatory way, but I am genuinely asking you
what your suggestions would be.

Personally I think that it might be an idea to give more thought to the
adjective part of the codenaming convention - it seems to be getting
more and more obscure.  I quite like the animal names part of the
convention.  And I realise that the codename is not part of the
offi

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's In A Name?

2011-06-12 Thread Nigel Verity 

Hi Guys

It's been very interesting to read all the different takes on the Ubuntu name. 
Whatever the wisdom of its original selection, everyone's familiar with it, and 
to change now would probably be a retrograde step. However, the individual 
release names must seem a bit odd to non-Linux users. What's wrong with, for 
example, just calling the versions Ubuntu 11, Ubuntu 12, etc? That would 
describe the sequence, which is all that really matters. Whether the version is 
released in April or October shouldn't impact on the numbering convention.

Anything that helps to give Ubuntu the image of being "mainstream" can only be 
of help. Quirky release names suggest that Ubuntu is perhaps intended only for 
people "in the know".

Other recent threads have pointed out that the vast majority of Windows and Mac 
users have never installed an operating system and would be extremely reluctant 
ever to do so. Until Ubuntu, or any other Linux distro for that matter, is 
widely available pre-installed on new hardware in high street shops, we're 
never going to make that all important big step. As things stand at the moment, 
if MS ever release a really flawed version of Windows or suffer a huge security 
embarrassment, it will be Mac OS that people turn to as the alternative, not 
Linux.

The diversity of distros which is such a strength of Linux is also a major 
barrier to its mass-market adoption. Consider the position of, say, PC World. 
If they took a policy decision to offer Linux pre-installed, how would they 
decide which distro to use, when there are so many and the relative merits of 
each change from month to month. At least with Windows you get the same very 
narrow version options wherever you buy your computer.

Don't get me wrong, I want Linux to go mainstream. It is better than Windows in 
practically every respect but, for all that, we appear to be unable to 
literally give it away as far as general desktop users are concerned. This 
indicates the strength of the MS marketing machine as much as anything. Since 
we can't hope to match that in financial terms we have to take every 
opportunity to broaden the appeal of Ubuntu. Ditching daft release names could 
be one step in the right direction.

Regards

Nige


  -- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's in a name?

2011-06-12 Thread Dino T. 
Glad to see I've been pronouncing Linux and Ubuntu the right way all along
lol.

*Dino Tassigiannis BA (Hons)*





On 12 June 2011 14:53, Liam Proven  wrote:

> On 11 June 2011 22:43, alan c  wrote:
> >
> > I gave a recycled Ubuntu PC to someone yesterday, who arrived with a
> black
> > (English born) friend. The friend was interested and had simply not been
> > aware of anything like Ubuntu, only Windows. They had enough African
> > knowledge to know what the ubuntu  philosophy meant. They even knew that
> my
> > anglicised pronunciation was wrong (You buntu) and were a bit
> amused..
>
> AIUI, it's really "úbúntú". The languages isiZulu and isiXhosa are
> tonal: each syllable should be pronounced with a rising tone with the
> emphasis on the middle one. By a rising tone, imagine saying it in a
> questioning manner, or the way a young Australian might say it.
>
> Very roughly, in something like English orthography:
> ooh-BOON-too.
>
> Linux, of course, is lee-nucks or lynn-ucks, *not* line-ucks.
>
> And if you think that's hard, the "xh" in the name part - Xhosa - of
> isiXhosa is pronounced with a lateral tongue click - think of the
> noise used to encourage a horse.
>
> --
> Liam Proven • Info & profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/lproven
> Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lpro...@gmail.com
> Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 • Cell: +44 7939-087884 • Fax: + 44 870-9151419
> AIM/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven • MSN: lpro...@hotmail.com • ICQ: 73187508
>
> --
> ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
>
-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's in a name?

2011-06-12 Thread Liam Proven 
On 12 June 2011 16:53, suprengr  wrote:
>
> I'll try that again... sent draft not real - whoops & sorry!
>
> In case you're wondering why Windows NT was given that name
> There used to be a best-in-breed mainframe sys called VMS...
> Microsoft's idea was to "go one better" and add one letter to each
> initial to prove it!
> they added "1" to V, "!" to M & "1" to S:
> one letter up [from VMS] to each of the intials = WNT!

We heard you the 1st time! ;¬)

I believe that is an urban legend, although Dave Cutler, the lead
architect of NT at MS, was also the project lead on VMS & earlier DEC
OSs. VMS ran originally on the VAX, incidentally, a minicomputer, not
a mainframe. There are various resemblances between NT and VMS at a
low level.

NT was built on the foundations of the original OS/2 3, after MS & IBM
fell out. IBM kept OS/2 2, the 80386 version; MS got the portable
version. It foundered until MS head-hunted Cutler from DEC. He was
frustrated as DEC management had red-lighted his project to create a
portable, cross-platform version of VMS. (I think it was called
"PRISM".)

NT was originally not developed on x86 - that was OS/2 2 territory. It
was developed for the Intel RISC chip, the i860, a general-purpose
RISC chip partly descended from the earlier i960, an embedded chip.

The i860 was codenamed N10: n-ten, or NT for short.

That's where the "NT" came from.

Source: Bill Gates in a 1988 interview. :¬)

-- 
Liam Proven • Info & profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/lproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lpro...@gmail.com
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 • Cell: +44 7939-087884 • Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AIM/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven • MSN: lpro...@hotmail.com • ICQ: 73187508

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's in a name?

2011-06-12 Thread Alan Lord (News) 

On 12/06/11 14:53, Liam Proven wrote:


And if you think that's hard, the "xh" in the name part - Xhosa - of
isiXhosa is pronounced with a lateral tongue click - think of the
noise used to encourage a horse.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_%28philosophy%29

There is also a recording somewhere of Desmond Tutu talking about Ubuntu...

Al


--
The Open Learning Centre
http://www.theopenlearningcentre.com


--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's in a name?

2011-06-12 Thread suprengr 
On Sun, 2011-06-12 at 16:48 +0100, suprengr wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-06-12 at 14:48 +0100, Liam Proven wrote:
> > On 11 June 2011 22:32, Grant Sewell  wrote:
> > > On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 22:13:03 +0100
> > > Alan Bell wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 11/06/11 21:06, (:techitone:) wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Windows is a familiar word. It's releases have progressive names,
> > >> > Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7. They sound cool.
> > >> not to me, they sound confused. 1, 2, 3, 3.1, 95, 98, NT, 2000, ME,
> > >> XP, Vista, 7. That is a complete and utter mess, far from progressive
> > >> it totally fails to form any kind of coherent progression.
> > >
> > > The Windows naming convention is totally baffling.  There have been 2
> > > main "branches" of Windows - DOS based and NT based.  The naming scheme
> > > seems to be a bit off on both sides:
> > > DOS based:
> > >  + Windows 1
> > >  + Windows 2
> > >  + Windows 3
> > >  + Windows 3.1
> > >  + Windows 3.11
> > >  + Windows 95
> > >  + Windows 98
> > >  + Windows ME
> > > NT based:
> > >  + Windows NT 3.1
> > >  + Windows NT 3.5
> > >  + Windows NT 4.0
> > >  + Windows 2000  (NT version 5.0)
> > >  + Windows XP(NT version 5.1)
> > >  + Windows Vista (NT version 6.0)
> > >  + Windows 7 (NT version 6.1)
> > >  + Windows 8 (NT version 6.2)
> > >
> > > It is completely non-sensical.
> > 
> > True!
> > 
> > And you missed out 98SE & NT 3.51 - the latter being my personal
> > favourite-ever version, followed by Win 2000.
> > 
> > NT 3.1 was really v1.0, of course; 3.5 and 3.51 were actually 1.1 and
> > 1.2, and NT 4 was version 2.0. :¬)
> > 
> > And then there are the server versions...
> > 
> > -- 
> > Liam Proven • Info & profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/lproven
> > Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lpro...@gmail.com
> > Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 • Cell: +44 7939-087884 • Fax: + 44 870-9151419
> > AIM/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven • MSN: lpro...@hotmail.com • ICQ: 73187508
> > 
> 
> In case you're wonder why Windows NT was given that name
> There used to be a best-in-breed mainframe sys called VMS...
> Microsoft's idea was to "go one better" and add to prove it they added
> one letter up [from VMS] to each of the intials... WNT!
> 
> Cheers,
> SuprEngr. 
> 
> ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

I'll try that again... sent draft not real - whoops & sorry!

In case you're wondering why Windows NT was given that name
There used to be a best-in-breed mainframe sys called VMS...
Microsoft's idea was to "go one better" and add one letter to each
initial to prove it!
they added "1" to V, "!" to M & "1" to S:
one letter up [from VMS] to each of the intials = WNT!

Cheers,
SuprEngr. 

ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/


-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's in a name?

2011-06-12 Thread suprengr 
On Sun, 2011-06-12 at 14:48 +0100, Liam Proven wrote:
> On 11 June 2011 22:32, Grant Sewell  wrote:
> > On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 22:13:03 +0100
> > Alan Bell wrote:
> >
> >> On 11/06/11 21:06, (:techitone:) wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Windows is a familiar word. It's releases have progressive names,
> >> > Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7. They sound cool.
> >> not to me, they sound confused. 1, 2, 3, 3.1, 95, 98, NT, 2000, ME,
> >> XP, Vista, 7. That is a complete and utter mess, far from progressive
> >> it totally fails to form any kind of coherent progression.
> >
> > The Windows naming convention is totally baffling.  There have been 2
> > main "branches" of Windows - DOS based and NT based.  The naming scheme
> > seems to be a bit off on both sides:
> > DOS based:
> >  + Windows 1
> >  + Windows 2
> >  + Windows 3
> >  + Windows 3.1
> >  + Windows 3.11
> >  + Windows 95
> >  + Windows 98
> >  + Windows ME
> > NT based:
> >  + Windows NT 3.1
> >  + Windows NT 3.5
> >  + Windows NT 4.0
> >  + Windows 2000  (NT version 5.0)
> >  + Windows XP(NT version 5.1)
> >  + Windows Vista (NT version 6.0)
> >  + Windows 7 (NT version 6.1)
> >  + Windows 8 (NT version 6.2)
> >
> > It is completely non-sensical.
> 
> True!
> 
> And you missed out 98SE & NT 3.51 - the latter being my personal
> favourite-ever version, followed by Win 2000.
> 
> NT 3.1 was really v1.0, of course; 3.5 and 3.51 were actually 1.1 and
> 1.2, and NT 4 was version 2.0. :¬)
> 
> And then there are the server versions...
> 
> -- 
> Liam Proven • Info & profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/lproven
> Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lpro...@gmail.com
> Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 • Cell: +44 7939-087884 • Fax: + 44 870-9151419
> AIM/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven • MSN: lpro...@hotmail.com • ICQ: 73187508
> 

In case you're wonder why Windows NT was given that name
There used to be a best-in-breed mainframe sys called VMS...
Microsoft's idea was to "go one better" and add to prove it they added
one letter up [from VMS] to each of the intials... WNT!

Cheers,
SuprEngr. 

ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/


-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's in a name?

2011-06-12 Thread Liam Proven 
On 11 June 2011 22:43, alan c  wrote:
>
> I gave a recycled Ubuntu PC to someone yesterday, who arrived with a black
> (English born) friend. The friend was interested and had simply not been
> aware of anything like Ubuntu, only Windows. They had enough African
> knowledge to know what the ubuntu  philosophy meant. They even knew that my
> anglicised pronunciation was wrong (You buntu) and were a bit amused..

AIUI, it's really "úbúntú". The languages isiZulu and isiXhosa are
tonal: each syllable should be pronounced with a rising tone with the
emphasis on the middle one. By a rising tone, imagine saying it in a
questioning manner, or the way a young Australian might say it.

Very roughly, in something like English orthography:
ooh-BOON-too.

Linux, of course, is lee-nucks or lynn-ucks, *not* line-ucks.

And if you think that's hard, the "xh" in the name part - Xhosa - of
isiXhosa is pronounced with a lateral tongue click - think of the
noise used to encourage a horse.

-- 
Liam Proven • Info & profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/lproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lpro...@gmail.com
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 • Cell: +44 7939-087884 • Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AIM/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven • MSN: lpro...@hotmail.com • ICQ: 73187508

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's in a name?

2011-06-12 Thread Liam Proven 
On 11 June 2011 22:32, Grant Sewell  wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 22:13:03 +0100
> Alan Bell wrote:
>
>> On 11/06/11 21:06, (:techitone:) wrote:
>> >
>> > Windows is a familiar word. It's releases have progressive names,
>> > Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7. They sound cool.
>> not to me, they sound confused. 1, 2, 3, 3.1, 95, 98, NT, 2000, ME,
>> XP, Vista, 7. That is a complete and utter mess, far from progressive
>> it totally fails to form any kind of coherent progression.
>
> The Windows naming convention is totally baffling.  There have been 2
> main "branches" of Windows - DOS based and NT based.  The naming scheme
> seems to be a bit off on both sides:
> DOS based:
>  + Windows 1
>  + Windows 2
>  + Windows 3
>  + Windows 3.1
>  + Windows 3.11
>  + Windows 95
>  + Windows 98
>  + Windows ME
> NT based:
>  + Windows NT 3.1
>  + Windows NT 3.5
>  + Windows NT 4.0
>  + Windows 2000  (NT version 5.0)
>  + Windows XP    (NT version 5.1)
>  + Windows Vista (NT version 6.0)
>  + Windows 7     (NT version 6.1)
>  + Windows 8     (NT version 6.2)
>
> It is completely non-sensical.

True!

And you missed out 98SE & NT 3.51 - the latter being my personal
favourite-ever version, followed by Win 2000.

NT 3.1 was really v1.0, of course; 3.5 and 3.51 were actually 1.1 and
1.2, and NT 4 was version 2.0. :¬)

And then there are the server versions...

-- 
Liam Proven • Info & profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/lproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lpro...@gmail.com
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 • Cell: +44 7939-087884 • Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AIM/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven • MSN: lpro...@hotmail.com • ICQ: 73187508

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's in a name?

2011-06-12 Thread Yorvyk 
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 21:06:09 +0100
"(:techitone:)"  wrote:


> 
> Mac OS X 'sounds' cool. Its big cat release names sound powerful. Lion is
> soon to be released and is very cheap. This is cool.
> 

>
I've always thought this sought of reasoning to be rather silly, given many Mac 
users don't know what the OS is called.  Many call it 'oh es ex' not 'oh es 
ten'.  If it ever gets to version eleven will it be called 'oh es exy' :)

-- 
Steve Cook (Yorvyk)

http://lubuntu.net 

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's in a name?

2011-06-11 Thread alan c 

On 11/06/11 21:06, (:techitone:) wrote:

In my experience when I speak with people about trying, or even switching
to, Ubuntu there is always a stumbling block with the name 'Ubuntu' and the
names of all the releases, Dapper Drake, Hardy Heron, Karmic Koala, Lucid
Lynx, Maverick Meerkat, Natty Narwhal. They just seem to 'switch off' to the
whole idea of it.


A name is a brand identity and it simply depends on marketing and how 
it is sold. How silly is it  to have a camera called Canon? A computer 
called Windows?  A drink called coke? Shoes called Nike? Ipod?? Lucky 
Goldstar (LG)?


How much professional marketing is done for the brand 'Ubuntu'?

I am in close contact with a user population just like yours, Joe and 
Jill. An elderly friend I help calls it 'Ubunti' and who cares? I do 
not. The important point is that they do not want to use Windows! 
(which is also on their machine).


I gave a recycled Ubuntu PC to someone yesterday, who arrived with a 
black (English born) friend. The friend was interested and had simply 
not been aware of anything like Ubuntu, only Windows. They had enough 
African knowledge to know what the ubuntu  philosophy meant. They even 
knew that my anglicised pronunciation was wrong (You buntu) and were a 
bit amused..


BTW,  I  *never* talk to Joe and Jill about names of versions, at all. 
 Usually I would not even say what the version *number* was. If you 
find the names etc are 'too much information'  what about not offering 
so much detail, it sounds as if it is not welcomed anyway?


--
alan cocks
Ubuntu user

--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's in a name?

2011-06-11 Thread Grant Sewell 
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 22:13:03 +0100
Alan Bell wrote:

> On 11/06/11 21:06, (:techitone:) wrote:
> >
> > Windows is a familiar word. It's releases have progressive names, 
> > Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7. They sound cool.
> not to me, they sound confused. 1, 2, 3, 3.1, 95, 98, NT, 2000, ME,
> XP, Vista, 7. That is a complete and utter mess, far from progressive
> it totally fails to form any kind of coherent progression.

The Windows naming convention is totally baffling.  There have been 2
main "branches" of Windows - DOS based and NT based.  The naming scheme
seems to be a bit off on both sides:
DOS based:
 + Windows 1
 + Windows 2
 + Windows 3
 + Windows 3.1
 + Windows 3.11
 + Windows 95
 + Windows 98
 + Windows ME
NT based:
 + Windows NT 3.1
 + Windows NT 3.5
 + Windows NT 4.0
 + Windows 2000  (NT version 5.0)
 + Windows XP(NT version 5.1)
 + Windows Vista (NT version 6.0)
 + Windows 7 (NT version 6.1)
 + Windows 8 (NT version 6.2)

It is completely non-sensical.

> > Mac OS X 'sounds' cool. Its big cat release names sound powerful.
> > Lion is soon to be released and is very cheap. This is cool.
> Well Oneiric Ocelot is a big cat name, although I suspect "Oneiric"
> will perplex and befuddle the vocabulary challenged. Anyhow, once
> released it should in theory be referred to by the release number,
> e.g. Ubuntu 11.04.

I have to admit that I've kinda gone off the development names of
late.  I liked some of the earlier ones, but I really think we could
have done better than "oneiric ocelot".  I know the development name
shouldn't be used post release, but considering the codename is used in
several places inside an Ubuntu release itself (let along all over the
Internet) it would be a shame to deny the name.

Grant.

-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's in a name?

2011-06-11 Thread Alan Bell 

On 11/06/11 21:06, (:techitone:) wrote:


Windows is a familiar word. It's releases have progressive names, 
Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7. They sound cool.
not to me, they sound confused. 1, 2, 3, 3.1, 95, 98, NT, 2000, ME, XP, 
Vista, 7. That is a complete and utter mess, far from progressive it 
totally fails to form any kind of coherent progression.


Mac OS X 'sounds' cool. Its big cat release names sound powerful. Lion 
is soon to be released and is very cheap. This is cool.
Well Oneiric Ocelot is a big cat name, although I suspect "Oneiric" will 
perplex and befuddle the vocabulary challenged. Anyhow, once released it 
should in theory be referred to by the release number, e.g. Ubuntu 11.04.



Alan

--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's in a name?

2011-06-11 Thread suprengr 
On Sat, 2011-06-11 at 21:42 +0100, john beddard wrote:
> These are valuable lessons that we need to take on board Tony. 
> 
> However we are dealing across an international community, where Ubuntu
> can have different meanings. Not forgetting that Microsoft Windows has
> very negative image across the world. To the point that most users had
> to begin using it, because they had no other choice. 
> 
> My first response would to make the name more accessible by the
> marketing people : U2 Ubuntu. However, probably better, would be the use
> of graphic characters, something the open-source community  has been
> exceptional at doing. So for example a Natty Narwhale character for the
> current 11.04 release. Making each major release more memorable.
> Alternatively, whilst Ubuntu's logo is strong, this characterisation
> could be done for the school's and young adult market in general.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, 2011-06-11 at 21:06 +0100, (:techitone:) wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I've been using Ubuntu on and off for a couple of years now and have
> > learned a lot from reading the UK Ubuntu Talk emails. I've install
> > Xubuntu many times on older (+5 to -10 years) laptops and I've given
> > these laptops to people to borrow for community projects that I'm
> > working on. 
> > 
> > It takes them a little while to get out of their Windows or Mac OS way
> > of working but the people that borrow them are eventually impressed by
> > how easy and reliable they are to use.
> > 
> > These people are 'Joe Public', they have no tech skills and have no
> > desire to have any tech skills. All they want/need to do is email, use
> > Facebook, surf the Net, write something to print out, maybe watch a
> > DVD and play music.
> > 
> > Everyone knows what Windows is because they, their friends, family,
> > neighbours, work colleagues etc use it. Windows is everywhere in Joe
> > Public's world.
> > 
> > Some of them use Mac's, sometimes for the same reasons as above for
> > Windows but in my experience it's because it's what they used during
> > further and higher education, ie for creating video's using Final Cut
> > Pro, publishing using In Design etc. They then go into the industry
> > and use FCP etc on Mac's in the workplace. The iPod, iPhone and iPad
> > have also converted many users to the Mac.
> > 
> > In my experience when I speak with people about trying, or even
> > switching to, Ubuntu there is always a stumbling block with the name
> > 'Ubuntu' and the names of all the releases, Dapper Drake, Hardy Heron,
> > Karmic Koala, Lucid Lynx, Maverick Meerkat, Natty Narwhal. They just
> > seem to 'switch off' to the whole idea of it.
> > 
> > Windows is a familiar word. It's releases have progressive names,
> > Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7. They sound cool.
> > 
> > Mac OS X 'sounds' cool. Its big cat release names sound powerful. Lion
> > is soon to be released and is very cheap. This is cool. 
> > 
> > If it doesn't sound cool it isn't gonna sell, even if it's free! Any
> > advertising freelancer will tell you this.
> > 
> > What's Ubuntu? What's an Ubuntu? The UK market have no
> > concept/comprehension of this word. They have no common frame of
> > reference.
> > 
> > They want to know what the word Ubuntu is. I tell them it's a
> > philosophy and that it means,
> > 
> > "I am what I am because of who we all are." (From a translation
> > offered by Liberian peace activist Leymah Gbowee.)
> > 
> > and that it's an operating system that they can freely install on
> > their PC. I can even give them the wiki definition,
> > 
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_%28philosophy%29
> > 
> > And by the time I mentioned the names of the releases they have just
> > glazed over. Apart from when I say 'Maverick Meerkat' which is 'cool'
> > because of the TV ads featuring a Meerkat that says, "Simples".
> > 
> > If Ubuntu is not a cool word = Ubuntu is not cool :(
> > 
> > Most of the people that borrow the laptops end up installing a copy of
> > Ubuntu on their home Windows PC so they can dual boot into either,
> > just in case!' They feel much 'safer' using Ubuntu after using it on a
> > free machine for a while, with everything installed for them and
> > working.
> > 
> > Only one person I've 'spoken' to about Ubuntu has installed it on
> > there own desktop as their only OS. They came to my house to install
> > it becuase they we're worried something would go wrong. This person
> > really enjoy's using Ubuntu. They took a copy of it to Uni on a
> > bootable flash drive and impressed fellow students and their lecturers
> > when they were able to boot a copy of Ubuntu from a 'pen drive' on a
> > networked Uni PC, and were amazed when they could gain access to files
> > they shouldn't have been able to! This made what Ubuntu could do cool
> > for these people, the name though was not popular.
> > 
> > The Ubuntu OS is really cool, but we know this. The word Ubuntu is
> > cool in our world but from my experience it's not c

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's in a name?

2011-06-11 Thread john beddard 
These are valuable lessons that we need to take on board Tony. 

However we are dealing across an international community, where Ubuntu
can have different meanings. Not forgetting that Microsoft Windows has
very negative image across the world. To the point that most users had
to begin using it, because they had no other choice. 

My first response would to make the name more accessible by the
marketing people : U2 Ubuntu. However, probably better, would be the use
of graphic characters, something the open-source community  has been
exceptional at doing. So for example a Natty Narwhale character for the
current 11.04 release. Making each major release more memorable.
Alternatively, whilst Ubuntu's logo is strong, this characterisation
could be done for the school's and young adult market in general.

John



On Sat, 2011-06-11 at 21:06 +0100, (:techitone:) wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I've been using Ubuntu on and off for a couple of years now and have
> learned a lot from reading the UK Ubuntu Talk emails. I've install
> Xubuntu many times on older (+5 to -10 years) laptops and I've given
> these laptops to people to borrow for community projects that I'm
> working on. 
> 
> It takes them a little while to get out of their Windows or Mac OS way
> of working but the people that borrow them are eventually impressed by
> how easy and reliable they are to use.
> 
> These people are 'Joe Public', they have no tech skills and have no
> desire to have any tech skills. All they want/need to do is email, use
> Facebook, surf the Net, write something to print out, maybe watch a
> DVD and play music.
> 
> Everyone knows what Windows is because they, their friends, family,
> neighbours, work colleagues etc use it. Windows is everywhere in Joe
> Public's world.
> 
> Some of them use Mac's, sometimes for the same reasons as above for
> Windows but in my experience it's because it's what they used during
> further and higher education, ie for creating video's using Final Cut
> Pro, publishing using In Design etc. They then go into the industry
> and use FCP etc on Mac's in the workplace. The iPod, iPhone and iPad
> have also converted many users to the Mac.
> 
> In my experience when I speak with people about trying, or even
> switching to, Ubuntu there is always a stumbling block with the name
> 'Ubuntu' and the names of all the releases, Dapper Drake, Hardy Heron,
> Karmic Koala, Lucid Lynx, Maverick Meerkat, Natty Narwhal. They just
> seem to 'switch off' to the whole idea of it.
> 
> Windows is a familiar word. It's releases have progressive names,
> Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7. They sound cool.
> 
> Mac OS X 'sounds' cool. Its big cat release names sound powerful. Lion
> is soon to be released and is very cheap. This is cool. 
> 
> If it doesn't sound cool it isn't gonna sell, even if it's free! Any
> advertising freelancer will tell you this.
> 
> What's Ubuntu? What's an Ubuntu? The UK market have no
> concept/comprehension of this word. They have no common frame of
> reference.
> 
> They want to know what the word Ubuntu is. I tell them it's a
> philosophy and that it means,
> 
> "I am what I am because of who we all are." (From a translation
> offered by Liberian peace activist Leymah Gbowee.)
> 
> and that it's an operating system that they can freely install on
> their PC. I can even give them the wiki definition,
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_%28philosophy%29
> 
> And by the time I mentioned the names of the releases they have just
> glazed over. Apart from when I say 'Maverick Meerkat' which is 'cool'
> because of the TV ads featuring a Meerkat that says, "Simples".
> 
> If Ubuntu is not a cool word = Ubuntu is not cool :(
> 
> Most of the people that borrow the laptops end up installing a copy of
> Ubuntu on their home Windows PC so they can dual boot into either,
> just in case!' They feel much 'safer' using Ubuntu after using it on a
> free machine for a while, with everything installed for them and
> working.
> 
> Only one person I've 'spoken' to about Ubuntu has installed it on
> there own desktop as their only OS. They came to my house to install
> it becuase they we're worried something would go wrong. This person
> really enjoy's using Ubuntu. They took a copy of it to Uni on a
> bootable flash drive and impressed fellow students and their lecturers
> when they were able to boot a copy of Ubuntu from a 'pen drive' on a
> networked Uni PC, and were amazed when they could gain access to files
> they shouldn't have been able to! This made what Ubuntu could do cool
> for these people, the name though was not popular.
> 
> The Ubuntu OS is really cool, but we know this. The word Ubuntu is
> cool in our world but from my experience it's not cool in the world of
> Joe Public.
> 
> I would really like to find a way to enthuse people about Ubuntu but I
> don't know how the get past it's name turning them off the idea.
> 
> Any suggestions, please?
> 
> Cheers, Tony :)
> -- 
> --
> (:techitone:)
> --

Re: [ubuntu-uk] What's in a name?

2011-06-11 Thread George Tripp 
>Windows is a familiar word. It's releases have progressive names, Windows XP, 
>Windows Vista, Windows 7. They sound cool.
>
>Mac OS X 'sounds' cool. Its big cat release names sound powerful. Lion is soon 
>to be released and is very cheap. This is cool. 
>

In my experience people use these OSs not because they think they sound cool 
but 
because they're on the PC/laptop when they buy it.

>If it doesn't sound cool it isn't gonna sell, even if it's free! Any 
>advertising 
>
>freelancer will tell you this.

Not at all convinced that sounding cool will help. Until Ubuntu is available 
pre-installed alongside other PCs/laptops in retail outlets I suspect that the 
only users are going to be enthusiasts (such as us in this forum) and their 
friends/relatives who have corrupted their computers and lost their original 
installation disks!

Sorry if this sounds a bit negative.

George


-- 
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/