MX Linux Forum

I've meant to mention this for a while now. The description of MX as a 'product' on the main site was jarring when I first saw it, but it's more than that, the word is wrong and a big deal. Distros of GNU/Linux are not commercial products, they're community 'projects'. A product implies something being sold, or at least a tangible thing, a good to be exchanged. Isn't this true? Can you guys change that one word?

Product
noun

a thing produced by labor.

the word is wrong and a big deal...can you guys change that one word?

Nothing anywhere on the Home page suggests a commercial interest, so it's definitely not a big deal to most of the universe. A product is by definition something produced.

richb wrote:Product
noun

a thing produced by labor.

That's exactly why GNU/Linux distros aren't products. A distro as I said is not a tangible finished thing, or made at a cost and with a value to be exchanged for. Even if you mean it in the looser, immaterial and at least possibly non-commercial sense, using it implies that the focus of MX is on an 'end output', which isn't fair or right. The word 'project' on the other hand gets at the purpose of a Linux distro. That it's a result of and will continue to evolve through collaborative development efforts. And indeed the word project better covers what's under that dropdown category on the front page of the site.

I have no objection to project and will not object if changed. But it is not something I have any passion for.

I can see the OP's point, kinda -- the word "Products" could be changed to something else there. I looked at a few other distros' main pages (antiX's, for example), just for comparison. I don't know if it's a big deal, though -- it isn't something that has ever bothered me.

qwertyblahblah wrote:That's exactly why GNU/Linux distros aren't products. A distro as I said is not a tangible finished thing, or made at a cost and with a value to be exchanged for. Even if you mean it in the looser, immaterial and at least possibly non-commercial sense, using it implies that the focus of MX is on an 'end output', which isn't fair or right. The word 'project' on the other hand gets at the purpose of a Linux distro. That it's a result of and will continue to evolve through collaborative development efforts. And indeed the word project better covers what's under that dropdown category on the front page of the site.

Can you tell us why this is such a hot button for you?

Paul.. wrote:

qwertyblahblah wrote:That's exactly why GNU/Linux distros aren't products. A distro as I said is not a tangible finished thing, or made at a cost and with a value to be exchanged for. Even if you mean it in the looser, immaterial and at least possibly non-commercial sense, using it implies that the focus of MX is on an 'end output', which isn't fair or right. The word 'project' on the other hand gets at the purpose of a Linux distro. That it's a result of and will continue to evolve through collaborative development efforts. And indeed the word project better covers what's under that dropdown category on the front page of the site.

Can you tell us why this is such a hot button for you?

I know it's it's just one instance of one word, it's not so paramount, I guess it's my left-wing sensibilities that make it annoying for me. I use Linux because it's not designed to be bought and sold. The word 'product' suggests a distro at least could be. I know MX isn't, so that's the completely wrong impression to give. A Linux distro is a project rather than just a product because it is free and open source.

,quote]
I know it's it's just one instance of one word[/quote]...and in a menu, never in any text on the site. A MX Linux is indeed a project, a status that IMO is not about to be impugned by a single top menu entry.

I think software is a product regardless of how it's procured or acquired. I don't think price is relevant. Many mistakenly believe that open source or freeware has no cost. I can assure them that the costs are very real, and very high. Whether or not the consumer is charged for these costs doesn't change anything about the software.

Jerry3904 wrote:

I know it's it's just one instance of one word

...and in a menu, never in any text on the site. A MX Linux is indeed a project, a status that IMO is not about to be impugned by a single top menu entry.

Yes, if I'm going to talk about semantic clarity I shouldn't have posted that with the menu entry the site actually 'describes' MX as a product. I was being hyperbolic, of course nothing beyond the menu title does such thing.

MX Linux is indeed a project

Yes, and the resulting ISO that you download and install is the product of the project, an object cannot really be a "project".

Is this "Solved"?

[]

Also, that dropdown menu contains (among others) links to:

1) distro download sources
2) community-contributed wallpaper (many not found within the downloadable isos)
3) conkies
4) MX artwork like logos and icons

These are 4 different categories of products of people's time/effort/creativity. It's not just the distro that is being referred to under "Products".

asqwerth wrote:Also, that dropdown menu contains (among others) links to:

1) distro download sources
2) community-contributed wallpaper (many not found within the downloadable isos)
3) conkies
4) MX artwork like logos and icons

These are 4 different categories of products of people's time/effort/creativity. It's not just the distro that is being referred to under "Products".

conkies? I thought somebody mentioned cookies

Sometimes it takes people from outside to give a different perspective that we don't have. Words carry all kinds of associations. And their context matters. I happen to agree with OP that "Products" on a Linux distro site gives off a vibe we don't intend or want. We glide right by it without a second thought because we know what MX is. But a first time visitor gets a little feeling of dread "Oh, are they about to try to make me pay for this?" Couple this with the "Buy" right under "Download" on the right, and the visitor thinks "It must be one of those distros that has a scaled-down free version and full-featured one I have to pay to get". Immediate turn-off.

I think it's easy to fix. We shouldn't be so literal. Instead of "Products", use "MX Linux". That's what somebody wants to click. And instead of a laundry list of stuff there, just put "Download/Features/Screenshots". Move the other items to new tabs, such as "Media" for "Interviews/Reviews/Testimonials", and so on.

Just my two cents. I think our front page matters tremendously.

I agree with Old Giza.

Also, instead of "Buy" maybe something like "Order DVD or Flashdrive" or something like would be better to make it clear what you "buy".

Another agree.

I agree as well. The idea that MX is a product just makes me cringe.
The ideology behind MX is quite important to me.

duane wrote:I agree as well. The idea that MX is a product just makes me cringe.
The ideology behind MX is quite important to me.

What do you think the ideology behind MX is?

anticapitalista wrote:What do you think the ideology behind MX is?

"It just works" :)

Adrian wrote:

anticapitalista wrote:What do you think the ideology behind MX is?

"It just works" :)

'It' being the product we produce i.e. a distro ? :)

I hadn't given the Main mxlinux.org page much attention, it's not my area of responsibility or interest, so I generally go right to the forum.
Now, that I've better explored it, I still don't care whether or not MX Linux is called a Product, but "Products" as the header for that drop-down menu isn't very descriptive of what's in it. "About MX-Linux" would be better. And I agree that the "Buy" link in it's current context can give the wrong initial impression, although the Odisc service itself is valuable for a lot of people and we do need the link.

Adrian wrote:

anticapitalista wrote:What do you think the ideology behind MX is?

"It just works" :)

Amen bruddah

anticapitalista wrote: What do you think the ideology behind MX is?

To keep Jerry off the streets and out of the pool halls?

uncle mark wrote:

anticapitalista wrote: What do you think the ideology behind MX is?

To keep Jerry off the streets and out of the pool halls?

hello qwertyblahblah and hello everyone
the exchange about product is from the consumer side.
From the mechanic's side of production things are produced by investors. producers of materials, fund$, time, and talent invest to create a product of the producers.
a project does not sound final nor formal. project is a scaring word.
When MX puts out a Final product it is not a project at that time. it is the product.
Product visibility and availability can be named anything you want about showcasing your talent, the product.
The Final MX product is fantastic talent. The consumer cares not about the materials, funds, or time that went into the product.

Many a person in the pool halls has not been kept out of Who's
Who.

okay all
back with
"goods"
mx final is a "goods." how about that? Oh Boy is MX the good goods. better goods.
wish to compare reception of our Products as opposed to our goods?

@richb:

richb wrote:Product
noun

a thing produced by labor.

Exactly.

Products can by definition be offered free of charge. For example, when you give an old piece of furniture to your neighbour as a present, that piece of furniture remains to be a product.

The word "product" itself does not necessarily have a commercial implication.

Joint efforts, within an organizing structure, constitute projects. The results of Free/Libre Open Source Software projects are products (unless those projects fail).

IMHO not calling MX-Linux versions and modular parts of it "products" would severely devaluate the labor that the community of project participants invests.


Greetings, Joe

Much ado about nothing, methinks!
People who are GREATLY into the GNU/Linux philosophy aren't likely to be users of MX, despite being SystemD-free. In the words of Ricky Nelson, "You can't please everyone, so you gotta please yourself!"

qwertyblahblah wrote:I know it's it's just one instance of one word, it's not so paramount, I guess it's my left-wing sensibilities that make it annoying for me.

If you frame it a little more to the (Marxist) left, you can distinguish between commodities and products. Commodities are products offered for sale on the market. See also: Commodity Fetishism which distorts social relationships into economic ones. FOSS creates products which may be leveraged as commodities but prioritize the social relationships over the economic ones.

I can see an argument for a more informative menu tile (eg. resources), notwithstanding that MX is the product of many contributors and individual efforts, produced by such collaborative efforts.

Producing a driver's license or enjoying home garden produce as the product of one's own efforts....

I believe contemporary commercial use of the terminology has somewhat dominated a term with many applications, not least in mathematics, where the notion of 'result' is a somewhat truer reflection of the intent.

Since the term product is not used elsewhere on the website, the debate over 'product' is one for a much wider audience and cultural usage, as I see it. A more relevant menu entry perhaps, but not for the OP's argued reason, I'd suggest. Australian usage of product does indeed have commercial connotations in some contexts, but not as strongly as in other nations, I imagine.