[NTLUG:Discuss] Marketting Linux (Was:MS XP Throw it in the trash!)

[Steve]

Steve Baker wrote:

[on marketing]
> I was kinda hoping that between IBM and SGI, we'd see some of that.
> 
> The IBM campaign has been fairly low key (apart from in SanFrancisco and
> NewYork where they painted whole sides of buildings with their 'Peace/Love/Linux'
> advert and (illegally) stencilled it on a bunch of sidewalks).


I had some issues with this marketing especially as the first campaign. It 
trivialized Linux in a way by associating it with things that its intended 
audience probably doesn't care for. I wish they had mentioned like its power, 
flexibility, and cost rather than going with a hippie-theme that could 
stereotype it. In contrast, that "they stole my servers - replaced by a 
mainframe" commercial was the right way to do things.


> I went into a laundrette in San Francisco some months ago that faced one of those
> 10 storey high IBM ads - I was wearing my NTLUG Teeshirt at the time - and one
> of the people who ran the place remarked - "Oh - you're wearing one of those
> IBM Penguins - aren't they cute."


I have one of those MBNA LinuxFund credit cards. That penguin usually gets a 
chuckle b/c it's so damn cute.

 


> I think our success on the desktop now hinges on a teeny-tiny legal issue
> in the Microsoft settlement...Will hardware vendors be allowed to build
> dual-boot machines without Microsoft beating them up over it?
> 
> If they can then I think it's possible that we'd see vendors installing
> Linux as standard alongside Windoze - it's a zero cost item and doesn't
> consume a whole lot of disk space, so they have almost nothing to lose
> by offering it and they have some extra goodies to list in their adverts.


Personally, I don't belive that a push-based mechanism will materially work for 
Linux as this point. Having Linux as a dual-boot is not a zero cost issue for 
manufacturers as other issues like process change and tech support come into 
play. For them to break away, there must be very apparent demand first. I 
suspect that for the next year, Linux will continue to grow organically, adding 
on new users because of self-selection, need, etc. which I think is fine and 
healthy.

What I find far more important than OEM support is whether or not Microsoft is 
allowed to proprietize information distribution.


> What that one great package might be - I'm not sure.  Something like
> GIMP maybe? - Secure email with no virii maybe? - Home web/file servers?


I don't think that Linux's emergence on the desktop will be because of a killer 
app. It's not like some company couldn't port any killer app to Windows with its 
far bigger desktop market right away.

I think Linux's growth on the desktop will just be more evolutionary than 
revolutionary. As time goes on, the gap between Linux's desktop environment and 
apps will start to close in on the commercial world's. At some point, that gap 
will be narrow enough where people will question the logic of going with a 
Microsoft solution when all the pros and cons are evaluated. It won't happen at 
the same point in every niche; some niches will reach this point faster than 
others.


> But it all depends on the exact provisions of the agreement.  I heard that
> Microsoft will be required to allow vendors to install 3rd party software
> in place of the Microsoft equivelents - but whether that also requires
> M$ to support dual-booting isn't clear...and besides, it looks like the
> states aren't going to swallow it - so it's all up for grabs anyway.


Spirit-wise, I'm pretty sure that dual-booting would fall under the same 
category. It basically says that Microsoft can't punish hardware vendors 
directly or indirectly by giving others more favorable treatment if the vendors 
go with non-Microsoft solutions.

Steve