On 05/15/2009 07:14 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 05/15/2009 10:36 AM, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
> I would like to object to the image of Fedora merely being "an
> alternative", especially in the context of being an alternative to
> Microsoft Windows. If anything, Microsoft Windows is a very sad (or
> humorous) alternative to Linux.
Well, the point of describing it that way is the end users don't
necessarily understand the idea of an operating system but most people
would know what Windows is. By describing it as a alternative, you get
the basic idea across. Try explaining to a non technical person, what
I hear you. I do not necessarily think the description needing an update
is wrong, I just wanted to emphasize that positioning Fedora as an
alternative to Microsoft Windows is the wrong way to go in my opinion.
Most users actually don't know what Windows is either. They just know
they have Foo here, and thus want Foo there. From that perspective, it's
almost like the Apple community; once you're hooked, you're hooked,
whether you know what it is or how it works doesn't matter.
Then there's those that do look a little further and those probably do
know what an operating system is -although they might not (yet) realize
that Operating System > Microsoft Windows.
Regardless, previous two paragraphs barely add to the discussion ;-)
I think the Fedora Project is stronger in it's advocacy, then it is in
user-perspective expectation management. I also think the Fedora Project
is stronger in it's development edge/focus, thriving Free Software
innovation by early adoption and being a platform (often? most?) used by
upstream developers, yada yada, blabla, <insert other things here>, then
it is in spreading Linux out there.
That being said, of course it doesn't mean we shouldn't attempt to
improve that situation and what I'm saying is I don't think the angle we
should take at that is by positioning Fedora as an alternative to
Jeroen van Meeuwen