Slashdot Mirror
He's a Mac, He's a PC, But We're Linux!
davidmwilliams writes "Earlier this year the Linux Foundation launched a competition for budding writers, film makers and just general Linux enthusiasts to make their own grassroots advertisement to compete with Apple's highly-successful 'I'm a Mac' series of adverts. The winner has now been announced."
I watched a few of these videos and I'm going to admit that it's very tough to push an operating system in less than a minute. So that leaves you in the very department you don't want to be in--marketing.
I will congratulate Linux and the winning contestant on achieving what Apple did and Microsoft tried to. And that is simplify Linux down to an idea easy to grasp with no actual numbers or ideas surrounding it. Like the Mac ads, it's just "cool" to be a Mac. I like that they imply that to be Linux is to enjoy freedom but it's no more convincing to me than the Mac ads. I'm a Linux fanatic but I'm realistic.
I don't think Linux needs this kind of advertising. I would prefer the software to speak for itself--warts and all. I hope all the participants had fun and I also hope that this doesn't make an easy target for anti-Linux folks. The winning ad sidesteps some of Linux's difficult aspects (usability, third party support, etc.) and promotes its trump card. Linux is freedom.
My work here is dung.
While that is a nicely produced ad, if its purpose is to promote linux use to the general public, it completely fails.
Nothing about it will grab their attention.
It looks more like those microsoft ads, where they show white drawings on top of real life video.
what exactly is the winning video parodying? did you even bother to watch it before you came here to complain?
frog blast the vent core
The problem is that it's hard to pin down the advantages in a manner that people will "get it".
I don't know how many times I've shown (honestly so and in a way the people were just gobsmacked...) those advantages- and people will still use XP or Vista, because they "like" it, never mind that they're always bitching about all the problems they actually HAVE with the stuff and never once twig onto the fact that it really doesn't have to be that way and you don't have the crap going on in the large on Linux. And this doesn't even get into the people with the mindset that something as good as what Linux has become could ever be "free" or that handing copies out to people could be anything but illegal.
Spelling out "advantages" isn't going to get you there right at the moment.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
I will congratulate Linux and the winning contestant on achieving what Apple did and Microsoft tried to. And that is simplify Linux down to an idea easy to grasp with no actual numbers or ideas surrounding it. Like the Mac ads, it's just "cool" to be a Mac. I like that they imply that to be Linux is to enjoy freedom but it's no more convincing to me than the Mac ads. I'm a Linux fanatic but I'm realistic.
But, see, there's a big, big problem with the winning ad.
Unless you already know what Linux is, which many, many people do not, it is utterly meaningless.
I know it has become popular to make ads that don't really explain what they're for in recent times, but that only works if the brand they're advertising is already recognizable, at least among their target demographic. But The Great Unwashed Masses don't even know what Linux is yet. Knowing that "it's freedom" tells them nothing, and the cute little animated graphics don't give any indication that it's even something to do with a computer—yeah, the graphics themselves are sometimes clearly computer-related, but these days, what isn't?
When Linux is already as recognizable a name as Mac, iPod, Coke, or Nike, and everyone knows that "it's just another alternative to Mac or Windows," then we can make ads like this to push the "freedom" aspect of it.
But until then, this ad doesn't tell a non-geek anything...except that Linux is pretentious.
Dan Aris
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
Are you kidding? Tech support = Gollum.
The ad brings up the idea that Linux is about freedom. Does Linux follow through on that promise?
I started using Ubuntu in December (hand in my geek card, I know). I tried once before with Mandrake about 5 years ago and it was too much work (honestly) for a hobby OS.
How free are people under Linux? I understand that it's about freedom of information, but when I think about the other possibilities that I might want to have in terms of User Interface manipulation (like the ad seems to suggest) I begin to wonder. Is there an easy (non-code, maybe even scripting) way to change the look of the UI? Is the UI as easy, fun, and colorful as the ad seems to suggest? These may seem like dumb questions to some, but if Linux wants market share they need to build a brand and follow through on that brand promise.
About freedom and intuition in applications: When trying to play a DVD on my girlfriend's brand new Ubuntu build it was necessary to download 3 different media applications (settled on VLC, but even that had a fatal bug sometimes) and sift for a while through google just to install the correct libs. I understand that the DVD format isn't free, but getting everything to work correctly was a bit of a chore. THAT is not freedom. THAT is frustration to a new user. If I hadn't been there I know she would have ditched the OS and gone back to Windows. She even picked up an "Ubuntu for Dummies" book (which did not fully describe getting a DVD to play) so she's by no means lazy about learning Linux.
She doesn't use the computer for too much but shouldn't the bare basics work immediately?
"Basics" are different for everyone (Aha! Another chance to have Linux be about freedom!) so shouldn't there be an option to walk people through what tasks they might use the computer for, then show them to the new user and make it enjoyably interactive to CHOOSE those programs, with an option somewhere to try out and learn other programs?
It's about freedom AND communicating that freedom effectively, and I feel the Linux community would benefit greatly from taking the time to concentrate on that aspect. If Linux (whatever flavor) is really about freedom, then that gift of freedom from developers comes with responsibility. That is a responsibility to coherently express how and what the OS can do.
If there really are a lot of people taking Linux notebooks/netbooks/desktops back, don't you think they at least *tried* tinkering with the OS? To me that says that the initial impression Linux gives may not be a helpful one.
If Linux is trying to get new users, shouldn't the focus be on effectively presenting the OS to new users?
In short, the ad seems cool, but Linux should get that ad out there and they should find a way to follow through on what effectively seems to be Linux's biggest shortcoming.
-
why should i switch if there is ZERO incentive for me to use linux [...]
the thought of giving more money to redmond makes me want to puke
Well, it sounds like you have greater than zero incentive to me. Perhaps there are other reasons you will discover.
I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
Heh... typical of Linux though. Copying Mac or Windows, but years later, and not quite as good.
It's amazing that before you can offer real, valid criticisms of Linx, you need to qualify it with "but I really love it!"
Yeah, just like workspaces, man, totally rip off of Mac OS X's Spaces feature, and Windows' not yet existing equivalent!
Clicked pie.
It's okay if you're happy enough where you are. It sounds like you're used to a certain level of pain. Everyone's experience is unique.
For me, the math happens to run the other way. Here at work I'm forced to use Windows. I've been doing systems work for more than thirty years now, but fortunately it's almost never involved Microsoft products. The kinds of work I do have been in areas where Microsoft doesn't go, so it hasn't even been an option. When I switch to Windows it's endless irritation. Slow performance most of all, but everything, just everything is a little bit below par. My Linux systems are running on older hardware, never a problem, and easily eight or ten times more responsive.
So stay with Windows if you think it's faster and does what you need. After all, it's a free choice. Nobody is forcing you.
Parity: What to do when the weekend comes.
"Gnash is not ready for prime time and last I checked, didn't currently work with youtube. Supposedly swfdec does, if you compile the latest build..."
...and that's why "freedom" hasn't caught on with the general public.
A lot of people have been posting this. The ad doesn't tell you what Linux actually is, just that it's gives you freedom. But that's OK. That's actually what makes it a good ad. It focuses on a single concept. The problem is not the ad itself, it's those that are focusing on a single ad and not thinking about a wider marketing campaign. Unless the product is very self explanatory, you don't introduce something new with a single ad, you serve up multiple ads, possibly with an overall theme, each one highlighting something different about the product. To be simple, look at Apple's ads. Note that I use the plural form of ad. Each one talks about one thing. "Ease of use" is one ad. "No viruses" is another ad. "Interoperabilty" is another. They don't do this all in one ad, its impossible. Some of the entries tried to do this and it failed miserably. You only have thirty seconds to get your point across. Say too much and no one will get it.
So this is only the beginning of a campaign. It's the initial buzz creator. It gets people asking the questiong "what is this linux thing?". Some will go look it up, but they don't have to, because your next ads are coming out that go deeper. They use the same overall style, but instead of talking about freedom, they talk about security, or reliability, or open standards, or whatever. There's a lot of reasons Linux is great, but you have to pick only one reason per ad.
"It's not whether you win or lose, it's how drunk you get." -- H. J. Simpson
And yet... Linux and the thousands of other open source projects that make a usable desktop remain Free, while the others do not.
Even if I concede that open source clones of proprietary software are often inferior (which is certainly not a given), I'm ok with that given the benefits. If you *need* pivot tables in Excel or the bazillion features in Photoshop, then spend the money for your single license, possbily DRM'ed, binary-only product that can only be installed and run on a single OS a single hardware platform. More power to you! Isn't choice wonderful?
I, along with many others, choose cost-free software that affords us the freedom to copy it indefinitely, install it on whatever OS/hardware we have, and tweak and fiddle with it without fear of DMCA violations or SPA audits.
Your snide "not quite as good" remark totally ignores the benefits beyond technical features.
Method of processing duck feet
Why is it that every time someone posts a "linux not ready for desktop" comment, at least one person has to pipe up that they're using linux exclusively on the desktop?
That's about as helpful as saying, "Well, the bug doesn't happen on my machine."
Ok, but I'm not a driveling whiny developer enthusiast that needs to have the bazillion levels of freedom that you need to hack the bejeezus out of your computer. I'm a burger flipper, a tire guy, a mechanic, a professional, or a housewife and I just want the stuff to work. I don't want to have to make a stupid decision about which distribution I should download and I don't want to have to answer nine billion technical questions just to get it installed. Something I have never gotten from Linux. I want to have that feeling that there is a company that I can blame, I need to have the feeling that there is a group of people that may benefit from my purchase, and who can be called upon to support that product. I want a product not a cool concept (Apple delivers both). Grow up, Linux is as good or better technically than anything being sold but it isn't a product. It will never be a product as long as it is distributed by and has as many distributions as geeks writing it. Ubuntu is coming the closest to being a product and it's goals are commendable but it is not a mainstream desktop PRODUCT and never will be.
Just because it's free doesn't mean it is going to be good and just because it costs a lot of money doesn't mean that it's evil. The answer is in between those extremes just like everything else in life.
I'l probably get modded a 0 flame bait for this but it's still a valid statement!
Why bother
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Advertisements don't need to inform. Pay attention to the next few car commercials you see and notice how facts about the car are pretty light.
4096R/EF7BAFA6 79E1 DF98 D09D 898F 9A11 F6F0 DDDC 23FA EF7B AFA6
Contrast with Windows: Where are my drivers? Okay, installed.
I think you left out a few steps, like "What's the manufacturer's web site? Okay, where is their downloads page? Okay, what's the exact model number? Okay, what version of Windows am I using?"