__/ On Saturday 27 August 2005 23:24, [johnny bobby bee] wrote : \__
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> When advising somebody to install Ubuntu, for example, being rock-solid
>> and user-friendly, what will the first step be? Send them to the Web site
>> to order a CD, right? What will they see? Three half-naked people holding
>> hands. What will they see in ms.com? A guy in a suit holding a tablet,
>> for example? Which one will a naïve user be more likely to /trust/?
> I can understand what you're trying to do here. But trying to homogenize
> GNU/Linux and OSS product names to something more sanitized is not the
> answer. What drove *you* here?
I imagine it was the neat programming environment and SSH (i.e. less leg
work). Honestly. That's how I became dependent on Linux and learned to love
it not for being "not Windows", but for doing exactly what I needed.
> Were the names more 'professional' then?
The names never appeared professionals to me. Persistent use and experience
taught me to dispose of the naming stereotype. It is a peril that many, not
just myself, must overcome.
> I don't get it? But I gotta tell ya, for me, it was the funky names and
> wild musings of the community as a whole. Sure, I've stayed because of
> the quality of the products. Hell, If I wanted a guy in a suit holding a
> tablet I'd have stuck with Microsoftie.
> When I want half-naked people holding hands I look to Ubuntu, even
> though they took those fine folks down. Leave the naive users to their
> own makings. I'm happier over here with the GIMP, Apache and Debians of
> the world. Gotta love a distro that's named after a dude and his
That's another issue. A one-man piece of software will have repellent
characteristics to the prospective user. That's why companies try to
glorify themselves, often by giving the illluion of /scale/. How often do
you see a name of a person in a Mac/Windows-bundled application?
>> To penetrate the commercial world, can we not find some shareable photos,
>> names and labels that instill better sense of trust in the visitors'
> Trusted enough to be used by IBM, HP, governments of the world, most
> commercial websites, any higher learning institution.
Indeed. And yet, back rooms will not give 'masses' the right impression. Put
some Linux boxes in the helpdesks, the clusters, the call centers. Get a
few Linux boxes in the display window of the local computer shop.
>> A lightweight page like Debian's does not do the trick either. It is
>> still hard for me to persuade people to use Linux, even though it's free.
> So? Where's the problem? All good things in due time. If not, those folk
> are allowed to suffer with their OS if they wish. It's a Free (and open
> source) world.
Often the solace to most of us... those who insist and use a poor operating
system hinder themsleves. Nonetheless, what will you do when your (mine
actually) mother suffers from viruses, a bloted Registry and system
crashes? What do you do when your son wants to buy a computer for gaming
and the cost of that machine is well over $1000? Or when the IT support
people implement Windows- or IE-only systems?