Canonical confirms MSI's high return rate claim
Erik Funkenbusch
"Unclear selling is happening, typically online. The customer will get
their netbook sent to their home and they imagine to find something like a
Microsoft desktop, but they see a brown Ubuntu version. They are unwilling
to learn it and they were expecting to have Windows. We said a long time
ago, we didn't want to make a Windows clone. It has a different interface
especially with the Ubuntu Netbook Remix. We think it's a better way but
it's not the same way people are used to. That unfamiliarity can take a
while to learn and there is an education that has to be stressed."
Moshe Goldfarb.
Get ready for the Linux loons to attempt to use some Jebidiah like argument
to spin it their way.
Something like: What do we really mean by *return*.
Or
Don't many people wipe Windows and install Linux?
etc....
Facts and statements from credible sources seem to give them fits.
--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
Please Visit www.linsux.org
Chris Ahlstrom
this bit o' wisdom:
Makes sense to me. That's why the seller must be very clear about their
product's features. People can be incredibly blind when they make
purchases.
--
There's a thrill in store for all for we're about to toast
The corporation that we represent.
We're here to cheer each pioneer and also proudly boast,
Of that man of men our sterling president
The name of T. J. Watson means
A courage none can stem
And we feel honored to be here to toast the IBM.
-- Ever Onward, from the 1940 IBM Songbook
Firey Bird
> On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 17:57:42 -0400, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
>>
http://osnews.com/story/20362/Canonical_Confirms_MSI_s_Linux_Return_Rate_Statement
>>
>> "Unclear selling is happening, typically online. The customer will get
>> their netbook sent to their home and they imagine to find something like
>> a Microsoft desktop, but they see a brown Ubuntu version. They are
>> unwilling to learn it and they were expecting to have Windows. We said a
>> long time ago, we didn't want to make a Windows clone. It has a different
>> interface especially with the Ubuntu Netbook Remix. We think it's a
>> better way but it's not the same way people are used to. That
>> unfamiliarity can take a while to learn and there is an education that
>> has to be stressed."
>
> Get ready for the Linux loons to attempt to use some Jebidiah like
> argument to spin it their way.
>
> Something like: What do we really mean by *return*.
> Or
> Don't many people wipe Windows and install Linux?
> etc....
>
> Facts and statements from credible sources seem to give them fits.
I don't see anything damaging to linux in this story. It addresses poor
advertising/inability to read.
Richard Rasker
Well, actually, I think that poor advertising *is* damaging to Linux -- or
any product, for that matter. This higher-than-average return rate isn't
exactly good for Linux, no matter how you look at it.
I think that advertizing and marketing leave quite a bit to be desired when
it comes to Linux. OK, "marketing" is sort of a dirty word -- especially
among techies, who wince at the idea of spending billions to foist
half-baked crapware upon the unsuspecting masses like Microsoft does.
And OK, Linux has come a long way on technical merit and word-of-mouth among
said techies; I guess that's why it's hugely popular in datacenters,
supercomputing, networking, embedded devices, and other "hidden" (from the
general public) applications.
But to become a regular choice for Joe Sixpack's desktop, mr. Sixpack must
at least have a fair idea what it's all about, and -- most importantly --
that it is /not/ Windows. In this area, Linux could do with a bit of
marketing to instill name awareness into the greater audience in general
and IT retail in particular.
The big question of course is where the money should come from.
I've been thinking about offering preinstalled Linux pc's and laptops for
quite a while -- I have good connections with several smaller computer
shops and two larger outfits, and especially the smaller businesses were
(and still are) quite interested. But for this to succeed, I know I have to
invest time, effort and money into creating marketing material (folders)
and a small printed manual to help people on their way with the most
important settings (networking, screen, printer) and applications (Firefox,
OpenOffice etcetera). Even with connections in the world of printing and
advertizing the cost for a small, local campaign is some 4,000 euros
($5,500); with just a few dozen euros return per machine sold, it's a risky
and costly endeavour -- as any endeavour outside trodden paths. So far, I
haven't had the courage to take this step :-(
Anyway, we have the Linux Mark Institute. Perhaps the time has come to
establish a Linux Marketing Institute as well?
Richard Rasker
--
http://www.linetec.nl
Phil Da Lick!
Why don;t you take this to alt.windowsshills.circle-jerking?
Only the wintrolls care about this shit here.
Chris Ahlstrom
this bit o' wisdom:
> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 17:57:42 -0400, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>>>
> http://osnews.com/story/20362/Canonical_Confirms_MSI_s_Linux_Return_Rate_Statement
>>
>> Get ready for the Linux loons to attempt to use some Jebidiah like
>> argument to spin it their way.
>>
>> Something like: What do we really mean by *return*.
>> Or
>> Don't many people wipe Windows and install Linux?
>> etc....
>>
>> Facts and statements from credible sources seem to give them fits.
>
> I don't see anything damaging to linux in this story. It addresses poor
> advertising/inability to read.
And as if Moshe isn't spinning and pulling "facts" out of his ass.
--
Jenkinson's Law:
It won't work.
Chris Ahlstrom
this bit o' wisdom:
> But to become a regular choice for Joe Sixpack's desktop, mr. Sixpack must
> at least have a fair idea what it's all about, and -- most importantly --
> that it is /not/ Windows. In this area, Linux could do with a bit of
> marketing to instill name awareness into the greater audience in general
> and IT retail in particular.
True. But how much headway can you make against a user that is put off
by a different *color scheme*?
> Anyway, we have the Linux Mark Institute. Perhaps the time has come to
> establish a Linux Marketing Institute as well?
I thought they already existed. Including Canoncical.
cc
<phil_the_l...@spammerskissmyarse.hotmail.com> wrote:
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >http://osnews.com/story/20362/Canonical_Confirms_MSI_s_Linux_Return_R...
>
> > "Unclear selling is happening, typically online. The customer will get
> > their netbook sent to their home and they imagine to find something like a
> > Microsoft desktop, but they see a brown Ubuntu version. They are unwilling
> > to learn it and they were expecting to have Windows. We said a long time
> > ago, we didn't want to make a Windows clone. It has a different interface
> > especially with the Ubuntu Netbook Remix. We think it's a better way but
> > it's not the same way people are used to. That unfamiliarity can take a
> > while to learn and there is an education that has to be stressed."
>
> Why don;t you take this to alt.windowsshills.circle-jerking?
>
> Only the wintrolls care about this shit here.
Wintrolls like Chris Ahlstrom and Richard Rasker?
Chris Ahlstrom
this bit o' wisdom:
> On Oct 8, 7:54 am, "Phil Da Lick!"
> <phil_the_l...@spammerskissmyarse.hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> >http://osnews.com/story/20362/Canonical_Confirms_MSI_s_Linux_Return_R...
>>
>> > "Unclear selling is happening, typically online....
>>
>> Why don;t you take this to alt.windowsshills.circle-jerking?
>>
>> Only the wintrolls care about this shit here.
>
> Wintrolls like Chris Ahlstrom and Richard Rasker?
You bastard! <grin>
--
Writers who use a computer swear to its liberating power in tones that bear
witness to the apocalyptic power of a new divinity. Their conviction results
from something deeper than mere gratitude for the computer's conveniences.
-- Edward Mendelson, "The New Republic", February 22, 1988
chrisv
> mentally-ill troll wrote:
>>
>> Facts and statements from credible sources seem to give them fits.
Liar.
>I don't see anything damaging to linux in this story. It addresses poor
>advertising/inability to read.
The lying flatshit loser is just begging for attention, that's all.
bbgruff
Ah - steady now.
I think I see what your friend Moshe (aka flatfish) is on about now, and it's
quite a valid point.
He has claimed here for some time that machines pre-loaded with Linux are
bought only so that they can be over-written with Windows (often "pirated"
Windows).
Following that reasoning, it would appear that some people are finding that
they can't use their pirated Windows to overwrite the Linux on MSI machines,
and are therefore returning them?
I wonder why that should be?
Is there something different about the XP used by MSI, so that a pirated
Windows XP won't work on it?
... or perhaps there was some fallacy in the "only to over-write with Windows"
argument?
JEDIDIAH
> Firey Bird wrote:
>
>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 17:57:42 -0400, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>
> http://osnews.com/story/20362/Canonical_Confirms_MSI_s_Linux_Return_Rate_Statement
>>>>
>>>> "Unclear selling is happening, typically online. The customer will get
>>>> their netbook sent to their home and they imagine to find something like
>>>> a Microsoft desktop, but they see a brown Ubuntu version. They are
>>>> unwilling to learn it and they were expecting to have Windows. We said a
>>>> long time ago, we didn't want to make a Windows clone. It has a
>>>> different interface especially with the Ubuntu Netbook Remix. We think
>>>> it's a better way but it's not the same way people are used to. That
>>>> unfamiliarity can take a while to learn and there is an education that
>>>> has to be stressed."
>>>
>>> Get ready for the Linux loons to attempt to use some Jebidiah like
>>> argument to spin it their way.
>>>
>>> Something like: What do we really mean by *return*.
>>> Or
>>> Don't many people wipe Windows and install Linux?
>>> etc....
>>>
>>> Facts and statements from credible sources seem to give them fits.
>>
>> I don't see anything damaging to linux in this story. It addresses poor
>> advertising/inability to read.
>
> Well, actually, I think that poor advertising *is* damaging to Linux -- or
...not so much. Sure it's a bit of a black eye but it's at least
visibility. Since so few people are aware of Linux at this point, this
sort of problem is to be expected. Ultimately, what's more important is
how the hardware vendor deals with the situation.
> any product, for that matter. This higher-than-average return rate isn't
> exactly good for Linux, no matter how you look at it.
All things considered... it is hardly the end of the world.
[deletia]
Trolls will always find something to whine about.
--
Apple: Because a large harddrive is for power users.
|||
/ | \
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com