From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Oct 30 14:53:27 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA06093 for freebsd-advocacy-outgoing; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 14:53:27 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from smtp04.primenet.com (smtp04.primenet.com [206.165.6.134]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA06087 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 14:53:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tlambert@usr05.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp04.primenet.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA28376; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 15:53:23 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr05.primenet.com(206.165.6.205) via SMTP by smtp04.primenet.com, id smtpd028343; Fri Oct 30 15:53:13 1998 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr05.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA10713; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 15:53:12 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199810302253.PAA10713@usr05.primenet.com> Subject: Re: FreeBSD certified software (was: WordPerfect 8 for Linux) To: jcwells@u.washington.edu Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 22:53:12 +0000 (GMT) Cc: grog@lemis.com, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: from "Jason C. Wells" at Oct 28, 98 06:16:30 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > >StarOffice on CD is probably not easy to install on FreeBSD; it's the > >port that does that. If a port exists, and the manufacturer distributes > >the package on his CD-ROM, then we should give him extra credit for > >that, even if it's not a native FreeBSD port. > > Absolutely. This would fall under "Designed for". > > The communcation hangup here is in the definition of "native". Perhaps a > vendor builds a FreeBSD software product. Maybe the vendor knows nothing > of "FreeBSD Ports(tm)". I would still call this a "native port" because it > was explicitly made to run on FreeBSD without emulation. The vendor gets > the extra recognition. I would like to see three categories: o Can be made to run with effort "Runs on FreeBSD" This is the "publicity" tool, where anything that can be made to run, painfully, or as a result of a downloading install stuff from some other unknown place gets "branded". o The logo should be small to avoid real-estate concerns o Multiple logo form-factors should be available. o Install tools, but non-native binaries "FreeBSD Friendly" This is the "give the users the warm fuzzies" tool. I think it is important to give a purchase incentive to people to make the logo valuable for vendors to have on their software. If people have confidence in a rather pain-free install process, they will be more likely to shell out money for the software to run it on FreeBSD. o The logo should be small to avoid real-estate concerns o This is a true branding effort. There should be one logo, although scaling (within limits) should be at the discretion of the vendor. o Native binaries. "Designed for FreeBSD" This is the "vendor reward" tool. o The logo should be larger. o This is a true branding effort. There should be one logo, although scaling (within limits) should be at the discretion of the vendor. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message