Ubuntu, SUSE, Fedora Linux updates prepped as Win7 release nears

[Sean DALY]

thanks Larry for that

to be clear, I do agree that the ZDNet piece was poorly written.
Contrast with http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2009/10/22/win7_launch/
which from the same information provides more meaningful analysis...

In my view, open source as a reporter's beat is past its prime. A few
short years ago, many large IT shops needed explanations due to their
dependence on the monoculture. I don't think that's the case anymore;
FLOSS has found its place in most areas of computing (desktop OSes
being a notable exception). After all, there is no "proprietary
software" beat, but organization by vertical market or technical
class. I myself am much more focused on the K-6 education vertical
market, and tend to want to see things through that prism; pundits in
that area compare FLOSS to proprietary all the time.

For good coverage of FLOSS, ars technica has a well-deserved
reputation, their analysis is based on actual reviews such as this
one: http://arstechnica.com/open-source/reviews/2009/10/ars-takes-a-first-look-under-the-hood-of-fedora-12.ars

Sean


On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 2:27 AM, Larry Cafiero <larry.cafiero at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Sean DALY <sdaly.be at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, I agree that it's a good idea to set the record straight.
>> However, there is an ugly truth: the wider the coverage of anything,
>> the more errors there are... responding to them turns into
>> whack-a-mole.
>
> Heh. I think that an exaggeration, but it can turn into that when not done
> properly.
>
>>
>> To combat that, what's necessary is to go beyond error-correction to
>> influencing perceptions widely. When perceptions are positive enough,
>> Fedora users will whack the moles themselves, and clueless
>> commentators will educate themselves or lose credibility.
>>
>> A key way to influence perceptions is to cultivate journalists. Nobody
>> likes to admit they made a mistake. Journalists get called clueless
>> and worse every day of the week, like everyone they generally accept
>> constructive criticism though. In this connection, Bob's comment was
>> exemplary: he politely set the record straight.
>
> Bob's comment was exemplary, as were others. I'm not so quick to give this
> pair a pass on this one. In this case, you have ZDNet's Linux and Open
> Source bloggers -- a pair who SHOULD know that release cycles of the distros
> in question are roughly six months ("roughly" because OpenSUSE's is not
> exactly six; nine, I think, but that's close enough) -- writing something
> that, essentially, is false and worse, it's arguably slanted toward
> Microsoft.
>
> Again, these two writers are the <steps_back_for_emphasis>LINUX AND OPEN
> SOURCE REPORTERS for ZDNet</steps_back_for_emphasis>. If they don't know
> that the larger distros -- Ubuntu especially, with their x.04/x.10 naming
> convention -- have a six-month cycle, then they really have no business
> covering Linux and Open Source for one of the largest, if not the largest,
> Web-based tech news portal.
>
>>
>> What I'm saying is, make changing perceptions part of the plan.
>> Although the media usually wish to present accurate information, what
>> they really want is accurate information which is also timely,
>> interesting, and topical. This is where press releases can play a
>> major role. Many journalists with 4 stories to file in the day will be
>> happy to quickly adapt a well-written release and put it up.
>
> Having been a newspaper editor for 32 years (which is what I do when I'm not
> promoting Fedora), you are right about the workload. More times than not,
> journalists appreciate being set straight when they're wrong, but more
> importantly they are immensely grateful for getting accurate and
> well-written information that they can glean (if not outright copy) for
> their stories.
>
>>
>> When that
>> happens, you've made news, not reacted to it. Over time, awareness
>> rises within influencers, and next thing you know, most of them will
>> be able to write from memory that there are two Fedora releases per
>> year for example. Or whatever branding message you wish to spread -
>> that Fedora is high-quality, installs easily, etc.
>
> This is true. But again, I would think anyone who had been covering Linux
> and Open Source for any length of time should know that release cycles for
> Ubuntu and Fedora have always been six months.
>
>>
>> Journalists know that Windows 7 is make-or-break for Microsoft; just
>> look how MS is taking risks they haven't before such as selling PCs
>> for the first time ever and painting all their national websites
>> green.
>
> I hope. Again many reporters in the mainstream media are happy to be
> spoon-fed whatever Microsoft provides them, so we should be vigilant about
> this.
>
>> The WinXP -> Win7 upgrade path is wipe and install... the same
>> as most WinXP -> GNU/Linux installs. So journalists know that now is
>> perhaps a better time than ever to talk about alternatives. When
>> Constantine launch time comes, perhaps a talking point to consider
>> beyond the great features is how upgrading to Fedora can be a better
>> choice than upgrading to Windows 7.
>
> That would be great. Is there anything on the drawing board?
>
> Larry Cafiero
>
> --
> Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
> Fedora-marketing-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
>