Where is Linux brand presence?

[Dalani]

It has always astonished me how after all these years in hearing about the eminent Linux desktop revolution just around the corner and Linux server market dominace, that as of yet there is virtually no LINUX BRANDING antywhere in mainstream media including sponsorship ads at international Soccer games, hockey and other sport events.

Where is that Linux Penguin? Why hasn't orgs like the free software foundation pooled moneys together to buy ad space in mainstream media?

[bigtomrodney]

Right now Linux is making lots of progress without any of that type of coercion. It does it through its reputation for being solid and secure. With that said, there is plenty of corporate support and branding. Dell are selling Ubuntu PCs, HP are/have shipped SUSE and Ubuntu PCs, IBM have even made a great video commercial.

To be fair, your average user couldn't even handle a Windows install so forget about mixing a new operating system into that whether its Linux, BSD, Mac or anything else. The appearance of OEM installed Linux is the drive, get that out there and you'll see the branding.

[Kieren]

It's very similar to Google. Have you ever seen a Google advert? Probably not. People do normally say 'Google' rather than 'search' though and most people use their search engine. Just because advertising hasn't been used as it's marketing technique doesn't mean that none are being used

You suggest why not use sporting events too but do Microsoft or Apple use this for their operating systems? I'm not a watcher of sports but from what I've noticed they tend to advertise things like Xbox but not an OS.

[Dalani]

Linux due to its fragmented distribution has not had the focused branding of Apple and Microsoft.

@bigtomrodney: Microsoft and Apple have advertised in mainstream media over DECADES. I remember seeing Apple IIe adverts in printed large circulation mags like Omni et al.

Now both Apple and MS enjoy a form of advertising that is free and ubiquitous: PRESS RELEASES: every time Apple sneezes the world knows through the news channel. If Linux could enjoy the same level of exposure then it would gain wide acceptance.

As for Google, think again they've become so omnipresent, they don't need to advertise (they beat out Apple and MS by being on over 99% of desktops-I mean who with a desktop doesn't use Google?).

A better comparison would be Cisco or IBM who don't sell to consumers yet they are known brands. If Cisco launched a consumer product tommorow, everyone would know about and the press releases would show up in print.

[techieMoe]

Linux due to its fragmented distribution has not had the focused branding of Apple and Microsoft.
...

Now both Apple and MS enjoy a form of advertising that is free and ubiquitous: PRESS RELEASES: every time Apple sneezes the world knows through the news channel. If Linux could enjoy the same level of exposure then it would gain wide acceptance.

Linux is not a company. Apple and Microsoft are for-profit corporations. It benefits them monetarily to run ads. The Linux OS has no one commercial entity, nor is it motivated by profit on the whole. If that means Linux will never have as "wide acceptance" as Windows or Mac, I for one am perfectly okay with that.

[GNU-Fan]

There is The Linux Foundation, which has the point "Promoting Linux" on its list.
A few GNU/Linux distributors exist which actually do some active advertising, namely Suse (Novell), Canonical and RedHat.

But the advertising is still very limited. My theory is that nobody really wants to reach that kind of people that would only learn about Linux when it's in the mainstream media. No company wants to have millions of angry customers to call their support line because their "computer doesn't work". It's just too much hassle for the money.

Business clients are a lot easier to support. You can make long term support contracts with them with fixed details about what to support. This gives you a more constant stream of income and there are less of them to take care of.

[Dalani]

I understand Linux is not a company per se, but neverthless it is a brand and brandname that is recognizable in the IT world- like John Deere, Cisco, IBM, Lucent, Unix etc...and some even non-profs like WWF and UNICEF are also brands in their own right by virtue of being recognizable and as such part of culture.

My point is that since the collection of Linux distros were always and continue to be potentially viable alternatives to MS and OSx why shouldn't they pool their ad dollars together with OSF to push Linux more into the mainstream consciousness. Ive always seen Linux as a mark of OS quality. I think if the non-It public at large knew the brand they might be more open to choices.

[Dalani]

There is The Linux Foundation, which has the point "Promoting Linux" on its list.
A few GNU/Linux distributors exist which actually do some active advertising, namely Suse (Novell), Canonical and RedHat.

But the advertising is still very limited. My theory is that nobody really wants to reach that kind of people that would only learn about Linux when it's in the mainstream media. No company wants to have millions of angry customers to call their support line because their "computer doesn't work". It's just too much hassle for the money.

Business clients are a lot easier to support. You can make long term support contracts with them with fixed details about what to support. This gives you a more constant stream of income and there are less of them to take care of.

Advertising isn't just to get more sales or sell to more customers. It's also branding to differentiate from competitors and have what's called market presence. Linux isn't like Mac or MS. Linux is Linux. John Deere advertises, not to sell you a farm tractor, but so that when you think tractor you think John Deere.

In a nutshell: When I think server or inexpensive web browser for a library what should come to mind? You know the answer but how would I if never heard of Linux.

[Lakshmipathi]

It's very similar to Google. Have you ever seen a Google advert? Probably not. People do normally say 'Google' rather than 'search' though

Yes you are right,Kieren how often we hear the term "go and google it" , instead of "go and search it". Recently Yahoo launched a massive ads campaign "It's You " Yahoo Buys Full Page Front Page Ad In Times Of India - washingtonpost.com
Almost everyday,I can see yahoo ads on TV.I know most people use google more than yahoo.

In a nutshell: When I think server or inexpensive web browser for a library what should come to mind? You know the answer but how would I if never heard of Linux.

Dalani,In these 4 years , whereever I went (I mean - moving to different client projects ) Server means _Linux_ . To be honest ,I have never seen M$ server in these 4 yrs.I heard client want to migrate their project from M$ or other *NIX to Linux .
Regarding Linux Desktop for users ,companies are started to introduce them. (Right now,I'm typing this from Ubuntu Desktop from work place). There are few (really few ) Linux desktop (but plenty of linux servers ) around me.I'm sure ,if the management realizes the usefulness of Linux Desktop,Linux will rule the IT space

[Dalani]

Like I said

When I think server or inexpensive web browser for a library what should come to mind? You know the answer but how would I if never heard of Linux.

Most public librairies and many schools still use old MS PC for conventional web browsing and educational use. IF Im head librarian and never heard of Linux and need to upgrade and MS is always in my face....