On the subject of naming the Dapper successor

[Randy Gloden]

I don't know about you folks, but I would pitch running "Ubuntu Linux" 
on the server.  Neither the versions or the names matter much to them, 
so I wouldn't use them in the pitch.  They would be in such shock over 
the "Linux" part that they would probably miss the "Ubuntu" part 
altogether.  They would be lucky to have heard of Ubuntu or Debian.  The 
question I would have to contend with is:  "Why are you not going with 
Red Hat"  (the name they have heard of) and how we were going to support 
it.  Canonical makes the second question easier.

Of course, I can't speak directly to the quality of service offered by 
Canonical because I've neither dealt with them in a support context nor 
have heard from anyone else that uses their services.  Mark has a 
positive reputation for the success of his earlier endeavors so maybe 
that would work.

For those that are deep enough into the Linux world to be aware of these 
cute animal  name designations, I would think they would also be aware 
of the positive publicity the distro has gotten recently.

I don't think it's an issue, but then again, some people judge things 
based on things I think are irrational.


--------Randy
www.microbabble.com

Hidde Brugmans wrote:

>On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 15:22 +0000, Matthew East wrote:
>  
>
>>On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 15:53 +0100, Carsten Lange wrote:
>>    
>>
>
>*snip*
>
>  
>
>>I think John's point was that in order for Ubuntu to attract a
>>professional market, a more serious codename may help. I take Hidde's
>>point though that the codename sets Ubuntu apart, and I agree that in
>>some markets, that will be a positive factor, rather than a negative
>>factor. But there are other markets where that won't be true, I think.
>>
>>Matt
>>    
>>
>
>Obviously there will be a certain class of people that will not look
>further than the name. However, these are also the people that will
>complain the loudest, and give up easiest when trying Ubuntu as a
>product.
>
>It will take far more than a name to convince these people. They need a
>company to sell it to them and charge a lot of money for it and their
>support and backing, so they can feel safe.
>
>Furthermore if these managers and organisations are not ready to embrace
>Ubuntu on its merit, but for some other reason (such as to go with the
>trend) a mere name will not convince them. All it could do is make them
>slightly more comfortable with a choice they would only feel comfortable
>with making anyway if a professional came in and offered it to them.
>
>For this class of customers we have the year.month naming scheme, and I
>am not convinced that it is worth giving up a marketing advantage to
>please them.
>
>Canonical alone is not big enough to support the rate of growth and
>progress that Ubuntu needs to be taken seriously. Anything that helps us
>create buzz and enthuse the community further into helping us should be
>treasured.
>
>Hidde
>  
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.6/257 - Release Date: 2/10/2006
>  
>