Headline FeedsLinuxInsider Talkback
|
|
Re: Eight IT Textbooks, 4,031 Pages, 17 Mentions of Linux
Posted by: Paul Murphy 2004-04-02 13:26:27
See Full Story
Want to know why most business analysts and venture capitalists simply don't get it with respect to Unix? Take a look at the computer books they study while working toward their MBA, financial analysis certificate or accounting designation, and you'll understand that their ignorance isn't entirely their fault. Each of these professional qualifications is directly or indirectly controlled by some group that sets minimal educational standards, including things like "IT competency maps" -- lists of things graduates are supposed to know about IT.
Re: Eight IT Textbooks, 4,031 Pages, 17 Mentions of Linux
Posted by: grsampson 2004-04-10 13:14:46 In reply to: Paul Murphy
This analysis of open-source-blindness in textbooks on e-business is very interesting, but perhaps a little out of date now that business is in fact starting to take up Linux quite widely. I have an e-biz textbook of my own out (published in Oct 2003 here in Britain, in December 03 I think in the USA) which devotes a full chapter (out of 14 chapters) to Linux and the open source movement. Now that business and government computing is increasingly starting to adopt open source, I'm sure that other authors will follow suit.
Geoffrey Sampson, www.grsampson.net
Geoffrey Sampson, www.grsampson.net
Re: Eight IT Textbooks, 4,031 Pages, 17 Mentions of Linux
Posted by: Paul_Murphy 2004-04-04 06:49:55 In reply to: Paul Murphy
<p>
This column got slashdotted - meaning that something over 600 people offered some comment on it. In many cases those comments were perceptive and valuable - others, of course, had little or nothing to do with the issues.
<p>
Several other sites offered comment as well but of all the comments and treatments I've seen so far, this one on groklaw seems the most reasonable:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20040404010720380
<P>
As regular readers know I have a lot of difficulty telling bias from reality and find myself caught between two horrible biases (realities?) here. On the one hand I usually think of groklaw as an unpaid and unacknowledged shill for IBM; on the other hand this story has to be right (right?) simply because the writer quoted my stuff sympathetically.
<P>
I really don't know what's more difficult to rationalize - finding myself agreeing with Ted Sampley (http://www.usvetdsp.com/jf_kerry.htm ) on John Kerry or finding an intelligent and well thought through review of some my work on groklaw. [expletive deleted]! maybe not all good guys are all good, or all bad guys all bad?
<P>
Seeing things through simplistic filters like "good guy" "bad guy" affected many of the slashdotters too, but -overall- the comments
received from many sources were extremely valuable
and I want to thank all those who contributed - whether I agreed with them or not.
This column got slashdotted - meaning that something over 600 people offered some comment on it. In many cases those comments were perceptive and valuable - others, of course, had little or nothing to do with the issues.
<p>
Several other sites offered comment as well but of all the comments and treatments I've seen so far, this one on groklaw seems the most reasonable:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20040404010720380
<P>
As regular readers know I have a lot of difficulty telling bias from reality and find myself caught between two horrible biases (realities?) here. On the one hand I usually think of groklaw as an unpaid and unacknowledged shill for IBM; on the other hand this story has to be right (right?) simply because the writer quoted my stuff sympathetically.
<P>
I really don't know what's more difficult to rationalize - finding myself agreeing with Ted Sampley (http://www.usvetdsp.com/jf_kerry.htm ) on John Kerry or finding an intelligent and well thought through review of some my work on groklaw. [expletive deleted]! maybe not all good guys are all good, or all bad guys all bad?
<P>
Seeing things through simplistic filters like "good guy" "bad guy" affected many of the slashdotters too, but -overall- the comments
received from many sources were extremely valuable
and I want to thank all those who contributed - whether I agreed with them or not.
Linux is NOT the issue -- it's the IMAGE
Posted by: Matrketing-Guy 2004-04-03 03:16:02 In reply to: Paul Murphy
I read this article with interest, but at the risk of veering away from the main topic (the textbooks) I wonder about the wisdom of taking an open-source approach.
Sure it may look good on paper, but I wonder if these guys have thought about the opinion of the general public of Open Source/GNU/Linux etc.
I have been involved in the marketing (dirty word I know!) of software and hardware to non-technical people for a number of years. The consultancy group I work for numbers many of America's top blue-chip electronics and software corporations among its clients, I have over 11 years experience of marketing, and 4 years experience of software development (VB) and systems administration (NT 3.51), in addition to a marketing science qualification from one of America's top business schools - so it's safe to say that I know what I am talking about when it comes to computers and marketing.
I have been keeping an eye this forum for quite some time now, as part of my daily intelligence gathering, I find the robust exchange of views, and technical arguments make an interesting diversion from some of the other corporate bullshit I have to deal with in my working day. I also read corporate intelligence reports from the Gartner group, Forrester, the Meta group, and Olsen Online Business Intelligence Services.
LinuxInsider has often proved to be far more accurate when it comes to the technical details,and I am often amazed at the incredible levels of intelligence and insight shown by its readership, some of whom demonstrate a knowledge of Linux and Operating systems far in advance of anyone I have ever met, even in the IS department of major corporations. For this reason, I feel I should contribute my 2c to the debate about the future direction of Linux and the whole Open Source movement in general.
I feel I can do my bit for the Open Source community by offering (free of charge) some of my hard-earned knowledge straight from the bloody trenches at the front-line of tech-Marketing. Normally I would be paid over $4000/day for my perspective, but Slashdot - this one's on me. You people can think of it as my small and unworthy attempt to "give something back" to the Community.
Why Linux/Open Source has an image problem in major US Corporations and what the community can do about it. Like any movment, political or religious, Open Source/Linux has its Leaders, High priests and Gurus. These high profile individuals represent the public face of the organization. Like it or not, these people are associated with the product in the eyes of the buying public. One of the first things the Linux movement must do in order to gain acceptence by middle-America and Joe-and-Jean Sixpack and their 2.4 kids, is to develop what we in the Marketing profession call a "Happy Face".
When Joe Sixpack drives past a McDonald's, he associates it with the smiling face of Ronald McDonald the clown,and quality food served quickly. When he is choosing a collect-call company, the smiling face of Al Bundy (of TV's Married with Children) springs to mind, and when he thinks of fried chicken in large capacity bucket-like containers, it is the image of the happy-go-lucky avuncular Colonel with his associations of good old Southern hospitality that sticks in his memory. (In marketing terms this is known as a "positive association".
Because the image puts the consumer into a "buying-receptive" mental state).
Linux/Open Source lacks any kind of "Happy Face". Now this in itself is not a problem, were it not for the fact that Linux has several extremely high-profile advocates who are the exact opposite of "Happy Faces" in that they invite negative associations into the consumers head and put him/her into a state known by Marketers as "passive-aggressive sales-message rejection"
(In layman's terms they don't want to buy the product).
Now, I will not lower the tone of the debate by naming names. I will give a few brief profiles and community members will know who I am talking about.
In reverse order of harmfullness we have the laconic, dour nothern European. Not known for his sense of hunor, and with far too many nights spent coding when he should have been out partying he creates an image of Linux as the OS of choice for "friendless geeks who never got laid". (note - I do not subscribe to this viewpoint, but trust me some of my focus group members do).
Then we have the good old gun-toting libertarian self-proclaimed open source guru. Although M.R. studies show that 78% of PC owners show right-wing bias this person is too wacko and off-the scale for them. He alienates them, and in the worst case scares them that they risk being physically harmed if they don't agree with his fundamentalist libertarian "philosophy".
Finally we have a bearded Communist hippy. Do I need to say any more ?
So the normal consumer associates Linux with a sucicidal friendless nerd from some godforsaken corner of Northern Europe, a plainly insane right wing lunatic, and an "alternative lifestyle" Communist throwback to Woodstock with a facial hair problem. Is it any wonder that time after time, the message comes back from my focus groups that Linux is for wierdos ?
Here are a few example comments from a focus group session from Q3 1999 in response to a question about their attitudes to Linux and open source software, you'll get the general idea.
"Linux - that's that geek system right ?"
"I tried Linux but it was too hard for me to install, then that guy flamed me on the newsgroups"
"I don't want any Open Source software because it is written by communists and I am concerned about security"
"My boss says Linux was written by Communists and Gun-Nuts"
"Linux is used by Communists who hate capitalism and Microsoft"
"Open source software cannot be any good because it is written by college students and hackers."
"Linux is not compatible with my USB peripherals"
"I would like to try Linux but my buddies would think I was a Commie"
I could go on and on with these genuine responses, but I think I've illustrated my point well enough. Linux has a serious image problem.
What to do about it is more problematic. Open Source proponents and Linux advocates are fiercely independent and proud of their alternative stance. They see any form of marketing as "selling out to da man" or "not groking it" or becoming a "suit" Any mention of money or financial rewards is derided, and developers are supposed to be content with "Kudos" from the community. Whilst this might be ok at college, or if you are tremendously wealthy, it cuts no ice with Joe Sixpack who was raised on Microsoft and associates Bill's millions with the quality of the software his company puts out. From the focus group again:
"If Bill (Gates) is worth that much money he must make the best software in the world."
"Microsoft must know what they are doing - the whole world uses their software."
"The best programmers work for Microsoft - they have the most tech-savvy hackers there."
"Microsoft spend millions on their software I think it is the best in the world. (referring to IE5)
Again the message is clear: Microsoft is winning the hearts and minds not only of Joe Sixpack, but also Juan Sixpack in South America, Jean-Paul Sixpack in France, Jeroen Van der Sixpack in the Netherlands, Nkwele-Olamu Sixpack in West Africa, Mohammed-Al-Sixpack in Iran, Kulwant Chandrasekhera Sixpack in India, and Boris Sixpack in the Russian Federation.
Their message is powerful, international, and presented relentlessly with no internal bickering and bitching.
What can be done ?
There are no easy answers. The Linux/Open Source community has proved unwilling or unable to accept critisim (even constructive criticism such as this) gracefully, preferring to mount foul-languaged assaults on the personal integrity of anyone who steps out from the party line.
I offer no easy solutions, however here are a few pointers:
1) As a damage limitation exercise Linux/GNU should appoint itself a "Marketing Spokesperson".
This person would be the "official face of Linux/GNU/Open Source". First and Foremost, they would wear an expensive suit, especially when talking to the press or when dealing with high-profile major corporation with deep pockets and $$$s to spend. I realise this is ridiculous from a technical perspective, but with my blend of tech-savvy and marketing exprience, I realize the importance of presentation over technical merit.
It goes against the grain of the community, but if we are to become the next Microsoft (and why else would we be in this game if not to win it at all costs), we must fight them on our battleground, but with the same weapons they use against us.
2) The Penguin logo MUST go ASAP. Although it seemed "cute" and funny at the time, in the eyes of the corporate MIS department it just looks juvenile. Linux needs a new logo, preferably one of those kind of eliptical ones with a swoosh that in the eyes of the public can mean one thing: Hip and cool DOTCOM Corporation. The logo should be bland, yet robust, non-controversial yet ahead of the curve, and toned in serious businesslike colors such as gray, silver, and white. It should transcend culture and religion to be internationally recognized like the Coca-Cola image is all over the world.
3) Downplay RMS, Linus, ESR, etc. They are technicians with zero understanding of the general public, or of software consumers in general. Indeed many of them only write their program for themselves to "scratch an itch". This is hardly the way to gain public acceptance.
4) Direct X - A MAJOR stumbling block on Linux's road to world domination is the lack of Direct X support for Linux. This trivial omission means that most games will not run on Linux. Linux could gain 1000's of new games by simply implementing the DirectX api. This is a no-brainer. Kernel support for XML would be a big performance booster too in the B2B and B2C application area, and would make Linux buzzword compliant for XML.
5) Finally FOCUS GROUPS. Before you think about starting that new open-source project, (be it a new web browser like Mazola, or simply a new front-end for the cdplayer application) Get a focus group together. Use a few minutes of your non-tech-savvy friend's time. If you don't have any friends like that, try your folks, or your grandparents. Ask them what they would like to see in your new program. This way, you will gain "market perspective" on the likely acceptance of your product by the "normal people" of the world.
Thank you for your time
Sure it may look good on paper, but I wonder if these guys have thought about the opinion of the general public of Open Source/GNU/Linux etc.
I have been involved in the marketing (dirty word I know!) of software and hardware to non-technical people for a number of years. The consultancy group I work for numbers many of America's top blue-chip electronics and software corporations among its clients, I have over 11 years experience of marketing, and 4 years experience of software development (VB) and systems administration (NT 3.51), in addition to a marketing science qualification from one of America's top business schools - so it's safe to say that I know what I am talking about when it comes to computers and marketing.
I have been keeping an eye this forum for quite some time now, as part of my daily intelligence gathering, I find the robust exchange of views, and technical arguments make an interesting diversion from some of the other corporate bullshit I have to deal with in my working day. I also read corporate intelligence reports from the Gartner group, Forrester, the Meta group, and Olsen Online Business Intelligence Services.
LinuxInsider has often proved to be far more accurate when it comes to the technical details,and I am often amazed at the incredible levels of intelligence and insight shown by its readership, some of whom demonstrate a knowledge of Linux and Operating systems far in advance of anyone I have ever met, even in the IS department of major corporations. For this reason, I feel I should contribute my 2c to the debate about the future direction of Linux and the whole Open Source movement in general.
I feel I can do my bit for the Open Source community by offering (free of charge) some of my hard-earned knowledge straight from the bloody trenches at the front-line of tech-Marketing. Normally I would be paid over $4000/day for my perspective, but Slashdot - this one's on me. You people can think of it as my small and unworthy attempt to "give something back" to the Community.
Why Linux/Open Source has an image problem in major US Corporations and what the community can do about it. Like any movment, political or religious, Open Source/Linux has its Leaders, High priests and Gurus. These high profile individuals represent the public face of the organization. Like it or not, these people are associated with the product in the eyes of the buying public. One of the first things the Linux movement must do in order to gain acceptence by middle-America and Joe-and-Jean Sixpack and their 2.4 kids, is to develop what we in the Marketing profession call a "Happy Face".
When Joe Sixpack drives past a McDonald's, he associates it with the smiling face of Ronald McDonald the clown,and quality food served quickly. When he is choosing a collect-call company, the smiling face of Al Bundy (of TV's Married with Children) springs to mind, and when he thinks of fried chicken in large capacity bucket-like containers, it is the image of the happy-go-lucky avuncular Colonel with his associations of good old Southern hospitality that sticks in his memory. (In marketing terms this is known as a "positive association".
Because the image puts the consumer into a "buying-receptive" mental state).
Linux/Open Source lacks any kind of "Happy Face". Now this in itself is not a problem, were it not for the fact that Linux has several extremely high-profile advocates who are the exact opposite of "Happy Faces" in that they invite negative associations into the consumers head and put him/her into a state known by Marketers as "passive-aggressive sales-message rejection"
(In layman's terms they don't want to buy the product).
Now, I will not lower the tone of the debate by naming names. I will give a few brief profiles and community members will know who I am talking about.
In reverse order of harmfullness we have the laconic, dour nothern European. Not known for his sense of hunor, and with far too many nights spent coding when he should have been out partying he creates an image of Linux as the OS of choice for "friendless geeks who never got laid". (note - I do not subscribe to this viewpoint, but trust me some of my focus group members do).
Then we have the good old gun-toting libertarian self-proclaimed open source guru. Although M.R. studies show that 78% of PC owners show right-wing bias this person is too wacko and off-the scale for them. He alienates them, and in the worst case scares them that they risk being physically harmed if they don't agree with his fundamentalist libertarian "philosophy".
Finally we have a bearded Communist hippy. Do I need to say any more ?
So the normal consumer associates Linux with a sucicidal friendless nerd from some godforsaken corner of Northern Europe, a plainly insane right wing lunatic, and an "alternative lifestyle" Communist throwback to Woodstock with a facial hair problem. Is it any wonder that time after time, the message comes back from my focus groups that Linux is for wierdos ?
Here are a few example comments from a focus group session from Q3 1999 in response to a question about their attitudes to Linux and open source software, you'll get the general idea.
"Linux - that's that geek system right ?"
"I tried Linux but it was too hard for me to install, then that guy flamed me on the newsgroups"
"I don't want any Open Source software because it is written by communists and I am concerned about security"
"My boss says Linux was written by Communists and Gun-Nuts"
"Linux is used by Communists who hate capitalism and Microsoft"
"Open source software cannot be any good because it is written by college students and hackers."
"Linux is not compatible with my USB peripherals"
"I would like to try Linux but my buddies would think I was a Commie"
I could go on and on with these genuine responses, but I think I've illustrated my point well enough. Linux has a serious image problem.
What to do about it is more problematic. Open Source proponents and Linux advocates are fiercely independent and proud of their alternative stance. They see any form of marketing as "selling out to da man" or "not groking it" or becoming a "suit" Any mention of money or financial rewards is derided, and developers are supposed to be content with "Kudos" from the community. Whilst this might be ok at college, or if you are tremendously wealthy, it cuts no ice with Joe Sixpack who was raised on Microsoft and associates Bill's millions with the quality of the software his company puts out. From the focus group again:
"If Bill (Gates) is worth that much money he must make the best software in the world."
"Microsoft must know what they are doing - the whole world uses their software."
"The best programmers work for Microsoft - they have the most tech-savvy hackers there."
"Microsoft spend millions on their software I think it is the best in the world. (referring to IE5)
Again the message is clear: Microsoft is winning the hearts and minds not only of Joe Sixpack, but also Juan Sixpack in South America, Jean-Paul Sixpack in France, Jeroen Van der Sixpack in the Netherlands, Nkwele-Olamu Sixpack in West Africa, Mohammed-Al-Sixpack in Iran, Kulwant Chandrasekhera Sixpack in India, and Boris Sixpack in the Russian Federation.
Their message is powerful, international, and presented relentlessly with no internal bickering and bitching.
What can be done ?
There are no easy answers. The Linux/Open Source community has proved unwilling or unable to accept critisim (even constructive criticism such as this) gracefully, preferring to mount foul-languaged assaults on the personal integrity of anyone who steps out from the party line.
I offer no easy solutions, however here are a few pointers:
1) As a damage limitation exercise Linux/GNU should appoint itself a "Marketing Spokesperson".
This person would be the "official face of Linux/GNU/Open Source". First and Foremost, they would wear an expensive suit, especially when talking to the press or when dealing with high-profile major corporation with deep pockets and $$$s to spend. I realise this is ridiculous from a technical perspective, but with my blend of tech-savvy and marketing exprience, I realize the importance of presentation over technical merit.
It goes against the grain of the community, but if we are to become the next Microsoft (and why else would we be in this game if not to win it at all costs), we must fight them on our battleground, but with the same weapons they use against us.
2) The Penguin logo MUST go ASAP. Although it seemed "cute" and funny at the time, in the eyes of the corporate MIS department it just looks juvenile. Linux needs a new logo, preferably one of those kind of eliptical ones with a swoosh that in the eyes of the public can mean one thing: Hip and cool DOTCOM Corporation. The logo should be bland, yet robust, non-controversial yet ahead of the curve, and toned in serious businesslike colors such as gray, silver, and white. It should transcend culture and religion to be internationally recognized like the Coca-Cola image is all over the world.
3) Downplay RMS, Linus, ESR, etc. They are technicians with zero understanding of the general public, or of software consumers in general. Indeed many of them only write their program for themselves to "scratch an itch". This is hardly the way to gain public acceptance.
4) Direct X - A MAJOR stumbling block on Linux's road to world domination is the lack of Direct X support for Linux. This trivial omission means that most games will not run on Linux. Linux could gain 1000's of new games by simply implementing the DirectX api. This is a no-brainer. Kernel support for XML would be a big performance booster too in the B2B and B2C application area, and would make Linux buzzword compliant for XML.
5) Finally FOCUS GROUPS. Before you think about starting that new open-source project, (be it a new web browser like Mazola, or simply a new front-end for the cdplayer application) Get a focus group together. Use a few minutes of your non-tech-savvy friend's time. If you don't have any friends like that, try your folks, or your grandparents. Ask them what they would like to see in your new program. This way, you will gain "market perspective" on the likely acceptance of your product by the "normal people" of the world.
Thank you for your time
Re: Eight IT Textbooks, 4,031 Pages, 17 Mentions of Linux
Posted by: svermaatsfsu 2004-04-02 17:01:40 In reply to: Paul Murphy
This issue is much more than what a handful of authors choose to publish. It’s a vicious circle in many ways. Publishers will publish popular topics. Topics that sell. Business schools have always gravitated towards Windows based products. Regression is taught using Excel, not KSpread. Database skills are taught using Access.
Publishers look at this profile and encourage authors to write along these lines. As a result, we hardly see any open source books from Prentice Hall or McGraw Hill. We see O'Reilly books on all the open source topics, but they are hardly used as MBA texts. Perhaps if O'Reilly published MBA texts?
I have these conversations with my publishing reps every semester. The end result is that "we are not there yet". For the time being, it’s Windows, and that's what we'll sell. Other publishers such as Course Technology sell Linux books, but those are generally for "step-by-step" approaches. I think it’s a bit early for the Business EDU market to move to this camp. Maybe a couple more years?
Hopefully, things will change in the near future. In the meantime, I am happy hosting my MBA class site on PHP+MySQL+Apache on Linux. You should come to my classes and talk to my students :-)
Sameer Verma
sverma@sfsu.edu
Publishers look at this profile and encourage authors to write along these lines. As a result, we hardly see any open source books from Prentice Hall or McGraw Hill. We see O'Reilly books on all the open source topics, but they are hardly used as MBA texts. Perhaps if O'Reilly published MBA texts?
I have these conversations with my publishing reps every semester. The end result is that "we are not there yet". For the time being, it’s Windows, and that's what we'll sell. Other publishers such as Course Technology sell Linux books, but those are generally for "step-by-step" approaches. I think it’s a bit early for the Business EDU market to move to this camp. Maybe a couple more years?
Hopefully, things will change in the near future. In the meantime, I am happy hosting my MBA class site on PHP+MySQL+Apache on Linux. You should come to my classes and talk to my students :-)
Sameer Verma
sverma@sfsu.edu
Re: Eight IT Textbooks, 4,031 Pages, 17 Mentions of Linux
Posted by: RaH 2004-04-02 14:07:38 In reply to: Paul Murphy
I cannot believe those texts rag on the *nix O/S so much. I have used Windows since I began using a computer, around 5 years. Around 3 years ago I purchased a distro of Linux (SuSe) because the company I work for moved me into the IT department. I had until that time only heard of Linux and knew nothing of it. I bought it so I could use it at home and learn the O/S as I learned Windows. I was truely amazed at the level of control over the system that Linux offers the user. Unlike the hidden world of Windows, Linux is wide open. When you update a package or install a new package, you know exactly what is being installed. Under Windows you have no idea what is being put on your system. Seems to me these people forget that over 90% of the internet is *nix of some sort. If Unix, Linux, BSD were that abissmal to use and that proprietary *cough* WINDOWS, then would that many admins implement the O/S? Many of our systems at my job are Linux controlled. We seamlessly use Linux, Windows, and SCO together in our network. There is very little if no maintence. As for learning Linux, with no prior knowledge of networking or knowing anything of the TCP/IP protocols, it took me all of 90 minutes to integrate Linux into my home network and configure a Samba client to share Windows files. For the neigh sayers of Linux I submit this. If Linux truely is the poor O/S "requiring more testing before being put into business use", then why was I unable to share an internet connection between two Windows boxes ( even using the ICS wizard ) yet I was able to do it through Linux within 5 minutes using Squid? Pound for pound, ounce for ounce Linux is without a doubt the absolute best O/S that I have used. I enjoy the level of control over my system it affords me. I still use my Windows box, but only to play games. Anyone thinking of converting to a new O/S, give Linux a shake. It is worth the $80 I paid for my distro. Plus you get a ton of extra software. Mine came with 7 cd's of software. The best part of all I saved for closing. In 3 years of using Linux my system has locked up on me a total of 5 times, as opposed to 5 times per use on Windows.
