On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 8:25 AM, Marcus (OOo) <[email protected]> wrote: > Am 07/12/2011 01:41 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: >> >> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 4:59 AM, Graham Lauder<[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, 2011-07-11 at 20:21 +0300, Daniel Shahaf wrote: >>>> >>>> Javier Sola wrote on Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 18:43:17 +0700: >>>>> >>>>> If Apache forced this without discussion it would be a bad start for >>>>> the project. >>>> >>>> You're misportraying the facts; it's a preexisting Apache policy that >>>> predates OOo being proposed as a podling. >>>> >>>> Now, we're generally reasonable people here, and the podling can always >>>> request an exception (talk to trademarks@). >>> >>> >>> >>>> But, with my Member hat on, >>>> this collective "Let's join Apache, but not be called Apache, and not >>>> work with existing Apache entities" spirit leaves a rather bad taste. >>> >>> I'm not saying we the community, should not be called Apache whatever. >>> Nobody is down on Apache, but I just don't want to dilute the strong >>> brand of the #product#. OOo has a very strong market share in the >>> Office Suite Software Consumer market. >>> >>> >>> http://www.webmasterpro.de/portal/news/2010/02/05/international-openoffice-market-shares.html >>> >>> It is important that we maintain that share and grow it. >>> There is a large community: 35,000 individuals subscribed to OOo >>> maillists when I last checked, Louis may have more up-to-date numbers >>> Around 800 have signed the JCA/SCA >>> Scores possibly Hundreds of Millions of Users worldwide and growing >>> >>> All this under the OpenOffice.org Brand. There has been a lot of noise >> >> Yes, under the Apache brand. But also under the Obama presidency and >> under the Chinese Year of the Rabbit. We don't know what is >> coincidence versus a real essential cause and effect relationship. In >> other words, we don't know if we'd have the same number of users, or >> even more, with a different name. >> >> These seems like something we could debate endlessly without >> resolution. But I wonder if a more definitive answer might come from > > Then we should come to a result. I tried to asked this in my mail on the > 10th. > >> a survey of users and other market participants, looking at branding >> perceptions, trying out a few variations on the name, seeing which >> ones elicit the most positive responses. I'd be happy to yield to >> facts. > > -1 > > I don't think that yet another survey will bring better results than the > last mails here on the list. ;-) >
Just to be clear, I mean a survey of the target market, current and potential users. I agree that a survey of participants on this list would not tell us much more. I hope we all agree that the target audience of a branding strategy is larger than this list. > Marcus > > > >>> around LibreOffice with those Linux Distributions who used Go-OOo now >>> distributing with LO, but those numbers, compared to OOo across all >>> platforms are miniscule and I believe that will remain the same unless >>> of course this stalling of development, forced on us by Oracle, >>> continues or the brand is modified violently so that we have >>> re-establish our brand right from the beginning. In our consumer market >>> tacking Apache on the end would do just this. This not a slight on >>> Apache or lack of appreciation for their efforts thus far, just a >>> statement of the circumstances. >>> >>> Cheers >>> GL >
