Michael DeHaan wrote:
I was talking with a user who did not want to look at Fedora or an EL on
the desktop where they work for the following reasons, and was looking
at using Ubuntu. Naturally knowing that really there is almost no
difference in these (Gnome is Gnome) and they didn't even need the
non-free codecs, I figured I would pass on the comments in hopes that
this would be useful to someone else.
There is a ton of things beside GNOME: the amount of included drivers
and hardware support, the amount of tutorials and screencasts spread all
over the web, the configuration tools etc. Even the hype.
Their Comments:
(A) Fedora is too much of an upgrade process every six months.
This is interesting to me because Ubuntu comes out at about the same
rate. I did not think they were talking about LTS releases, but are we
pitching the ease of things like preupgrade enough? How do we get
I don't think preupgrade makes a difference. If they need to to an
upgrade, preupgrade or not, they still have to do the upgrade work.
Maybe you have a better change emphasizing that the life of a Fedora
release is in fact longer, at about 13 months (release N does not
obsolete release N-1, but N-2).
more desktop footprint out there -- not just in home users, but also in
companies where there is mindshare (and future contributors) to be
won? How do we make Fedora seem less fragile even as it tries to be
the "best of what works now"? It's clearly a fine desktop. Not much
is required in a desktop. The whole phrase is kind of silly even as I
mostly just want a web browser and an editor, and most everyone else
does too :)
By the contrary, desktop is hard, it needs a lot of polishing and fine
tuning.
(B) Comments that Red Hat, not Fedora, was disinterested in the
desktop -- therefore they were less interested in Fedora as they didn't
see an investment. Clearly not true. I don't see this being
applicable because it's a capable desktop, we invest well in it, and
Fedora cares very much about this. Again, how do we pass on that
message? Again, nothing technical is IMHO required, it's mostly about
dispelling those statements.
Sorry, but you lose here. Beyond all misquoting, see this relatively
recent answer from the Red Hat CEO:
"They're [Canonical] primarily a desktop provider. We're primarily a
server provider. Those are pretty different skill sets. I welcome Ubuntu
everywhere. Let them get desktops all over the place."
Source: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-10002150-92.html (but it was
all over the web).
In the context of fedora-marketing, I'm wondering how we can deal with
this image that -- as far as I can not tell, is not descriptive of the
distro.
I am afraid that even fedora-marketing does not have a clear definition
of what Fedora is. Quote from our front page:
"Fedora is a Linux-based operating system that showcases the latest in
free and open source software. Fedora is always free for anyone to use,
modify, and distribute. It is built by people across the globe who work
together as a community: the Fedora Project. The Fedora Project is open
and anyone is welcome to join.
The Fedora Project is out front for you, leading the advancement of
free, open software and content. "
I want to see Fedora everywhere, corporate desktops and making Microsoft
go away seems to be a noble goal (it's free) with huge advantages to
Fedora (huge contributer and mindshare base). Let's figure out what it
takes to make that happen.
--
nicu :: http://nicubunu.ro :: http://nicubunu.blogspot.com
Cool Fedora wallpapers: http://fedora.nicubunu.ro/wallpapers/
Open Clip Art Library: http://www.openclipart.org
my Fedora stuff: http://fedora.nicubunu.ro
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
