Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of marcus.mail@wtnet.de designates
 213.209.103.7 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <4E1C3D35.3050204@wtnet.de>
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 14:25:25 +0200
From: "Marcus (OOo)" <marcus.mail@wtnet.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); de;
 rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Thunderbird/3.1.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: OpenOffice.org (was Re: Ooo blog)
References: <B3EE6990-2D6C-47C6-85CF-9940E4AFFCEF@gmail.com>
	<D67A5FEA-8E60-4DB1-AB3F-F82ACFA04018@comcast.net>
	<B1AA907C-DE95-431C-97F6-D85CEF954645@free.fr>	<4E182995.20203@btconnect.com>
	<1310382401.23340.203.camel@linux-krcc.site>	<4E1AE1D5.9000709@khmeros.info>
	<20110711172123.GA11666@daniel3.local>
	<1310461169.2068.97.camel@linux-krcc.site>
 <CAP-ksoiyfWKW6Lck93nknNd5HTZ6XEhje1hGVEXsXS1Mto4f-Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAP-ksoiyfWKW6Lck93nknNd5HTZ6XEhje1hGVEXsXS1Mto4f-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Am 07/12/2011 01:41 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 4:59 AM, Graham Lauder<yorick_@openoffice.org>  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. ;-)

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