Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <4E1C3EDB.1060808@apache.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 14:32:27 +0200
From: Kai Ahrens <kahrens@apache.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110516 Lightning/1.0b2
 OracleBeehiveExtension/1.0.0.2-OracleInternal
 ObetStats/CATCAFCAFCAFCAF_1290427482410-758826575 Thunderbird/3.1.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
CC: "Marcus (OOo)" <marcus.mail@wtnet.de>
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>
 <4E1C3D35.3050204@wtnet.de>
In-Reply-To: <4E1C3D35.3050204@wtnet.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Am 12.07.2011 14:25, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
> 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. ;-)

Of course it makes a difference to ask our users instead of asking some
deeply involved people on this list, having very subjective interests in
one or the other direction.

And in the end, the user rules, not any marketing speech.

- Kai