You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to marketing@openoffice.apache.org by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> on 2011/10/26 21:06:26 UTC
Branding of the 3.4 release
I'm moving this conversation over from ooo-dev, since it is a great
fit for the new ooo-marketing list.
It may not be evident from the digressive threads on ooo-dev, but we
are making good progress on the 3.4 release. From what I've heard, we
could have an build that we can start testing in November, on Windows,
Mac and Linux.
One of the things we need to figure out for the 3.4 release is how we
brand the product. Name and logo.
As most of you know, Oracle had the registered trademark for
"OpenOffice.org" as well as the logo trademark. These now belong to
Apache.
However, we cannot continue calling the product "OpenOffice.org"
because that does not comply with Apache branding requirements [1].
Apache products must be called "Apache X" (for some value of X).
So possible names are:
a) Apache OpenOffice.org
b) Apache OpenOffice
c) Apache Office
d) Apache <fill in the blank>
Could we resolve this question, hopefully without excess bloodshed,
within the next 6 weeks? I think we need to resolve it that quickly
in order to get the new branding applied to the 3.4 release.
Also, if at all possible, could we have an initial discussion on "how"
we will decide this? What techniques, what data, what form of
argument or analysis will be persuasive to us and lead to the best
results? It won't help at all (I fear) if we just all respond with
our preferred name based or anecdotal evidence. That probably will
not lead us to consensus.
In any case, welcome to the ooo-marketing list. Enjoy!
Regards,
-Rob
[1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs.html
Re: Branding of the 3.4 release
Posted by richard clary <r....@gmail.com>.
Apache (x) = Induction(s)
Causal inference: A causal inference draws a conclusion about a causal
connection based on the conditions of the occurrence of an effect.
Premises about the correlation of two things can indicate a causal
relationship between them, but additional factors must be confirmed to
establish the exact form of Strong induction. The equation "the
gravitational force between two objects equals the gravitational
constant times the product of the masses divided by the distance
between them squared," has allowed us to describe the rate of fall of
all objects we have observed.
Therefore: The gravitational force between two objects equals the
gravitational constant times the product of the masses divided by the
distance between them squared.
The conclusion of this argument is not absolutely certain, even given
the premise. At speeds we normally experience, Newtonian mechanics
holds quite well. But at speeds approaching that of light, the
Newtonian system is not accurate and the conclusion in that case would
be false. However, since, in most cases that we experience, the
premise as stated would usually lead to the conclusion given, we are
logical in calling this argument an instance of strong induction.
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'm moving this conversation over from ooo-dev, since it is a great
> fit for the new ooo-marketing list.
>
> It may not be evident from the digressive threads on ooo-dev, but we
> are making good progress on the 3.4 release. From what I've heard, we
> could have an build that we can start testing in November, on Windows,
> Mac and Linux.
>
> One of the things we need to figure out for the 3.4 release is how we
> brand the product. Name and logo.
>
> As most of you know, Oracle had the registered trademark for
> "OpenOffice.org" as well as the logo trademark. These now belong to
> Apache.
>
> However, we cannot continue calling the product "OpenOffice.org"
> because that does not comply with Apache branding requirements [1].
> Apache products must be called "Apache X" (for some value of X).
>
> So possible names are:
>
> a) Apache OpenOffice.org
>
> b) Apache OpenOffice
>
> c) Apache Office
>
> d) Apache <fill in the blank>
>
> Could we resolve this question, hopefully without excess bloodshed,
> within the next 6 weeks? I think we need to resolve it that quickly
> in order to get the new branding applied to the 3.4 release.
>
> Also, if at all possible, could we have an initial discussion on "how"
> we will decide this? What techniques, what data, what form of
> argument or analysis will be persuasive to us and lead to the best
> results? It won't help at all (I fear) if we just all respond with
> our preferred name based or anecdotal evidence. That probably will
> not lead us to consensus.
>
> In any case, welcome to the ooo-marketing list. Enjoy!
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
> [1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs.html
>
--
Richard (Rrickey) Clary
Sr. Analyst Product Introduction (Retired)
Re: Branding of the 3.4 release
Posted by Donald Harbison <dp...@gmail.com>.
Terry,
I see you cast your vote for Apache Open Office, (c), and not (b) Apache
OpenOffice. This appears to contradict your statement here. If you wish to
vote again, you may do so and make any adjustments you see fit before the
ballot closes on Wednesday. FWIW, I think you state the obvious below. We
need pragmatic leadership at this point on this point to improve market
momentum.
/don
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 8:15 PM, Terry <te...@yahoo.com.au>wrote:
> It seems to me that there is no mystery about the name. 'OpenOffice' is a
> familiar term. 'OpenOffice.org' was used only in public writing and then
> only because another entity owned the term 'OpenOffice'. There is no
> longer a need to use '.org' because any generic term used to describe the
> software will be coupled with 'Apache'.
>
> The term 'openoffice.org' could be used as a keyword on web pages. Any
> reference to 'Apache Office' or 'Apache OpenOffice' can be accompanied by a
> reference to the origin of the software as 'OpenOffice.org'. After a few
> years, such accompaniment may no longer be required.
>
> Regarding the choice between 'Apache Office' and 'Apache OpenOffice', I
> know from years spent visiting forums and mailing lists that people
> commonly refer to the software as 'OpenOffice'. The use of that term in
> conjunction with 'Apache' identifies the software for many people.
>
> Terry
>
>
> >________________________________
> >From: Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
> >To: ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org
> >Sent: Thursday, 27 October 2011 6:06 AM
> >Subject: Branding of the 3.4 release
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >One of the things we need to figure out for the 3.4 release is how we
> >brand the product. Name and logo.
> >
> >As most of you know, Oracle had the registered trademark for
> >"OpenOffice.org" as well as the logo trademark. These now belong to
> >Apache.
> >
> >However, we cannot continue calling the product "OpenOffice.org"
> >because that does not comply with Apache branding requirements [1].
> >Apache products must be called "Apache X" (for some value of X).
> >
> >So possible names are:
> >
> >a) Apache OpenOffice.org
> >
> >b) Apache OpenOffice
> >
> >c) Apache Office
> >
> >d) Apache <fill in the blank>
> >
> >Could we resolve this question, hopefully without excess bloodshed,
> >within the next 6 weeks? I think we need to resolve it that quickly
> >in order to get the new branding applied to the 3.4 release.
> >
> >Also, if at all possible, could we have an initial discussion on "how"
> >we will decide this? What techniques, what data, what form of
> >argument or analysis will be persuasive to us and lead to the best
> >results? It won't help at all (I fear) if we just all respond with
> >our preferred name based or anecdotal evidence. That probably will
> >not lead us to consensus.
> >
> >In any case, welcome to the ooo-marketing list. Enjoy!
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >-Rob
> >
> >[1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs.html
> >
> >
> >
>
Re: Branding of the 3.4 release
Posted by Terry <te...@yahoo.com.au>.
It seems to me that there is no mystery about the name. 'OpenOffice' is a familiar term. 'OpenOffice.org' was used only in public writing and then only because another entity owned the term 'OpenOffice'. There is no longer a need to use '.org' because any generic term used to describe the software will be coupled with 'Apache'.
The term 'openoffice.org' could be used as a keyword on web pages. Any reference to 'Apache Office' or 'Apache OpenOffice' can be accompanied by a reference to the origin of the software as 'OpenOffice.org'. After a few years, such accompaniment may no longer be required.
Regarding the choice between 'Apache Office' and 'Apache OpenOffice', I know from years spent visiting forums and mailing lists that people commonly refer to the software as 'OpenOffice'. The use of that term in conjunction with 'Apache' identifies the software for many people.
Terry
>________________________________
>From: Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>To: ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org
>Sent: Thursday, 27 October 2011 6:06 AM
>Subject: Branding of the 3.4 release
>
><snip>
>
>One of the things we need to figure out for the 3.4 release is how we
>brand the product. Name and logo.
>
>As most of you know, Oracle had the registered trademark for
>"OpenOffice.org" as well as the logo trademark. These now belong to
>Apache.
>
>However, we cannot continue calling the product "OpenOffice.org"
>because that does not comply with Apache branding requirements [1].
>Apache products must be called "Apache X" (for some value of X).
>
>So possible names are:
>
>a) Apache OpenOffice.org
>
>b) Apache OpenOffice
>
>c) Apache Office
>
>d) Apache <fill in the blank>
>
>Could we resolve this question, hopefully without excess bloodshed,
>within the next 6 weeks? I think we need to resolve it that quickly
>in order to get the new branding applied to the 3.4 release.
>
>Also, if at all possible, could we have an initial discussion on "how"
>we will decide this? What techniques, what data, what form of
>argument or analysis will be persuasive to us and lead to the best
>results? It won't help at all (I fear) if we just all respond with
>our preferred name based or anecdotal evidence. That probably will
>not lead us to consensus.
>
>In any case, welcome to the ooo-marketing list. Enjoy!
>
>Regards,
>
>-Rob
>
>[1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs.html
>
>
>