[Linux-aus] Vista v. Linux Movie

[Brent Wallis]

Gidday

On 2/6/07, Paul Wayper <paul.wayper at anu.edu.au> wrote:
> 1) It costs nothing to install and use.
No. That is incorrect. Cost is not just money. I believe that this is
a very wrong thing to try and promote. Linux is NOT free as in
beer....I avoid the "F" word at all costs.


> 2) You get a huge bunch of software to use for free, as well as the
> operating system.  (Apple's iLife and Windows' supplied software are but
> a tiny patch on what we offer.)
> 3) You can give it away to friends and family to use.
> 4) You get industry-standard, time-test, proven firewall and security
> software.
No be careful. I have seen many a poorly configured FW using IPTABLES.
I have made part of my living out of fixing them up!

> 5) You get provably faster security updates and less time vulnerable to
> attacks.
This is a very big plus to promote!!


> 6) You get proven data security and (a certain amount of) freedom from
> vendor lock-in.
No NOT proven data security...no no no. It is only as good as the
person installing and admining. FOSS so far looks like it has a more
robust model to protect from these things but the jury is and should
always be out on these matters....

Sorry...this also flys out the window given the SUSE/MS deal...there
is lockin coming out of that that will make us think the old lockin
was easy to deal with...

>
> There are probably others.  And I have no problem with having ads which
> don't put a totally consistent, 'everyone must sing from the same
> hymnbook' face on what Linux offers.  Human beings are diverse; we learn
> and experience in different ways, we find different things attractive
> and interesting.  One of the Linux and FLOSS community's greatest
> strengths is our diversity of approach.  This should come across in our
> presentation.  A hundred people making videos on why they personally
> like Linux will 'win more hearts' (IMO) than a single
> glossy-but-soulless consistant, conformant approach.
Unfortunately this is not the case. Instead, it presents a shattered
"wabble of woudy webels" to lay people...instead of what you think it
presents. Old marketing maxim:
Perception in 9/10 of the Truth!

>
> > 2. We live in a world where our target audience mostly don't read
> > newspapers and their TV screen time is far and away out done by their
> > Internet screen time.
>
> Nonsense.  We aren't going after the wireheads who are glued to their
> computers all day.
Woa...if you could point to some evidence that supports this I am all ears.
I have 3 children aged 13 to 20....I guarantee you that they and their
peers spend less than 1 hr a day in front of TV....all and every set
of demographics that has come across my desk in the last 3 years
supports this trend 1000 percent (I can;t release as they are
proprietary studies...but a simple Google search on the matter brings
up plenty of supporting evidence...try "The Long Tail"
Rule 2 in marketing: ...make sure you identify the majority trends,
and understand that they may not be what YOU think!

>We're going after the people who use computers (at
> home and/or work) and also watch TV, read newspapers, see billboards and
> hear radio programmes.  Indeed, I would argue that to advertise only on
> the internet is to miss a lot of people who (IMO) need to learn about
> the benefits that FLOSS can provide.
No. The stats do not bear this out.

An example of the sort of "attitude" I mean is
> > partially  represented by this IPod add on Youtube:
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JJZiZHVovU
> > (apologies to any blonds on the list...:-) )
> That, to me, is a typical Apple ad.  What's it saying?  Who knows!  It
> certainly isn't saying anything good about how easy it is to understand
> what an iPod is doing.  To me it's fairly crass and sexist.  Even if you
> wanted to buy into a lifestyle inhabited by hip-looking
> twenty-somethings, why all of a sudden is an iPod part of that (and one
> that you can mistake for a home pregnancy kit, it would seem)?  The ad
> certainly doesn't help you there.
Once again, the majority of the target audience for this ad would
disagree with you!....
Sure its crass ....but it is very very popular and represents a
lifestyle choice..
Its target audience should be the same as ours....

> I would argue that building the expectation of a style of life, and
> creating the need for a product as part of fitting in with that
> expectation, is such a 90's marketing tool.  People have wised up to it
> - people recognise that trick and discard it.  It's overplayed,
> overdone, and there's too much competition for it to be effective now.
Rule 3 in marketing:
Collective populations have short memories... Whilst you and I may be
wise to the tricks, they remain the same, just dressed differently!
You speak of advertising 90s style...the reality is that its been the
same since time started...since the first "Neanderthal Saturday
Morning Flea Market"...only the things being sold and the delivery
methods have changed...:-)

> But what _is_ working is viral memes, subversive stuff that sees the
> underdog win, and seeing 'the truth' behind the corporate gloss.
I have to disagree very strongly here...the underdog winning...etc has
never won me business....ever... and only serves to alienate potential
clients. When we interview in the place I am working at the moment,
any potential candidate that brings these types of arguments up as
valid support for Linux is never called back, no matter how great a
tech they may be.... Please understand that this technique is only a
very small part of what got us this far but it will not, under any
circumstance hold water going forward. You will chase your potential
clients away if you promote as such. The "underdog nonsense" was old
in 2001 and even older now. Linux is already in big corporates...it
aint subversive any more...:-) MS use the "underdog" card to belittle
Linux and FOSS in the marketplace...don;t help them keep doing it!

Marketing Rule 4: People like to be part of something and will always
fall on the side of majority opinion and taste.

That rule is played over and over and over by politicians and it works
for them now in the same way it did 500 years ago...the trick is to
get the general population to feel good about a move.

Rgds
BW