Mozilla Marketing Project Launches
Tuesday July 22nd, 2003
Bart Decrem wrote in to tell us about the launch of Mozilla Marketing project mailing list and Bugzilla product. Bart is a new member of the Mozilla Foundation but has been involved with open source for many years now (he cofounded Eazel, among other achievements). Read the full article for complete details about the Mozilla Marketing initiative.
This probably means we get a mozilla store and T-shirts and all :) Not only would that mean public display people - it's a better way of donating.
#2 End users more influence on Development?
Tuesday July 22nd, 2003 4:13 AM
Will end-users now have more influence on Development?
Will the marketing groups be able to exert some influence on which and how some important-to-end-users bugs will be handled?
Some example bugs that have been neglected:
<http://bugzilla.mozilla.o…show_bug.cgi?id=62429#c74> Replying with the "start my reply above the quoted text" pref on should prepend the signature above the quote text. (top)
<http://bugzilla.mozilla.o…show_bug.cgi?id=141531#c5> move quote reply pref (reply below/above) to account settings
#3 Don't think it'll make a difference
Tuesday July 22nd, 2003 4:37 AM
I don't think this marketing project will make a difference to this (but you love any little opportunity to list these bugs don't you).
Previously mozilla.org consisted of commercial contributors (Netscape being the biggest) and volunteers, now it's basically the same but with the removal of Netscape.
I've got a feeling that the inclusion of these features will probably be considered for Thunderbird which ultimately will be the Mozilla mail/news client in the future. However, this article has nothing to do with these features.
#4 Linking to bugs
Tuesday July 22nd, 2003 5:06 AM
"(but you love any little opportunity to list these bugs don't you)"
#8 RE: Linking to bugs
Tuesday July 22nd, 2003 7:12 AM
That's a nice feature, and I may use in the future. Even better would be if there were a tooltip showing the *Summary* of the linked bug (as it does in bugzilla). Otherwise, a simple linkification of the url would be sufficient, since it is easier (for me) to copy/paste a url than to remember and then type the bug's number.
PS. Oddly, the URL I had originally pasted was not linkified. :(
#37 Re: RE: Linking to bugs
Wednesday July 23rd, 2003 1:37 AM
"Even better would be if there were a tooltip showing the *Summary* of the linked bug (as it does in bugzilla)."
That would be great but we really don't want to hit Bugzilla every time we load a Talkback page.
It would only need to be hit when the first post was made, as the tooltip would then be in the db as part of the post. But, that's still unnecessary hitting.
#42 Re: not so much
Thursday July 24th, 2003 4:51 AM
"It would only need to be hit when the first post was made, as the tooltip would then be in the db as part of the post."
Actually, with way things are currently set up, it wouldn't (links are created on the fly when the page loads). But I see your point.
Problem is, the summaries may well become outdated.
#9 End users more influence on Development?
Tuesday July 22nd, 2003 7:17 AM
> you love any little opportunity to list these > bugs don't you
I wouldn't say that I "love" any oportunity; but rather that I consider the issue of those bugs *important* enough to bring up wherever it may help get them fixed. ;)
PS. I'm "loving" the new threade+flat display format of the MozillaZine forums. It makes it much easier to read replies to posts. :-D
I can only repeat what has been said a million times before. If you provide a patch for this bug or pay someone to do it, I'm sure it will be accepted. If no one is willing to fix these bugs, nothing will ever happen.
Well, actually patch is often not enough, or votes. See bug 18574
#10 End users more influence on Development?
Tuesday July 22nd, 2003 7:20 AM
Well, I (and numerous others) *have* actually offered to pay to get these bugs fixed. :-P
#15 Re: Re: Re: Again with this legal stuff???!!!
Tuesday July 22nd, 2003 9:20 AM
> *have* actually offered to pay to get these bugs fixed. :P
And (luckily) still no-one cares to fix them. That should give you something to think about...
#18 Re: End users more influence on Development?
Tuesday July 22nd, 2003 10:36 AM
Maybe it wasn't organised well enough, maybe you actually have to actively look for someone to do it. At least, this scheme has worked with roaming profiles.
#6 Re: End users more influence on Development?
Tuesday July 22nd, 2003 5:32 AM
I'd guess not, especially not in the short term. If you're going to tell people what to do, you need to be in a position of authority over them. If the work is being done voluntarily by various people and groups, you don't have that authority.
That doesn't mean the marketing project wouldn't have any influence, but it'd probably be comparable to the influence of Netscape evang folks. If they say "this (lack of) feature is hurting our ability to market the browser", then that might be something that whoever was responsible took into account, but I doubt anyone is going to be in a position to say "marketing needs this done, go and code it".
#11 Mozilla Stuffed toy
by tomsommer <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Tuesday July 22nd, 2003 7:58 AM
We need a big, huge, awesome Mozilla stuffed toy :D
That and T-Shirts would be great :)
Don't forget the bumper stickers! We got to have those bumper stickers! :)
A CafePress store would be a cinch to set up.
While they're easy to setup, the quality of their product isn't particularly good. And we wouldn't want mozilla associated with shoddy quality :p
Maybe something can be organised with Thinkgeek <http://www.thinkgeek.com/>. They have made products for various open source projects over the years and their quality is quite good.
by clubantietam <email@example.com>
Tuesday July 22nd, 2003 10:33 PM
who owns the rights to the mozilla logo (and Mozzie?) now that the Mozilla Foundation has been established? It's not still AOL/Netscape, right? I have a small screen printing operation and I'd love to make shirts to sell at cost to help get the word out. If there are no legal issues, I can try to make some ASAP..
if there's onr thing i've found frustrating about the mozilla project it is this:
how can i, as a non programmer, contribute to spreading the word about moz? indeed a sub-question is how welcome am i as a non programmer, to the project?
i think it is make or break time for the lil green lizard and i hope i can contribute to this marketing. so, let's put the bug queries aside for a day or two and see what ideas we can come up with to let people know about this wonderful project and the ideals behind it.
bumper sticker: put a tiger in your tank and a lizard on your desktop
#22 tiger in your tank?
Tuesday July 22nd, 2003 1:31 PM
Maybe we can get ExxonMobile to donate some resources ;)
#21 A strong campaign that leaves the other way behind
Tuesday July 22nd, 2003 11:13 AM
I hope the marketing project will be taking measures to let the world know of Mozilla! Because Mozilla has been looked down on for far to long.
We need buttons with Mozilla tearing down non-standards to shreds (very very graphical ;-) )
#23 T-shirts and mugs are great, but...
Tuesday July 22nd, 2003 1:46 PM
We need *massive* advertising. Perhaps we could secure enough donations through t-shirt sales (etc.) to buy ad banners at respectable sites where IE usage is high. I'm thinking sites like CNet News (news.com.com), Google, and Amazon.com. Even television is not too much to ask - eventually.
I have some questions that I feel must be asked. In light of the fact marketing and advertising projects are expensive, and that we may not be able to secure enough free advertising as donations, it seems obvious that significant monies need to be raised. Who should that money go to, and how can the community be sure that the money is being used wisely? What kind of oversight can the community expect from mozilla.org? And finally, what sort of fundraising methods might be acceptable and who should be encouraged to pursue them?
I don't mean to imply any hint of shady doings, and I'm sure everyone over at mozilla.org are trustworthy individuals, but any time money come up in a conversation, one should ask some tough questions in return.
Those questions are quite obvious, but also important, and certainly most people would want answers to them before giving money to a cause.
One of the Mozilla folks posted somewhere that they're working on it. In a very limited time, all they have managed so far is a Paypal donation link on the homepage. They have stated that they are looking to become a 501(c)(3) non-profit (which requires them to publish answers to most of your questions in any case), and that they'll have other methods of giving available. Sorting all this stuff out takes a bit of time...
Tee Shirts and website buttons aren't going to even reach the average person, let alone convince him to download Mozilla. The best way to get Mozilla on computers is to get it on those CDs that ISPs use to set up thier service for a new customer. If Mozilla is the default agent that comes up when the user clicks on the ISP's icon, then it will be used. You aren't going to get the ISPs to do that unless Mozilla has a clear advantage for them (not just thier customers). One of an ISPs biggest expenses is it's help desk. Every time that phone rings it costs them money. Make a product that causes that phone to ring less than MSIE, and make sure they know Mozilla will save them money on support, and they will put it on thier CDs as the default browser. If MSIE results in fewer calls to the Help desk, Mozilla will be left off the CDs.
#27 and that, I'm afraid, isn't going to happen
Tuesday July 22nd, 2003 7:35 PM
IE is already installed / integrated into Windows with millions of dollars of expense behind it. Installing new software (Moz) onto what could be any number of platforms and co-exist with any number of already pre-installed SW, is only going to result in more Help desk calls.
Might be nice for ISP's whose users dont use Windows. Or corporations who place a high value on security Or embedded devices
Why does Moz have to take over the World anyway?
"Why does Moz have to take over the World anyway?"
It doesn't. However, it does need to maintain a significant presence amongst end-users to ensure sites don't go with IE-only designs.
#32 and that, I'm afraid, isn't going to happen
Tuesday July 22nd, 2003 8:31 PM
"already preinstalled SW, is only going to result in more Help desk calls." Microsoft has no more control over what third party software may be on a PC than Mozilla does, and because of MSIE's tight integration with Windows they are more likely to have problems with third party aps than Mozilla is.
"Why does Moz have to take over the World anyway?"
If you don't have a minium user base you see things like this "InstallShield Update Service Publisher Website requires Internet Explorer 5 (or higher), Cookies & Scripting enabled. Please ensure that all three of these requirements are met, as we have detected that you are not using Internet Explorer."
Installshield might be willing to write off 7 or 8 percent of users as costing more money than it's worth, but would be far less likely to write off 25% of potental customers if Mozilla reached that market share.
If you want to "get Mozilla on computers" what you need is some feature that enances the viewing of porn. That will get people to downloaded it real quick. :)
New slogan: "Better babes through Mozilla!"
"If you want to "get Mozilla on computers" what you need is some feature that enances the viewing of porn"
It allready has that feature. libpr0n is the name of the viewing library.
It's called "pop-up blocker".
I can see that more and more pop-ups are able to get displayed in Firefox. You can find fiefox features and specifications here: <http://www.miscproject.co…ila-firefox-explorer.html>
#43 you may be onto something here....
Thursday July 24th, 2003 6:47 AM
although i am not advocating or opposing the pr0n angle on mozilla, there is no doubt that often technologies can become popular just from that angle. Just look at VHS over Betamax.
#30 get into the hands of the press
by jaw79 <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Tuesday July 22nd, 2003 8:17 PM
from a post on a john dvorak article at <http://discuss.pcmag.com/…mag/messages?msg=15635.54>
particularly: "Mozilla is a perfect example. When they finally got to release One I had to find out about it in a discussion group. Nobody from Mozilla.org has ever contacted me as far as I know. The Opera people, I have to say, are very responsive."
it sounds like no one is even trying to get attention. granted this article was a long time ago, but getting articles in mass media will at least get the mozilla name in people's heads. so, as nice as bumper stickers are and i would throw down on a stuffed mozilla lizard in a heartbeat, i think maybe a top down approach would work better here. get the product into the hands of mainstream media. make sure every release is accompanied with a press release that goes out to cnet, pcmag, etc.
just my $.02
Look at these names as if you had never heard of them.
"Netscape". Must Be something to do with the Internet.
"Internet Explorer". Some kind of Internet software.
"Mozilla". ??? What does it do?
"Firebird". Some kind of Racing game?
The Browser that the Mozilla foundation releases needs a marketable name that clearly identifies it as Internet software. The average user has no clue what a Mozilla is or what it does.
No, I disagree. With sufficient brand awareness, any name is acceptable and becomes self-describing. For example:
How does Ford suggest 'a car manufacturer'? How does Nike suggest 'a shoe maker'? How does Sprint suggest 'a communications company'? Maybe Sprint should have been the one selling shoes :) How does IBM suggest 'a technology company'? (And don't say because it means International Business Machines -- most people wouldn't know that.)
In fact, a 'descriptive' name may in fact *hinder* brand uptake. Somehow 'Nike' or 'Reebook' is much catchier and memorable than 'John's shoes'...
The meaning of 'Netscape' had to be learnt as a brand, like any other product. I'll bet you a large sum that IE was initially sold to people by saying, 'It's just like Netscape'!
In any case, if you *must* identify the product as a browser, I think "Mozilla Browser" will do just nicely.
Nondescriptive names can become valued trademarks with a large advertising budget. Do you plan on cutting the Mozilla Foundation a multi million dollar check for an ad campaign?
"Descriptive names" are not good ideas for trademarks. In general a trademark needs to be unique and not-in-common-usage to be protectable. A trademark owner does not need a large advertising budget to have their mark become valuable. Google did not earn a powerful trademark through advertising - it was through utility. Of course, Google also runs the risk of losing their trademark, if they don't defend it. Do you say "facial tissue" or "Kleenex"? Do you say "photocopy" or "Xerox"? Do you say "kick ass browser" or "Mozilla"?