Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Linux Foundation Asks Who Says "I'm Linux" Best

Posted by timothy on from the creepy's-definitely-the-way-to-go dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Everyone has seen Apple's clever 'I'm a Mac' ads, and Microsoft's attempted responses, first with Jerry Seinfeld, and next with 'I'm a PC.' The Linux Foundation tries to fire back with its community-generated 'We're Linux' video contest: all of the eligible videos have now been submitted and are ready to be voted on. Thankfully, the quality of Linux is much higher than the quality of some of these entries: entries range from the hilarious but inappropriate, to the well-made but creepy, to the 'I'm sure it sounded good in your head.' Thankfully, there are one or two that could actually be real commercials."

10 of 459 comments (clear)

  1. And that so sums up Linux... by jonnyj · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Great product, shame about the marketing. That's why Canonical / Ubuntu is so important.

    1. Re:And that so sums up Linux... by FishWithAHammer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You ever notice how nobody really talks about features the way you're describing? It's because that's basically nerd porn. Everyone else would just go "jesus, that's boring" and tune out.

      This is something most of the Linux community doesn't get: People don't give a fuck about computers. It's like a car: the only time they care is when it isn't doing what they want it to.

      And, right now, it's a lot easier to get a Linux machine to the isn't-doing-what-they-want-it-to point than a Windows machine. (If you have to mention WINE, you pretty much already failed. WINE is an admirable effort that requires a level of technical proficiency or at least willingness to Google to get a lot of stuff running well--neither of which are things end users will do.)

      --
      "You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
    2. Re:And that so sums up Linux... by JWSmythe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I was going to reply to him, but you seem to actually understand.

          He has no clue about advertising. It has absolutely NOTHING (none, nada, nil, zip, zero, nuthin') to do with the product. It has everything to do with getting the viewer's attention, and keeping it for the 15 to 30 seconds that the ad runs, *AND* mixed in somewhere show the product.

          Like, this would make a killer ad..

          Show a jet fighter buzzing the surface of the ocean. It fires a missile. WOOSH! People like jet fighters. They like big explosions. The flash and the noise will get (or keep) them looking.

          The camera follows the missile. You see the girls on the beach. It flys down a road with flashy cars. it buzzes some other flashy thing. Then you see it going straight into a building with a big Linux sign on it.

          Big explosion. Dust settles (quickly, we're at like 20 seconds already), and the sign is still standing.

          No words. No dialogue. Just music (optionally, but suggested), jet engine noise, rocket noise, and explosion noise.

          People who want to sell their product always want to include all kinds of crap about their product. Consumers don't care. 99% of the people driving cars (like in your example) don't know anything about them. They can't tell you what engine it has. Half of them can't even tell you the model without going outside to look. Everyone can say if it's pretty or ugly. There are some people who are really into their cars (like me) who can run down every part in it accurately. Ads for my car had nothing to do with the features of the car.

          Here was the short version (30 sec). It doesn't even say the name until the end. Lots of noise and effects.

          This was the long promo video. Only the first 45 seconds showed up on TV, as I recall. Again, lots of noise and effects. Even I, a TransAm owner, didn't care to watch it past 1 minute, when they started babbling about the features.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    3. Re:And that so sums up Linux... by yoshi_mon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Another great way of putting the same idea. And while I agree I think that there is a bit more to the idea than even the previous poster says.

      Small % of people - Those in the know about a product and want all the 'nerd pron'. (Or to put it another way they know all about their needs.) To such people ads that show all the flash over substance are meh at best. However...that's kind of the whole point. The mass scale marketing can't be tailored for this very small set of people.

      Slightly larger % of people - These people are not the techs who are in the above category but rather the managers of those techs. Or the 'enthusiast' part of the market. The kind of people, for example, who do dual-phase cooling on chips that were designed for simple HSF setups. Still however this is not the target that mass scale marketing has to aim for.

      Nearly every other bit of the % of people - The masses who want that hole not the bit. This is the target audience that when thinking about mass marketing your looking at. For example when I think about a fan belt for my car I sure as hell don't fall into either of the above two categories. I'm just looking for a part that will get the job done and not cost me an arm and a leg.

      And mind you there are those to whom fan belts are important things that they want to know all sorts of details about when they think about them. But much like when I think about my OSs don't fall into that 3rd category.

      And therein lies the rub. Most of us who have been involved in FOSS fall directly into the 1st or 2nd category in my list. And as such we make very poor advocates for it at times. Because the majority of people don't really care about FEATURE X that to us is really really cool and important.

      This is getting way too long winded so I'll just close in saying whenever any of the great FOSS conversion stores are shared, most of the best ones include users who just want something that works. Not the other 99% of the nerd pron that we like to go on about.

      --

      Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
    4. Re:And that so sums up Linux... by lennier · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, exactly!

      I use Ubuntu, I went cold turkey from Windows eleven years ago with Red Hat 5... and I'm *still* just deeply frustrated at how many silly little things aren't on anyone's priority list to get fixed.

      Not only that, most of the big projects (KDE, GNOME, OpenOffice) seem to have a definite philosophy of 'that's NOT broken and we WON'T fix it!' for things which quite patently ARE broken.

      Let's pass over with all decent haste the absolutely insane affair of 'spatial windows' in Nautilus (wtf? Windows 95 Explorer had a 'spatial' mode, it was just smart enough to *also* offer a tree browsing view for people who wanted to do serious file management) and give thanks that the Ubuntu people at least had the insight to override the GNOME people and turn *that* craziness off.

      Let's ignore for now the equally insane rush to *remove* copy-pastable file path text fields from dialog boxes and replace them with un-automatable candy-bar strips of buttons. Because, um, nobody uses keyboards anymore? I guess that's a step 'forward'. (Oh, yes, there's a magic hidden alt-key to bring up the real text field... but you'll never know what it is, because we don't talk about that.)

      Let's also be thankful that *finally* some 'fully packaged' applications *now* start putting in menu entries.

      No, let's talk about the more serious issues: how there are about five separate, incompatible 'official' object systems (GObject, CORBA/Bonobo, D-BUS, KParts, Firefox's XPCom, OpenOffice's UNO) before we even think about .NET/Mono or Java integration.

      How there's still no sensible shared configuration system - after a zillion false starts, we still have gconf (two versions of) for GNOME, and the horde of weird formats in /etc for everyone else. Different /etc layout for each distribution, of course, despite what FHS tried to do.

      How although we have X, which is fully networkable, if your X Server crashes - by definition a component which could be *on another machine entirely* - then ALL YOUR RUNNING X APPLICATIONS have to be restarted! The best feature of X, completely subverted just by bad 'standard' configuration.

      And yes, how every 'desktop environment' insists on reinventing the API wheel and building 'virtual filesystems' ON TOP OF its own API rather than making them available to the Posix level with something like FUSE.

      And then there's the pain of device management, like webcams. If it autodetects at startup, it'll probably work. If not.... good luck.

      I love Linux, but... we seem to be settling for far less than we had in the 80s, even. At least then we had dreams of what a desktop *could* be.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    5. Re:And that so sums up Linux... by waveclaw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Handyman's rule: all tools are hammers except chisels which are screwdrivers. What you buy something for may not be what it gets used to do.

      Harvard Business School professor Theodore Levitt:

      People don't want to buy a quarter-inch drill. They want a quarter-inch hole.

      Then explain the number of pristine, never to be used and decidedly overpowered tools sitting in many 'crasftsman' garages? I always felt Levitt was missing the mark. A lot of purchase decisions are about having the rights quarter-inch drill, regardless of its utility for making holes.

      People will buy a car to drive on a road, but what car they buy and why may have nothing at all to do with driving. Operating Systems today are not a choice about practicality or functionality, but of style and ethos. The hobbyist feel and methods of Linux are not that far removed from the home mechanic tinkering with his hot rod that never leaves the driveway.

      Linux won't garner marketshare based on being the quarter-inch hole maker of Personal Computers. We have Macs and corporate-desktop Windows for that.

      Linux.com has to differentiate Linux from its competitors and show that it's the sexiest drill in the cabinet. Pasty nerds arguing over the last donut doesn't do either of these. Honestly, Ubuntu's graphics artists and Novell's XGL efforts did more to make people say "I want that on my computer" than 5 years of making Office 20XD6 work a little better on crappy hardware.

      --

      "You cannot have a General Will unless you have shared experiences. You cannot be fair to people you don't know."
  2. Very fitting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I find this situation to be a very fitting analogy to the computing world as a whole. Apple does something that gets attention. Microsoft makes their cheap knockoff of it. Then the OSS/Linux guys come along and say "Hey, we can do that, too!"

    1. Re:Very fitting by Galois2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well as usual with Linux, they show up late to the game

      Not quite -- the "he's linux" commercial preceeded either the Mac or PC ad series. Perhaps the only usual thing is that Apple and MS take undeserved credit.

      and produce a half ass working team that people find unbearable to watch while the hardcore crowd yells at them for being peons.

      I found http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwL0G9wK8j4 to be a fully working team, coached by Wooden no less.

      But hey we can criticize MS/Apple all day, but when it comes to Linux we have to treat them with special care because they 'do it for free'.

      No, we can criticize MS because we've proven in court they illegally use their monopoly to extinguish competition in other areas, and Apple because they lock down both their hardware and software. Linux is the best open source OS there is, and anyone who cares about software freedom ought to care about it.

  3. What a second... by Antony-Kyre · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Aren't linux machines still Personal Computers?

  4. facepalm by blhack · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Isn't part of the point of linux that there isn't a face to it?

    Linux is my mailserver
    Linux runs my mythtv
    Linux runs on my access point
    Linux runs on my sister's laptop.
    Linux runs on our company's DVR.

    Linux is not an operating system for the desktop or for the server, or for the embedded device. Linux is an operating system for EVERYTHING.

    Its like a ball of clay, endless potential and totally at the hands of the artist.

    --
    NewslilySocial News. No lolcats allowed.