Co-branding?
Paul W. Frields
stickster at gmail.com
Wed Mar 26 16:09:29 UTC 2008
On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 12:45 +0100, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
> Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was talking recently to a couple of friends who aren't in the software
> > industry and it came out in our recent discussions that both the
> > companies they are working for is using Fedora on their systems. They
> > remarked that they had no idea that Red Hat was involved in Fedora.
> >
> > I still meet people in various places who think Red Hat has stopped
> > working on a free distribution after Red Hat Linux 9 and continue to use
> > it or worse a earlier version.
> >
>
> People don't know about Linux. People don't know (or don't care) about
> Free and Open Source Software in general. Or open document standards for
> that matter. Even more people do not know EPEL. I've seen experienced
> administrators not knowing perl-LDAP is actually a package and it
> doesn't need to come from CPAN.
>
> Long story short; people just can't keep track. Some people will miss
> out on huge changes. Ask people to explain global warming. Ignorance is
> bliss. And not our problem.
>
> > I just looked within Fedora to see if there was any hint and couldn't
> > really find any prominent ones. The note on http://fedoraproject.org is
> > also easily missed. Is this a deliberate decision? Should there be some
> > of co-branding within the distribution and a prominent hint in other
> > places?
> >
> > Something like Fedora - Powered by Red Hat/ Sponsored by Red Hat or some
> > such.
> >
>
> A *huge* -1 here
>
> We've already spend lots of effort getting rid of the widely spread
> prejudice of being Red Hat's pre-enterprise private little playground
> project or distribution, and explaining that we're actually a community
> powered project instead (Yes, sponsored by Red Hat. Yes, upstream to Red
> Hat's Enterprise Linux product *and proud of it, might I add*).
>
> I'm not even sure we actually did get rid of that prejudice entirely. It
> may still exist in some people's heads.
>
> Anyway, correctly and fully exposing how Fedora is related to Red Hat,
> and how that works for both the community and Red Hat, with mere mortals
> on the one side, and business customers on the other, is way more
> important then getting the long-term users back on board because they
> missed out on Red Hat renaming the free/gratis distribution to Fedora,
> making Red Hat their Enterprise product.
>
> Honestly, I don't think it's our problem someone missed out on all this
> back in the day. If they're really interested / valuable as
> contributors, it'll come naturally. If not, it'll still come naturally
> with the work of our Ambassadors and thanks to other exposure.
In a thread on fedora-ambassadors-list[1], someone was kind enough to
raise an exception from our own Greg DeKoenigsberg:
"The Fedora brand must evolve separately from Red Hat's brand. Fedora is
very important to Red Hat, but Fedora is not Red Hat. It's really
crucial to understand that distinction."
-1 to co-branding.
= = = = =
[1] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-ambassadors-list/2008-March/msg00187.html
--
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-marketing-list/attachments/20080326/5d5f06c1/attachment.sig>
More information about the Fedora-marketing-list
mailing list