Promoting FOSS to People Who Don't Care

MarcoF brings us his take on how to cultivate interest in open-source software to casual users who aren't interested in or necessarily aware of its existence. Many people simply have trouble leaving their comfort zone of older proprietary software; what's the best way to get them to look at an open-source alternative? "Since most people would rather die than write or study software source code, it is actually counterproductive to promote software 'because you can modify it yourself and be part of its community'. Look for really practical advantages which can be enjoyed every day by the person you want to convince. Start from the actual deep passions, beliefs, interests and practical needs of the people in front of you and go backwards from there, delaying the apparition of terms like 'source code', 'the four software freedoms', GPL, Gnu, Linux, etc."

Easy, no Licenses/activation key

The selling point to get my father to switch to open office was that he could easily put it on new/other computers. He hated calling me up, asking me where that Office XP CD was only to have me tell him I have no idea. The idea of having 0 hassle when it comes to licenses and activation keys was the biggest selling point I can think of. Most people just want their computer to work and don't want to jump through a million hoops and keep track of that one cd-case whenever they want to install software on their new laptop.

"You mean I don't need a cd key for this? What happens if I lose the disc?"

"Uh, just download it again, it'll probably take 10 minutes or less on a good internet connection"

"Can I put this on your mother's computer?"

"You can put it on as many computers as you like, for free, have fun."

Re:Easy, no Licenses/activation key

"But surely it can't be any good if they're just giving it away. After all, you don't get something for nothing."

Re:Easy, no Licenses/activation key

"What, did you skip the 60s or something, pops? If people like doing it, they'll totally give it away for free."

Re:

"Oh, I remember the 60s. Best years of my life. I spent some time in the jungle hunting down the Cong. Y'know, this 'open source' stuff sounds kinda like commie propaganda to me."

Maybe there are some people you shouldn't try to switch to FOSS. : p

Re:Easy, no Licenses/activation key

I've found that people often have that cynical view of Open Source, and I typically have a hard time explaining why quality software is free. But since FOSS doesn't cost anything and I assure them there are no viruses, people tend to be pretty willing to try it out if they think they can save $20/$60/$100 on a proprietary program, and once they've tried it, they tend to change their tune.

Also, I keep portable versions of several programs on my flash drive, so if there's a computer handy I can show the program in question without even having to install it on their computer.

Re:Easy, no Licenses/activation key

My dad is an excellent example of the problem posed in the article: he's more than willing to sink huge amounts of money in software (he's bought photoshop CS and then CS3 when it came out, dozens of raw converters and plugins, more than a thousand euro altogether). He just does not 'buy' it, when I tell him there's pieces of software that are free can be as good. He's never even tried the GIMP or Rawtherapee, and forget about Ubuntu, but you'd think that investing some time in these applications would save money. Not enough. When people /buy/ software, I think they assume it comes with some magic factor X that makes it better than anything free, because it cannot have factor X, because it's free. And you gotta have that factor X, because, well, you just gotta... I had to camouflage Firefox as IE to get him to use that, because I was sick of all these spyware that came streaming in. Also, the 'IT department' on my mothers school (she's a teacher) is another example. They're a poor school that couldn't even afford to repair a leaking roof for over a year (the water came an inch high once in the classroom), yet they made money available for a fat win2003 server and xp-systems everywhere, with remote desktop. This is kindergarten ffs, but the 'IT-people' havn't got a clue, being trained MS-monkeys. People are undescribibly lazy and stupid when it comes to technical stuff. They don't care to spend dollars/euros, they want to be done with, _zero_ _effort_ must be involved.

Re:

"When people /buy/ software, I think they assume it comes with some magic factor X that makes it better than anything free, because it cannot have factor X, because it's free. And you gotta have that factor X, because, well, you just gotta..."

There are a l

Re:Easy, no Licenses/activation key

I've found that people often have that cynical view of Open Source, and I typically have a hard time explaining why quality software is free.

I usually describe OSS programmers as volunteers.
Most people get the concept of volunteering.

At least it gets them away from the image of "giving it away 'cause it isn't good enough to sell"

Offer to buy them a drink.

I was in the same group of software mavens, the FOSS crowd, and ran into the same issues everywhere from home users to big businesses. That is I did not understand why it was hard to convince people otherwise with my beliefs on open source. Then I started taking business classes and I got into a few meetings between the managers about large software purchases and I finally began to understand the whole picture. The problem is, we geeks do not understand people adn their internal perception of risk. As I scroll through the comments here I see some stuff that I can already see not working and some stuff working (but the author does not understand why it works).

The reason why people are so ready to throw money at a problem (and a lot of money in some cases) is by throwing money at the problem you are at least assured that you have entered into some sort of contract where whatever solution you get will come with some sort of support service. They don't care that you have the solution. For all they know, you could just be trying to con them out of their money or trying to waste their time. Instead, they want assurance that your solution will work as advertised after the transaction has been made. In otherwwords, they want assurance that the perceived risk they have in there minds can be mitigated by the money they give. And they will never state that either because they are acting based on experience and emotion. People don't hand over money knowing full well that it is really just there to eliminate the risk. They will say that they agree that they are handing over the money because it makes them sleep better a night or they feel like it (what they get in return) will probably turn out as expected.

So when you, a FOSS geek, comes along and says, "hey, this free stuff works better than what you paid for" they are not going to believe you and will turn down the offer. That is not because they don't trust you, that is because they are not offered any assurance should you happen to be wrong this one time. And if you happen to be wrong, now they just lost an hour or so of their life (time is just as important as money).

How can you convince them otherwise? Easy, mitigate the perceived risk in their minds. They want assurance, the safety in knowing that even the 5 or 10 minutes you're taking from their life is going to be worth it.

So one particularly easy way to do that is to make them a deal: if they try the FOSS software for a day, and they find it does everything they need then they will buy you a drink, but if at the end of the day they think it does not work as you claimed then you'll buy them a drink. Besides getting you an easy free drink, this offers them the assurance that their time is not wasted: if the software works (there was no risk), then they save money (minus the drink), but if the software does not work, they get a drink for the invested time/effort. Without the drink it is a win-lose situation (if they win they win free software, if they lose they lose time and effort) and suddenly their perceived risks in losing take over. By introducing the drink you take their mind off of focusing on the risk involved and offer them some assurance that the risk they think is there is actually not there.

Others here have claimed selling the software by advertising features and "bling" that they have not seen before. While this works, the problem is now you have people spinning cubes and not exploring other things that the software is capable of. Instead you've sold them a "shiny object" and they'll use it just like a "shiny object." That's not what you want, you want them to use it as a replacement and you want them to gain confidence to eliminate the perceived risk they associated with FOSS.

Finally I want to be clear that offering a drink will not always work because people are different. Some people are more conservative than others and some people will take quite a bit more social effort to get moving along. But I assure you, the problem always revolves around ri

Re:

That's why I suggest -- and not as a joke -- selling FOSS in boxed packages in retail stores. "A web browser that enhances computer security? For only $35? WOW!" "Hm, Microsoft Office for $130, or this 'Open Office' for $50? Heh, looks like I can save

Re:

The problem with that is that there are decades of history of low-quality shovelware software stuck in shrinkwrapped boxes beside the expensive Microsoft wares. A lot of it has been horrendous in quality. It's sort of a tainted category, unfortunately.

Re:

Copying software is not free, it does have a cost. A more correct statement would be, "For the consumer, after paying for the things you need to copy the first piece of software, each additional piece is at or close to 0" And something similar for the prod

Re:Easy, no Licenses/activation key

People pay all the time for things they can't hold in their hand. You can't hold a long distance phone call in your hand, why should you pay for that. You've already bought the phone. You can't hold a haircut in your hand. Sure you can look at and appreciate the haircut, but you can use the software too. People are just cheap. But they just know they can get software for free. Commercial software thrives off this. Let the software be free for everyone, and some percentage of people and businesses will pay for it, allowing you to make money. Make it impossible to copy, and it won't get popular enough to make any money. Very few software packages could survive without being free to those who weren't willing to pay.

Re:

Yeah, and Google Docs is a service. So you would pay for Google Docs but not OpenOffice?

Re:Obvious counterexample they'll understand

If you think Google is free, you don't get it.

Search isn't Google's product, you are. They sell your eyes to advertisers. Search is just the honey pot to get you there.

Why are people so blatantly naive?

Re:

The questions/issues I face are similar:

Download it? How do I know if it a legitimate one?

You get it from a reputable place, say the Ubuntu website.
A couple of friends have then gone and purchased Ubuntu from Amazon...... ARRRHHHH!

What about adding app

Re:Easy, no Licenses/activation key

Thanks, but you didn't help me explain how simple it is for a Linux user to add applications. I recognize how easily this is done through repo's, but HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THIS TO SOMEONE WHO DOESN'T EVEN KNOW WHAT A REPO IS... (which was my original question.)

My best effort is say "To add applications there is a little 'add applications' menu, which has a list of all the applications available with a summary of what they do. You just select which ones you want and click install, and it gets it from a trusted place on the internet and installs it for you."

As for your statement about 'the average user doesn't want to learn about repo's', I agree. But, they DO want to learn where they get applications, manage updates, and where these come from. If there is a way to explain this without describing repositories then tell me about it.

Re:

Sorry about the formatting of my reply. Here's the same rant, with the preview button!

More choice and freedom isn't always better either, they don't want to make choices because that takes consideration of the options and a decision-making process. For co

Re:Easy, no Licenses/activation key

One way to help is refuse to install unlicensed software on people's computers. Somebody says, I want a copy of photoshop. Say, go buy Photoshop Elements for $100, or here's a copy of GIMP for free. It doesn't have all the same features, and is kind of different. Most people will choose the free software over paying for something. I actually got my wife to use GIMP in this way. Actually we downloaded a trial of photoshop, and she found that she actually liked GIMP more. Give open source software a fair trial, and then compare it to the commercial alternative. Most people would rather have the free one than pay for MS Office, Photoshop, or most of the other stuff that people usually only have because they pirate it.

Re:

Not to mention software that expires. I don't know if this still applies because I haven't used Windows for a few years, but I've downloaded a bunch of 'niche' software that I considered useful and backed up to disc. Especially software where they've upg

My solution

I tried persuading all my friends, citing the freedom argument, the security argument, the stability, community etc. Nothing worked. Then I learned how. Show them the spinning cube (With my heavy metal friends, I go for a pentagonal prism), and shout 'It's free! It's free!' Over and over.

Re:My solution

Amazingly, that is exactly how to generate interest. People like things that are shiny, translucent, 3D, etc.

We actually had a discussion here at FUDCon about this very issue yesterday, and one of the real problems most people encountered wasn't generated interest as much as it was keeping people interested when they encounter little bugs or usability issues (there are quite a few in the Fedora utils which will be resolved this year). Unfortunately, polishing off apps to make them more usable (or even just having them update the UI during a complex operation) is not a high salience issue, and so such things often get neglected in open source projects, even though they can be a deciding factor in keeping non-programmers interested.

concentrate on the F, forget the OSS

Just tell 'em it's free[1].

That way of they don't like it, they've lost nothing. They can always go ahaed and buy some stuff.

As the article says, this is about people who don't care. All they want is to get stuff done. They're not interested in discussing your personal philosophy so just give them what they want - without the sermon.

[1] yes, yes, I know free beer or speech. Don't forget we're still talking about people who don't care

Thet fact that it's free ...

seems to resonate a lot with most people. Of course, this assumes that installation etc does not involve a command line. But given a MSI like installer, I think that free would be a big selling point, followed by be able to do what you usually do.

Re:Thet fact that it's free ...

Everything else is free too, if you are willing to ignore the law, which a lot of people are. I don't think it's a terribly strong argument. In fact, it may even work against you by causing the person to think "Hell, this software sucks so bad they can't even charge for it."

Re:Thet fact that it's free ...

Microsoft themselves have given me the strongest argument I need: "you will never see a pop up window telling you that your software needs to be registered to work" ... there is no Ubuntu Genuine Advantage, and unless someone writes a malicious piece of code, it will never call home. In other words, it's safe to use.

Re:

"there is no Ubuntu Genuine Advantage"

Don't speak too soon.. There is Linux Genuine Advantage:

http://www.linuxgenuineadvantage.org/ [linuxgenui...antage.org]

Linux Genuine Advantage(TM) is an exciting and mandatory new way for you to place your computer under the remote contro

Re:

It depends on how you phrase it. For example, this is the explanation I commonly give when I tell people about Red Hat and how they give things like JBOSS out for free:

"The business model is centered around charging businesses to get help from a Red Hat

Lead by Example

Here's what I do: I lead by example. Then, when someone comes to me with his IE problem, I (honestly) tell him that I'm sorry but I can't help him with that because I use a better browser instead and point him to Firefox.

I don't evangalise, not anymore. But if you come to me with a question or a problem, you get to hear my opinion and very often that is "sorry, that sounds like it's a windos/IE/MS-Office/whatever-specific problem. I don't do windos/IE/MS-Office/etc anymore, can't help you with that. I can only recommend you check out Apple/Firefox/OpenOffice/etc as an alternative, it works for me and doesn't have that problem."

Re:Lead by Example

I lead by example. Then, when someone comes to me with his IE problem, I (honestly) tell him that I'm sorry but I can't help him with that because I use a better browser instead and point him to Firefox.

Lead by example? That's my way of (politely) not giving free technical support to moochers.

Re:

Apple? That's like the opposite of open source.

Bingo!

I quit doing win32 tech support for free sometime in the early '00's. I will, on occasion, setup a new computer, or rebuild one.

When that happens, I load it up with Open Office, etc... and explain the new and free stuff. I also explain why their compute

Three simple words

Vendor lock in.

The biggest advantage of Free Software is freedom from vendor lock in. Ever found a bug in a program and been told 'yes, we fixed that. Pay $100 for the new version if you want the fix?' Ever wanted to run the software on another machine

Re:Three simple words

You'll lose nearly every person this article is intended for if you mention "vendor lock-in". Normal people don't care.

Ask Walmart

The latest Linux computer Walmart is selling has moved enough units that it was out of stock for a while. My questions would be:

1. How many of those units came back because people couldn't cope with Linux or were disappointed that they didn't get Windows?
   
2. How many customers were so satisfied that they bought second units or recommended them to friends?
   

Answer those two questions and you will know if there is any point trying to convert people who don't care. There's no point trying to convert them if they aren't going to like the experience anyway.

I tell people it's a sovereignty issue

It's about who owns their computer, them or the people who write the software. I point out numerous instances where various bits of proprietary software cause their computer to act in the developers best interests and against their own. DRM is one such, but there are others. I talk about how having the source code available allows 3rd parties to check up on the code and hold the original programmers accountable.

This is a complex argument, and hard for some people to grasp. But when people do it's pretty effective. Some people still don't care, but it's a much smaller percentage than the ones who think they don't care whether or not they have the source.

I think, maybe, I could refine it by linking it to voting machine issues and more people might get it then.

I also talk a bit about how they can give any software they have to friends for free and that it's perfectly legal and everything, and really that's how it should be. But that's a minor part of my little presentation.

Start simple, don't preach

I've learned that trying to convince someone who is happy with their software that they need to switch will be fruitless.

- When people are having problems with IE, I promote Firefox.
- When people are buying a new computer, I encourage them to try OpenOffice before buying MS Office. I've had several people try it and stick with it.
- When people complain about the loud ads in AIM, or having to run 4 different programs for AIM, Google Talk, MSN and Yahoo, I promote Pidgin.
- When someone wants to do some photo editing, but can't afford to shell out the cash for Photoshop, I suggest they try the Gimp. Nobody seems to like it, but they get their work done.
- When somebody can't get a media file to run, I suggest they try out VLC.

I have portable versions of all of the above (and then some) on my flash drive, so I can show people what I'm talking about if there's a computer nearby.

Once somebody is using most of the above software on Windows, I might suggest they try Linux if they voice a complaint about Windows (viruses, activation issues, slow boot time, bogged down system, etc.). I've gotten two people to try it out, one stuck with it, the other got a Mac.

There may be better promoters than my self, but I've found that if you're trying to push software (Free or not) on people who don't want it, they'll resist and you'll end up looking like an ass.

Re:Start simple, don't preach

Most FOSS is only "free" if your time is worthless

Could you expand on this point? I assume you mean that FOS software is hard to set-up or something, but I really haven't experienced that. Sure some programs are shitty, but so is a lot of non FOS stuff.

I have found FOSS to be less of a time commitment in many ways, as I can install it all with a click of the mouse. No cds, serial numbers, allowing the software to phone home, updating programs one by one, etc, etc.

Re:

In Business Terms: The accounting term is called "goodwill". That's what the single user-demos are building.

sigh I hate to nit-pick these things, but "goodwill" in an accounting context means something completely different. Specifically, when one company acquires another, they pay an amount of cash, often (usually) well above the value of the other company's

Here, try this DVD

Someone I know gets a new PC, and very soon they ask "Do you know where I can get a copy of program X?" Generally, they're implying cheap or bootleg. I give them a DVD of a bunch of Windows apps that I've collected. Some FOSS, some not, but all legally free. Somewhat similar to the (now un updated) OpenCD project. "Try these". Paint.Net(which I find to be MUCH better than GIMP), OpenOffice, T-bird, Pidgin, IrfanView, audio editing, video editing, antivirus, etc, etc.

No evangelism, no preaching. Don't go on about the source code availability, 'giving back' to the community, just let the apps stand on their own. Their eyes will glaze over if you try too hard, because they don't really care. Yet.

They won't understand the underlying FOSS concepts, until they play with it for a while.

Re:

Absolutely, not preaching is the key. Don't start talking about modifying the source, freely studying it, etc. - that gives the impression that this software is for enthusiasts only. Always emphasize the practical advantages. That means, saying that the so

Conservative Arguments for FOSS

It seems to me that for open source to advance, we need to get past this notion of FOSS as a "liberal" thing. There are plenty of us conservative neo-nazi fascist trying to take over the world Republicans that love Linux and it is incumbent upon us to communicate that using Linux is not an endorsement of Joseph Stalin.

a) Open Source is not communism and its not socialism. Socialism and communism are centrally planned, whereas, an open source system consists of thousands of voices, each operating with their own agenda. If any system is more like a communist system, its a big corporate system, which has all of its components centrally planned and designed. It's not like Linus Torvalds writes all of Linux. He's just famous for writing a very important piece at the center of things. While its true that you are not going to make billions of dollars writing that one thing and selling it over and over again, there's nothing to stop you from building a consulting firm offering open source solutions that makes billions and billions of dollars, if you want.

b) Rugged individualism. Open source is software about the inventor, without all of that unproductive fluff of corporate programming. You make something yourself, and then you publish it. If its good, people will use it. If not, then the project quickly dies.

c) Honesty. Open source systems are brutally honest. Whereas a system in a store will be filled with hype and lies, by contrast, an open source system tells it like it is. One of the things that I love about Linux is that the documentation with most of the software package clearly and immediately lists things that don't work or haven't been tested enough.

d) No spying. These days, using a copy of Windows makes it almost seem like you might be a criminal just for using it. And Windows is completely sealed up, and who knows what sort of deals that Microsoft cuts with the government. Because there's no secret codes in open source systems, everyone would know right away if something was wrong with it.

e) A real community. Every program these days has its communities, but with open source, you have a genuine interaction between the people that write and the people that use the software. Working in an open source community is like working in an old rural town, where everyone chips in to build that neighbor's house. Open source lets all of its dirty laundry out.

How I coverted my office

Our office was doing a major expantion, double the staff. The accountant was driving herself nuts trying to source Office CD's for everyone.

Then I installed OpenOffice on my machine. She walked by, and went "you didn't install Office without a key did you, because that's against the rules." I then proceeded to show her OO, how it works, what it was. Then came the big sale, "..and best of all, it's free."

Our office is MS Office free now, altho one holdout refuses to go OO, so eventually I installed the beta of IBM Lotus Symphony and all is good.

However, the community is part of the problem...

I try to promote FOSS projects as much as I can -- however it is the community that often kicks themselves in the butt. Often times I have received calls from friends or co-workers that installed a one-off OSS project that I recommended. Usually when they took the time to find the proper support for something that is broken, people's responses are "Well, go fix it!", or "Download the latest code from the SVN, change XYZ to file ZZZ.cpp and compile." They have no idea what an SVN is, let alone an idea of how to use it, or compile the results.

Lots of these people just want to use their computer. Paying some company $50 is no big deal if they can call them up and complain about a bug or mis-guided feature. Heck, they don't mind paying the $150 for Office because they know it is a well-supported community, and just about everybody can help them. (OpenOffice is making great strides in this area too).

People don't trust "Free"

People have no idea that a thing, software, can be "free as in speech." I don't even go there.

But when I tell people the software is free as in "you don't have to pay any money, you can copy to as many computers as you want, you can pass it along," they tend to look at me sideways. They are deeply suspicious. They just don't believe it. Generally, they voice two objections. The first is "If it's free, it must be crap." The second is "What's the catch? It can't *really* be free."

At that point, it's easy to reel them in. I just appeal to their natural skepticism, make them think their view of the world is especially insightful, and feed their greed. Here's how: "No, actually, it's not crap; it's better than the stuff they charge money for. Ya see, the people who write this free software give it away to everyone so that people will use it. Every once in a while, the head of I.T. in some big company tries it, likes it, and installs it in the company. Then the company will need some customization or training or other support so they'll call the people that wrote it and give them money to help out. The software writers make big money providing support, the companies save a lot of money because free software plus paid support is still cheaper than paying the ungodly cost of MS Office for every employee, and as this sort of minor, unintended side effect, regular folks like us get to acquire and use really high quality software for no money at all. Ain't that cool?"

The light bulb clicks on over their head. Their eyes furtively dart from side to side. Suddenly, they act like they just found a Rembrandt accidentally thrown out in the trash. They join me in the conspiracy to rip off the man (or so they think) and gladly take the CD that I'm offering.

No, it's not 100% accurate and it does tastelessly appeal to the base instincts of the mark. It's even comparable to an end-user marketing strategy commonly used to push crack. But it gets people to use (most often) a free AV product or (occasionally) OpenOffice, AbiWord, Firefox, et. al. They can learn more deeply later; I just want them to start using the stuff in the here and now. I want them to get used to the notion of not paying for software. This approach has had the most success for me.

Free = zero cost

Already large groups of people believe that software is "free" - they download it, install it and use it. They never paid a dime for it. They aren't going to, because someone made it available to them for free and you can count on people continuing to do so. Regardless of any laws to the contrary.

They have been doing this for years, since before the "Internet", although it has really taken off with the advent of warez web sites, P2P downloading and other stuff.

You are never going to convince someone that "vendor lock-in" is bad when they consider they are shafting the vendor just as much as the vendor is shafting them. Excessive costs? What cost? They are getting this stuff for free.

Does everyone do this? No, but it is a sizable group. Certainly enough to make a dent in overall statistics of revenue and use. The folks "in the know" about this consider the people paying to be losers and dummies, so you need a "guide" to get in with the right crowd. Information like this isn't free, especially for the people that are just graduating from AOL U.

Arguing about "free" software is pointless to these people. They aren't going to listen because to them all software is "free". There are no "vendors", there is no "support" and there are no costs.

Re:Evangelist in the Office

My advice ... keep this person as far away from your server as you possibly can.

Re:

What's with this fucking spam all of the sudden.
Isn't is possible to add in a layer orso that blocks all those IP addresses that are used for this crap?
Anonymous Cowardness is good and all to be able to talk about a company acting (illegal|immoral), but

Re:

Who did you have in mind, Daniela Cicarelli?

More likely CowboyNeal. :)

Re:Article not msft friendly = more flambait posts

What's the "N" word? Do you mean NIGGER [russnelson.com]? Or do you mean NOLDEMORT [wikipedia.org]? Why are there words we can't say? Thinking that words intrinsically have power is a pre-scientific idea. It's superstitious.