The principle job of marketing is to create "Brand Awareness", it could in fact be argued that it is it's only function and anything else that a marketing team does, goes back to that simple statement.
Brand awareness is driven by several factors
Visibility Attractiveness Ubiquitousness
Not sure that the last is even a proper word but it conveys the idea! :)
Visibility: A good brand has to catch the eye, rivet the attention create a desire to know more about it
Attractiveness: Once you have attention the good Brand has to be pleasing to the viewer such that it makes them want be associated with it.
Ubiquitousness: In other words the brand has to be seen on a regular basis especially where it has a good "fit". ie: there is going to be greater impact if it is seen on the front page of a technology publication than in "House & Garden's Bathroom edition"
Right now we are suboptimal on all fronts.
Our logo doesn't convey the right feelings and it's not particularly attractive either in style or in colour.
The two open source brands that have the highest awareness are Ubuntu and Firefox. It is not for no reason that the colours they use are ones that convey Warmth, vibrancy and reliability while at the same time demanding attention, Oranges Reds, Browns and Yellows. The colours are sexy and make the viewer feel good and excited. Green, does none of these things, green is a calming colour but doesn't immediately attract attention.
The things our branding needs to convey, especially at this point is excitement and passion but also reliability and friendliness and be attractive enough to seize the viewers attention and have them wanting to know more.
That's our problem right now, we are at the "New Brand" stage. Coca Cola for instance doesn't have that issue, their marketing is just about reminding, the same for MacDonalds. Ubuntu and firefox created a buzz around their brand by being attractive and warm and inviting and we need to do the same.
In my opinion we need to look at our branding elements from a fresh start. Ubuntu and Firefox branding were both started from scratch with a strong brand in mind, we seem to have drifted into ours without little branding consideration.Our brand is strong within the community, but it doesn't lend itself to creating a strong brand outside the community
So a couple of considerations:
1) The name openSUSE is cumbersome and I believe a return to simply SUSE would be a good first step. Novell has SUSE Enterprise and in fact from a branding perspective I preferred Novell Linux with the big red N
2) The colour pallet does not grab attention and so that needs to be rethought
3) Geeko does not engage the viewer in any meaningful way except for being familiar to the present community, he either needs rethinking or we go to an entirely different Logo.
4) A branding competition, open to all comers, would be a newsworthy event that would get us column inches and get the brand out there.
Remember that this not about what we as a community like, it's about how we get a better branding impression and thus increase brand awareness.
Cheers GL
Le 17/08/2010 13:19, Graham Lauder a écrit :
Right now we are suboptimal on all fronts.
I don't think so
Our logo doesn't convey the right feelings and it's not particularly attractive either in style or in colour.
not so bad
The two open source brands that have the highest awareness are Ubuntu and Firefox.
?? Firefox, probably, but Ubuntu?? The *name* Ubuntu is well known, but the logo?
viewer feel good and excited. Green, does none of these things, green is a calming colour but doesn't immediately attract attention.
on our ecological days, green is the best possible coolor, including political groups uses this color!
instance doesn't have that issue, their marketing is just about reminding, the same for MacDonalds.
how many billions $ spent ?
- The name openSUSE is cumbersome and I believe a return to simply SUSE
would be a good first step.
this is not false. The low case initial "o" is boring :-(
Changing brand is always extremely dangerous
jdd
Hello,
I could paste here a lot of companys like Dresdner Bank, Land Rover, Skoda, British Petroleum, 7up, Lacoste, Austin Martin, Starbucks and so on to negative ur theory about green as color for a product/company.
But on the end its to much work, to remind u to be a little bit more carefully.
So I found another solution, we all know we are not alone in the world of the Linux distributions today have one of the oldest and surly they with the most users her 17th birthday.
And now the funny thing, this distribution have no marketing team, they only have a press speaker. How can that be happen, to be such a great distribution without that? Without stupid endless discussions about slogans, colors, logos? Really interesting ;)
br gnokii
Am Dienstag, den 17.08.2010, 23:19 +1200 schrieb Graham Lauder:
The principle job of marketing is to create "Brand Awareness", it could in fact be argued that it is it's only function and anything else that a marketing team does, goes back to that simple statement.
Brand awareness is driven by several factors
Visibility Attractiveness Ubiquitousness
Not sure that the last is even a proper word but it conveys the idea! :)
Visibility: A good brand has to catch the eye, rivet the attention create a desire to know more about it
Attractiveness: Once you have attention the good Brand has to be pleasing to the viewer such that it makes them want be associated with it.
Ubiquitousness: In other words the brand has to be seen on a regular basis especially where it has a good "fit". ie: there is going to be greater impact if it is seen on the front page of a technology publication than in "House & Garden's Bathroom edition"
Right now we are suboptimal on all fronts.
Our logo doesn't convey the right feelings and it's not particularly attractive either in style or in colour.
The two open source brands that have the highest awareness are Ubuntu and Firefox. It is not for no reason that the colours they use are ones that convey Warmth, vibrancy and reliability while at the same time demanding attention, Oranges Reds, Browns and Yellows. The colours are sexy and make the viewer feel good and excited. Green, does none of these things, green is a calming colour but doesn't immediately attract attention.
The things our branding needs to convey, especially at this point is excitement and passion but also reliability and friendliness and be attractive enough to seize the viewers attention and have them wanting to know more.
That's our problem right now, we are at the "New Brand" stage. Coca Cola for instance doesn't have that issue, their marketing is just about reminding, the same for MacDonalds. Ubuntu and firefox created a buzz around their brand by being attractive and warm and inviting and we need to do the same.
In my opinion we need to look at our branding elements from a fresh start. Ubuntu and Firefox branding were both started from scratch with a strong brand in mind, we seem to have drifted into ours without little branding consideration.Our brand is strong within the community, but it doesn't lend itself to creating a strong brand outside the community
So a couple of considerations:
- The name openSUSE is cumbersome and I believe a return to simply SUSE
would be a good first step. Novell has SUSE Enterprise and in fact from a branding perspective I preferred Novell Linux with the big red N
The colour pallet does not grab attention and so that needs to be rethought
Geeko does not engage the viewer in any meaningful way except for being
familiar to the present community, he either needs rethinking or we go to an entirely different Logo.
- A branding competition, open to all comers, would be a newsworthy event
that would get us column inches and get the brand out there.
Remember that this not about what we as a community like, it's about how we get a better branding impression and thus increase brand awareness.
Cheers GL
-- Graham Lauder, OpenOffice.org MarCon (Marketing Contact) NZ http://marketing.openoffice.org/contacts.html
OpenOffice.org Migration and training Consultant.
Ambassador for OpenSUSE Linux on your Desktop
INGOTs Assessor Trainer (International Grades in Office Technologies) www.theingots.org.nz
On Wednesday 18 Aug 2010 01:59:51 S.Kemter wrote:
Hello,
I could paste here a lot of companys like Dresdner Bank, Land Rover, Skoda, British Petroleum, 7up, Lacoste, Austin Martin, Starbucks and so on to negative ur theory about green as color for a product/company.
And good for them, all of them, but look at the pallett not just the single color and then think about what they are trying to convey in their branding.
I don't know about Dresdner bank, never heard off them so I did some research after they were taken over by Commerzbank their colour scheme went gold http://www.dresdner-bank.de/ Landrover is Green and Silver, green conveys the outdoors and silver is about reliability. Yep good branding for a 4 wheel drive manufacturer.
BP Green and gold,gold to drag the attention and green for ecological feel Yep I can see that working in their market.
I could go on for the rest
But guess what, none of their target markets are like ours. Our target Demographic tends to be younger, green works in that demographic in political types of campaign or where sales depend on you appearing to be responsible.
Warm attractive high interest colours work for this demographic.
But on the end its to much work, to remind u to be a little bit more carefully.
So I found another solution, we all know we are not alone in the world of the Linux distributions today have one of the oldest and surly they with the most users her 17th birthday.
And now the funny thing, this distribution have no marketing team, they only have a press speaker. How can that be happen, to be such a great distribution without that?
You may have to clarify this, not sure what you're on about how is this a "solution"
Without stupid endless discussions about slogans, colors, logos? Really interesting ;)
If you believe that marketing is a stupid activity then what pray tell are you doing on this list. The only stupid marketing discussions are the ones that are not had and only stupid marketing people are the ones who don't have the discussion.
Marketing is a fluid thing, demographics change constantly the best marketers have to constantly stay on top of that, corporations constantly change their image, it's part of marketing.
br gnokii
Cheers GL
Am Dienstag, den 17.08.2010, 23:19 +1200 schrieb Graham Lauder:
The principle job of marketing is to create "Brand Awareness", it could in fact be argued that it is it's only function and anything else that a marketing team does, goes back to that simple statement.
Brand awareness is driven by several factors
Visibility Attractiveness Ubiquitousness
Not sure that the last is even a proper word but it conveys the idea! :)
Visibility: A good brand has to catch the eye, rivet the attention create a desire to know more about it
Attractiveness: Once you have attention the good Brand has to be pleasing to the viewer such that it makes them want be associated with it.
Ubiquitousness: In other words the brand has to be seen on a regular basis especially where it has a good "fit". ie: there is going to be greater impact if it is seen on the front page of a technology publication than in "House & Garden's Bathroom edition"
Right now we are suboptimal on all fronts.
Our logo doesn't convey the right feelings and it's not particularly attractive either in style or in colour.
The two open source brands that have the highest awareness are Ubuntu and Firefox. It is not for no reason that the colours they use are ones that convey Warmth, vibrancy and reliability while at the same time demanding attention, Oranges Reds, Browns and Yellows. The colours are sexy and make the viewer feel good and excited. Green, does none of these things, green is a calming colour but doesn't immediately attract attention.
The things our branding needs to convey, especially at this point is excitement and passion but also reliability and friendliness and be attractive enough to seize the viewers attention and have them wanting to know more.
That's our problem right now, we are at the "New Brand" stage. Coca Cola for instance doesn't have that issue, their marketing is just about reminding, the same for MacDonalds. Ubuntu and firefox created a buzz around their brand by being attractive and warm and inviting and we need to do the same.
In my opinion we need to look at our branding elements from a fresh start. Ubuntu and Firefox branding were both started from scratch with a strong brand in mind, we seem to have drifted into ours without little branding consideration.Our brand is strong within the community, but it doesn't lend itself to creating a strong brand outside the community
So a couple of considerations:
- The name openSUSE is cumbersome and I believe a return to simply
SUSE would be a good first step. Novell has SUSE Enterprise and in fact from a branding perspective I preferred Novell Linux with the big red N
- The colour pallet does not grab attention and so that needs to be
rethought
- Geeko does not engage the viewer in any meaningful way except for
being familiar to the present community, he either needs rethinking or we go to an entirely different Logo.
- A branding competition, open to all comers, would be a newsworthy
event that would get us column inches and get the brand out there.
Remember that this not about what we as a community like, it's about how we get a better branding impression and thus increase brand awareness.
Cheers GL
On Tue, 2010-08-17 at 15:59 +0200, S.Kemter wrote:
Hello,
I could paste here a lot of companys like Dresdner Bank, Land Rover, Skoda, British Petroleum, 7up, Lacoste, Austin Martin, Starbucks and so on to negative ur theory about green as color for a product/company.
British Petroleum > awesome bomb.
But on the end its to much work, to remind u to be a little bit more carefully.
So I found another solution, we all know we are not alone in the world of the Linux distributions today have one of the oldest and surly they with the most users her 17th birthday.
And now the funny thing, this distribution have no marketing team, they only have a press speaker. How can that be happen, to be such a great distribution without that? Without stupid endless discussions about slogans, colors, logos? Really interesting ;)
Dangerous thing to say, specially in a globalization perspective. I quite understand you, but first there is the need of understanding what can Marketing trully do for you and abandon the general idea that marketing sells... Marketing doesn't sell! Marketing doesn't adverstise... Marketing only promotes value... and value is what you want to bring to your audience. So Marketing is needed... And in a way, you need Marketing Management and not open Marketing (which I strongly am against, because it doesn't bring nothing new and instead it gives people a wrong idea about Marketing, so far, it's only working for a few non-marketeers to promote themselfs as marketeers, and I will continue attacking it academically).
br gnokii
Am Dienstag, den 17.08.2010, 23:19 +1200 schrieb Graham Lauder:
The principle job of marketing is to create "Brand Awareness", it could in fact be argued that it is it's only function and anything else that a marketing team does, goes back to that simple statement.
Brand awareness is driven by several factors
Visibility Attractiveness Ubiquitousness
Not sure that the last is even a proper word but it conveys the idea! :)
Visibility: A good brand has to catch the eye, rivet the attention create a desire to know more about it
Attractiveness: Once you have attention the good Brand has to be pleasing to the viewer such that it makes them want be associated with it.
Ubiquitousness: In other words the brand has to be seen on a regular basis especially where it has a good "fit". ie: there is going to be greater impact if it is seen on the front page of a technology publication than in "House & Garden's Bathroom edition"
Right now we are suboptimal on all fronts.
Our logo doesn't convey the right feelings and it's not particularly attractive either in style or in colour.
The two open source brands that have the highest awareness are Ubuntu and Firefox. It is not for no reason that the colours they use are ones that convey Warmth, vibrancy and reliability while at the same time demanding attention, Oranges Reds, Browns and Yellows. The colours are sexy and make the viewer feel good and excited. Green, does none of these things, green is a calming colour but doesn't immediately attract attention.
The things our branding needs to convey, especially at this point is excitement and passion but also reliability and friendliness and be attractive enough to seize the viewers attention and have them wanting to know more.
That's our problem right now, we are at the "New Brand" stage. Coca Cola for instance doesn't have that issue, their marketing is just about reminding, the same for MacDonalds. Ubuntu and firefox created a buzz around their brand by being attractive and warm and inviting and we need to do the same.
In my opinion we need to look at our branding elements from a fresh start. Ubuntu and Firefox branding were both started from scratch with a strong brand in mind, we seem to have drifted into ours without little branding consideration.Our brand is strong within the community, but it doesn't lend itself to creating a strong brand outside the community
So a couple of considerations:
- The name openSUSE is cumbersome and I believe a return to simply SUSE
would be a good first step. Novell has SUSE Enterprise and in fact from a branding perspective I preferred Novell Linux with the big red N
The colour pallet does not grab attention and so that needs to be rethought
Geeko does not engage the viewer in any meaningful way except for being
familiar to the present community, he either needs rethinking or we go to an entirely different Logo.
- A branding competition, open to all comers, would be a newsworthy event
that would get us column inches and get the brand out there.
Remember that this not about what we as a community like, it's about how we get a better branding impression and thus increase brand awareness.
Cheers GL
-- Graham Lauder, OpenOffice.org MarCon (Marketing Contact) NZ http://marketing.openoffice.org/contacts.html
OpenOffice.org Migration and training Consultant.
Ambassador for OpenSUSE Linux on your Desktop
INGOTs Assessor Trainer (International Grades in Office Technologies) www.theingots.org.nz
On Tue, 2010-08-17 at 23:19 +1200, Graham Lauder wrote:
The principle job of marketing is to create "Brand Awareness", it could in fact be argued that it is it's only function and anything else that a marketing team does, goes back to that simple statement.
Brand awareness is driven by several factors
Visibility Attractiveness Ubiquitousness
Not sure that the last is even a proper word but it conveys the idea! :)
Visibility: A good brand has to catch the eye, rivet the attention create a desire to know more about it
Attractiveness: Once you have attention the good Brand has to be pleasing to the viewer such that it makes them want be associated with it.
Before all else, a brand is a promise! Where do you fit it there? Considering we're talking about software, we enter soon on the Service Marketing, which once more reinforces the brand as a promise and as one of the most important tokens to accomplish the goals, specially with fidelization, which is the key parameter on the service marketing.
Ubiquitousness: In other words the brand has to be seen on a regular basis especially where it has a good "fit". ie: there is going to be greater impact if it is seen on the front page of a technology publication than in "House & Garden's Bathroom edition"
Right now we are suboptimal on all fronts.
Our logo doesn't convey the right feelings and it's not particularly attractive either in style or in colour.
Once more, can supply some backup information which can take this from the 'assumptions' field and place it in the 'facts' field ?
The two open source brands that have the highest awareness are Ubuntu and Firefox. It is not for no reason that the colours they use are ones that convey Warmth, vibrancy and reliability while at the same time demanding attention, Oranges Reds, Browns and Yellows. The colours are sexy and make the viewer feel good and excited. Green, does none of these things, green is a calming colour but doesn't immediately attract attention.
Once more, I would actually request backup data on this. Green out of all non-metal colours is probably the most friendly one and the most well accepted one. Once more, provide data to support such claim.
The things our branding needs to convey, especially at this point is excitement and passion but also reliability and friendliness and be attractive enough to seize the viewers attention and have them wanting to know more.
Do we have data supporting it doesn't do that? Even the output of a tiny focus group will do... but aren't we making too much assumptions here ?
That's our problem right now, we are at the "New Brand" stage. Coca Cola for instance doesn't have that issue, their marketing is just about reminding, the same for MacDonalds. Ubuntu and firefox created a buzz around their brand by being attractive and warm and inviting and we need to do the same.
Your judgements are wrong... Coca Cola is an Umbrella brand, we aren't, neither Ubuntu, neither firefox. So why comparing onions with potatoes? What can we take out of it? _NOTHING_. Same applies to BMW, Audi (the most recognized worldwide brand) and others.
Firefox used their brand with a promise: we do it lighter... the light wave browser (or at least in the start), and then evolved. Their campaign wasn't based on a brand, but on diferentiation and positioning features towards other browsers.
Ubuntu used also a promise: "Linux for human beings", not based on their logo, which in my opinion is very far from being a good logo.
In my opinion we need to look at our branding elements from a fresh start. Ubuntu and Firefox branding were both started from scratch with a strong brand in mind, we seem to have drifted into ours without little branding consideration.Our brand is strong within the community, but it doesn't lend itself to creating a strong brand outside the community
That means breaking a bond with something that was approved by the community, back then, SuSE Linux. I'm still from the time of that process and I've followed it very close.
Do we have a support study from our current community about brand notoriety so that we can actually support the claim that we need rebranding ?
So a couple of considerations:
- The name openSUSE is cumbersome and I believe a return to simply SUSE
would be a good first step. Novell has SUSE Enterprise and in fact from a branding perspective I preferred Novell Linux with the big red N
Novell's SuSE Enterprise > Commercial Linux; openSUSE > Community Linux;
There is a big difference between them. 'open' is an identifier of a wider realm than just openSUSE. I like openSUSE... and in a way that 'open' can be considered a promise ;)
- The colour pallet does not grab attention and so that needs to be rethought
Backup data to support such claim. Qualitative study could be fun in our community. Starting a rebranding process without such data is unthinkable.
- Geeko does not engage the viewer in any meaningful way except for being
familiar to the present community, he either needs rethinking or we go to an entirely different Logo.
Geeko is nice... Geek-o. It was born from the very own community some years ago. It was praised by the community... It's a logo with a distinctive look and unique silhouette (unlike ubuntu)... it translates the state of mind of the community... it is attractive to our target audience (I don't know any Geeko haters).
Once more, backup data on notoriety of Geeko.
- A branding competition, open to all comers, would be a newsworthy event
that would get us column inches and get the brand out there.
Though I'm in favor of community engagement on this kind of initiative, and Geeko itself is a proof that the community can come with nice things.. engaging a re-branding process now can be harmfull. Remember that not so long ago, openSUSE community decided to make KDE it's flagship Desktop Environment... We should be focusing on solidifying this first before moving into areas where we can find strong opposition.
Remember that this not about what we as a community like, it's about how we get a better branding impression and thus increase brand awareness.
Without current data to support those claims and future data to evaluate and correct anything, I don't believe that the risk/benefit equation is very attractive.
But you can pretty much ignore my opinion as in a way I'm not a true n'blue opensuse member, instead just a lurker and a old school fan of SuSE.
Cheers GL
-- Graham Lauder, OpenOffice.org MarCon (Marketing Contact) NZ http://marketing.openoffice.org/contacts.html
OpenOffice.org Migration and training Consultant.
Ambassador for OpenSUSE Linux on your Desktop
INGOTs Assessor Trainer (International Grades in Office Technologies) www.theingots.org.nz
On Wednesday 18 Aug 2010 05:31:53 Nelson Marques wrote:
Hi Nelson, My apologies that this took so long to answer, other things demanded my attention and I wanted to give this reply the time it deserves.
On Tue, 2010-08-17 at 23:19 +1200, Graham Lauder wrote:
The principle job of marketing is to create "Brand Awareness", it could in fact be argued that it is it's only function and anything else that a marketing team does, goes back to that simple statement.
Brand awareness is driven by several factors
Visibility Attractiveness Ubiquitousness
<snip>
Before all else, a brand is a promise! Where do you fit it there?
I agree with the sentiment but possibly not the wording, however this is not what we are talking about.
Considering we're talking about software, we enter soon on the Service Marketing, which once more reinforces the brand as a promise and as one of the most important tokens to accomplish the goals, specially with fidelization, which is the key parameter on the service marketing.
What is fidelization, it is not a word in any dictionary I use...?
Anyway I'm not talking about the brand itself, what I'm talking about is /awareness/, that which makes a brand grab people's attention. What you say above is true and I agree that a brand should be driven by an organisations Vision and Mission statements, what I'm saying is that the visual identity of the brand: Logo, name, colour pallet and style, needs to be attention grabbing and attractive
<snip>
Right now we are suboptimal on all fronts.
Our logo doesn't convey the right feelings and it's not particularly attractive either in style or in colour.
Once more, can supply some backup information which can take this from the 'assumptions' field and place it in the 'facts' field ?
Now I will agree that the statement is a generalisation, but it is accurate within my proposed demographic. Green is a soft colour and is not highly visible, that's a fact. Hard colours: Red, Orange, Yellow are much more visible and attention grabbing, You are a marketing person so you should know this as a fact also.
The two open source brands that have the highest awareness are Ubuntu and Firefox. It is not for no reason that the colours they use are ones that convey Warmth, vibrancy and reliability while at the same time demanding attention, Oranges Reds, Browns and Yellows. The colours are sexy and make the viewer feel good and excited. Green, does none of these things, green is a calming colour but doesn't immediately attract attention.
Once more, I would actually request backup data on this. Green out of all non-metal colours is probably the most friendly one and the most well accepted one. Once more, provide data to support such claim.
Aha it seems I was wrong that you would know this. Very well:
http://www.ideamarketers.com/?Advertising,_marketing,_money&articleid=11... Read the last line of the article in particular
http://ezinearticles.com/?What-Color-is-Your-Marketing-and-What-is-It- Saying?&id=427686
http://www.precisionintermedia.com/color.html
and a million others, but remember it depends on the demographic of your target market. Now I made the above assertions because I know the target market I am aiming at. However at no point have you asked what that target market is and so therefore any argument you make has no basis.
The things our branding needs to convey, especially at this point is excitement and passion but also reliability and friendliness and be attractive enough to seize the viewers attention and have them wanting to know more.
Do we have data supporting it doesn't do that? Even the output of a tiny focus group will do... but aren't we making too much assumptions here ?
I have done some small research comparing the 11.3 packaging to the 11.1 packaging and the response in a group of IT professionals was 100% in favour of the lighter funky colours of the 11.3 packaging.
That's our problem right now, we are at the "New Brand" stage. Coca Cola for instance doesn't have that issue, their marketing is just about reminding, the same for MacDonalds. Ubuntu and firefox created a buzz around their brand by being attractive and warm and inviting and we need to do the same.
Your judgements are wrong... Coca Cola is an Umbrella brand, we aren't, neither Ubuntu, neither firefox. So why comparing onions with potatoes? What can we take out of it? _NOTHING_. Same applies to BMW, Audi (the most recognized worldwide brand) and others.
I am talking about brand recognition, brand awareness. What are you discussing. You've gone off on a complete tangent here, I was merely comparing the age of the brands in this para. Coca Cola and Maccas are OLD well established brands. Ours is relative to their age, very new.
Firefox used their brand with a promise: we do it lighter... the light wave browser (or at least in the start), and then evolved. Their campaign wasn't based on a brand, but on diferentiation and positioning features towards other browsers.
That's branding, their campaign was to raise BRAND AWARENESS, there was little about how good it was compared to the opposition, their most successful campaign was just about raising awareness.
<snip>
So a couple of considerations:
- The name openSUSE is cumbersome and I believe a return to simply
SUSE would be a good first step. Novell has SUSE Enterprise and in fact from a branding perspective I preferred Novell Linux with the big red N
Novell's SuSE Enterprise > Commercial Linux; openSUSE > Community Linux;
There is a big difference between them. 'open' is an identifier of a wider realm than just openSUSE. I like openSUSE... and in a way that 'open' can be considered a promise ;)
- The colour pallet does not grab attention and so that needs to be
rethought
Backup data to support such claim. Qualitative study could be fun in our community. Starting a rebranding process without such data is unthinkable.
Our pallet is green and grey, the last colours you would use to attract attention.
- Geeko does not engage the viewer in any meaningful way except for
being familiar to the present community, he either needs rethinking or we go to an entirely different Logo.
Geeko is nice... Geek-o. It was born from the very own community some years ago. It was praised by the community... It's a logo with a distinctive look and unique silhouette (unlike ubuntu)... it translates the state of mind of the community... it is attractive to our target audience (I don't know any Geeko haters).
Once more, backup data on notoriety of Geeko.
I tell you what, let's reverse that, give me data on how well known Geeko is known outside the Linux community. I haven't seen any to support it's retention. How well known is it in comparison to say the Novell Red "N"
I don't dislike Geeko, quite the opposite, as a mascot he rocks, but the representation as a logo is not the best it could be
- A branding competition, open to all comers, would be a newsworthy
event that would get us column inches and get the brand out there.
Though I'm in favor of community engagement on this kind of initiative, and Geeko itself is a proof that the community can come with nice things.. engaging a re-branding process now can be harmfull. Remember that not so long ago, openSUSE community decided to make KDE it's flagship Desktop Environment... We should be focusing on solidifying this first before moving into areas where we can find strong opposition.
Nice things are OK as they gather a wider audience. My experience in the market promoting and selling openSUSE tells me otherwise
Remember that this not about what we as a community like, it's about how we get a better branding impression and thus increase brand awareness.
Without current data to support those claims and future data to evaluate and correct anything, I don't believe that the risk/benefit equation is very attractive.
The only data that needs to be recognised is: We languish way below Windows and Ubuntu on the desktop and Debian, Redhat and Windows in the Server space. Part of all that is brand awareness, PART of it! There are other factors, one being the glacial rate of change in response to the market. We make MS look positively light on their feet! ;) and some negative associations.
Raising Brand awareness is one way of countering that and putting SUSE where it belongs in the market: at the top!
Cheers GL
On Wednesday 18 Aug 2010 05:31:53 Nelson Marques wrote:
<big snip>
Without current data to support those claims and future data to evaluate and correct anything, I don't believe that the risk/benefit equation is very attractive.
I've quoted a bit out of another of your posts because it has relevance to this discussion.
[quote]
I've found an article [1] which might be interesting for some. I can't really place much comments on it, but it seems quite interesting from my view and it does demonstrate pretty much the obvious.
[1] - http://linuxtrends.com/linux-distribution-popularity-trends/
[/quote]
I did some calculations on this using the linuxtrends search criteria and then married them up to some other numbers that have been thrown about by those who know, mainly Steve Ballmer and Distrowatch and at the same time making a couple of reasoned, but obviously arguable suppositions.
The first supposition was that Steve Balmer was correct when he said that Linux share was about the same as Apple's: about 3.6%.
Gartner at various times has claimed between 1.29% and 1.55%. The difference between Gartner and Ballmer however is within a reasonable margin of error, so I'm going with Steve. I'm also making the assumption that search reflects the install base.
Distrowatch gives our five sampled Distros around 55% of the total linux install (it's actually a little less but I only counted the top twelve distros. No big deal, we're after trends) then our Famous Five have around 1.98% of the total OS install market.
Now here's where it gets interesting. Given that we use the above assumptions to give us a rough guide to total install, then in 2005 SUSE share was just under 0.7%. and Ubuntu was a little under 0.5%
By 2010 the SuSE influence had plummeted to under 0.2% and Ubuntu had gone up to just under 1.3%
The trend is the important thing. The interesting comment made by Linuxtrends was that the spike in interest in SuSE happened around the time of the Novell take over, in other words at a point when there was a massive highly publicised rebranding.
It seems these stats support the argument for a rebranding as soon as we can reasonably manage it
But you can pretty much ignore my opinion as in a way I'm not a true n'blue opensuse member, instead just a lurker and a old school fan of SuSE.
I wouldn't be so rude as to do that, your opinion matters as much as anyone else's, including mine. Open Source decision making is (or should be) about consensus, to reach that consensus requires interchange of opinion. Sometimes, in FOSS communities, such discussions can get robust. The design of the OpenOffice.org website for instance required robust debate for months because there were many radical elements in the design, but consensus was reached and the results, given the brief, have been spectacular. One just has to be ready to be in for the long haul.
Change is obviously needed as the stats above show.
Cheers GL
On Tuesday 17 August 2010 13:19:23 Graham Lauder wrote:
The principle job of marketing is to create "Brand Awareness", it could in fact be argued that it is it's only function and anything else that a marketing team does, goes back to that simple statement.
<snip>
Remember that this not about what we as a community like, it's about how we get a better branding impression and thus increase brand awareness.
Your mail is too long, bullet points dude ;-)
Otherwise, it IS a good analysis, and I think it makes sense. But (here it is) if your idea is basically to change the look and feel of openSUSE, I think now is a bad time. First we need the conference and finish the strategy, then it might even come natural - 'new direction, new look'. You're just 3 months to early :D
Also note that we need a (open)SUSE foundation which owns the brand if we want to change our name to SUSE - it is trademarked by Novell.
Finally, I really think we've got to cover our bases before we venture in the bold lands of changing brands...
cheers, Jos
Cheers GL
On Monday 23 Aug 2010 10:16:26 Jos Poortvliet wrote:
On Tuesday 17 August 2010 13:19:23 Graham Lauder wrote:
The principle job of marketing is to create "Brand Awareness", it could in fact be argued that it is it's only function and anything else that a marketing team does, goes back to that simple statement.
<snip>
Remember that this not about what we as a community like, it's about how we get a better branding impression and thus increase brand awareness.
Your mail is too long, bullet points dude ;-)
Hah! a pox upon your modern 15 second sound bites. It is sad that we have lost the ability to communicate for longer than a TV ad break or 140 characters or however many the accursed twitter allows. :D
Otherwise, it IS a good analysis, and I think it makes sense. But (here it is) if your idea is basically to change the look and feel of openSUSE, I think now is a bad time. First we need the conference and finish the strategy, then it might even come natural - 'new direction, new look'. You're just 3 months to early :D
It is never too early to keep in touch with your market
Also note that we need a (open)SUSE foundation which owns the brand if we want to change our name to SUSE - it is trademarked by Novell.
Fair enough, then like anything we have to bring them onboard, make the case for change and make it so persuasive that they will see the rightness of it and back it too the hilt.
Finally, I really think we've got to cover our bases before we venture in the bold lands of changing brands...
Cover what bases. There are no bases to cover, we haven't got off home plate. The opposition has pitched, now, we can either smash the ball outta the park and make people notice us or drop the bat and scurry back and hide in the bunker to strategise some more.
Oh and I did an approval rating survey at a local LUG on the packaging of 11.3 vs 11.1. 100% in favour of the OpenSLX packaging. Well done them.
Cheers GL
On Tuesday 24 August 2010 00:32:01 Graham Lauder wrote:
On Monday 23 Aug 2010 10:16:26 Jos Poortvliet wrote:
On Tuesday 17 August 2010 13:19:23 Graham Lauder wrote:
The principle job of marketing is to create "Brand Awareness", it could in fact be argued that it is it's only function and anything else that a marketing team does, goes back to that simple statement.
<snip>
<snip>
Also note that we need a (open)SUSE foundation which owns the brand if we want to change our name to SUSE - it is trademarked by Novell.
Fair enough, then like anything we have to bring them onboard, make the case for change and make it so persuasive that they will see the rightness of it and back it too the hilt.
Don't count on that. SUSE is the corporate brand. It is owned by Novell and will continue to be. It is a strong brand and we're lucky to be allowed to connect to it through adding 'open' in front. Besides, I personally like the 'open' part. Name change - you can discuss as long as you want but that won't happen in the next 5 years. Sad (maybe) but true (absolutely).
Finally, I really think we've got to cover our bases before we venture in the bold lands of changing brands...
Cover what bases. There are no bases to cover, we haven't got off home plate.
I mean - get the strategy discussion done. Get marketing materials. Get regular news on news.opensuse.org (besides the great weekly news). Get the ambassador program running. Etc etc etc. No matter how important a brand is, ours might not be super but it IS well known and recognizable and has a cute geeko. Frankly, priority should be on getting work done like the things I mentioned - they make much more difference. At some future point we might revisit this question but now it is just mail mail mail - but no result. Not your fault but that's how the circumstances make it.
Besides, something like this - needs years of preparing. And won't start by mail or IRC - it's too complicated for that. It needs high bandwith communication. In other words, a real life meeting.
The opposition has pitched, now, we can either smash the ball outta the park and make people notice us or drop the bat and scurry back and hide in the bunker to strategise some more.
Oh and I did an approval rating survey at a local LUG on the packaging of 11.3 vs 11.1. 100% in favour of the OpenSLX packaging. Well done them.
Yep, OpenSLX puts in a lot of work.
Cheers GL
Don't count on that. SUSE is the corporate brand. It is owned by Novell and will continue to be. It is a strong brand and we're lucky to be allowed to connect to it through adding 'open' in front. Besides, I personally like the 'open' part. Name change - you can discuss as long as you want but that won't happen in the next 5 years. Sad (maybe) but true (absolutely).
Frankly I couldn't agree more and I'm relieved to hear this - I'm still getting used to not spelling it SuSE... people don't like change and I think rebranding would waste a heck of a lot of energy and actually be counterproductive in the short term. Ubuntu hasn't been rebranded, just had a makeover.
I mean - get the strategy discussion done. Get marketing materials. Get regular news on news.opensuse.org (besides the great weekly news). Get the ambassador program running. Etc etc etc. No matter how important a brand is, ours might not be super but it IS well known and recognizable and has a cute geeko. Frankly, priority should be on getting work done like the things I mentioned - they make much more difference.
Absolutely. I'm an artist, and I nearly 'missed out' on the experience of openSUSE as I thought it was a business product. But with a free disk on Linux Format magazine I tried it out, wrestled with wireless and liked what I found. I've joined the artwork groups and hope to work on and help develop the 'creative side' of openSUSE along with some less bland merchandise.
best
Helen
On Tuesday 31 August 2010 00:30:02 Helen wrote:
Don't count on that. SUSE is the corporate brand. It is owned by Novell and will continue to be. It is a strong brand and we're lucky to be allowed to connect to it through adding 'open' in front. Besides, I personally like the 'open' part. Name change - you can discuss as long as you want but that won't happen in the next 5 years. Sad (maybe) but true (absolutely).
Frankly I couldn't agree more and I'm relieved to hear this - I'm still getting used to not spelling it SuSE... people don't like change and I think rebranding would waste a heck of a lot of energy and actually be counterproductive in the short term. Ubuntu hasn't been rebranded, just had a makeover.
I mean - get the strategy discussion done. Get marketing materials. Get regular news on news.opensuse.org (besides the great weekly news). Get the ambassador program running. Etc etc etc. No matter how important a brand is, ours might not be super but it IS well known and recognizable and has a cute geeko. Frankly, priority should be on getting work done like the things I mentioned - they make much more difference.
Absolutely. I'm an artist, and I nearly 'missed out' on the experience of openSUSE as I thought it was a business product. But with a free disk on Linux Format magazine I tried it out, wrestled with wireless and liked what I found. I've joined the artwork groups and hope to work on and help develop the 'creative side' of openSUSE along with some less bland merchandise.
Now THAT is the kind of testimony I love to hear ;-) Welcome (again) Helen, we sure can use nice artwork. If you lack ideas, ask on this or the artwork list. In general, however, picking up something because you think it would be good if it was done (and because it seems fun) is just great. After all - being pro-active is what keeps us moving. Anyone talking such efforts down will have to answer to me - I have a bunch of Voodoo dolls here to make sure they won't do it again ;-)
best
Helen
-
Graham Lauder -
Helen -
Jean-Daniel Dodin -
Jos Poortvliet -
Nelson Marques -
S.Kemter