| 1 |
On 1/3/07, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
| 2 |
> "Mark Haney" <mhaney@××××××××××××.org> posted |
| 3 |
> 459C0E03.3080003@××××××××××××.org, excerpted below, on Wed, 03 Jan 2007 |
| 4 |
> 15:11:47 -0500: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> > Ah, now it makes sense. But since I have no intention of building |
| 7 |
> > anything to be distributed or used for other than what it was designed |
| 8 |
> > for, I'm okay with the branding. Most times I treat brands like I treat |
| 9 |
> > my kids when they get rowdy, I mentally turn off any notice of them. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Admittedly being a bit pedantic, that isn't quite true, at least with |
| 12 |
> "that browser otherwise called Firefox". You not only notice but accord |
| 13 |
> some value to the brand, as you not only noticed but obviously prefer the |
| 14 |
> Firefox branding, or you'd prefer "Bon Echo" or whatever, since the only |
| 15 |
> positive is the branding, which you wouldn't care about, and it comes with |
| 16 |
> a big negative, restrictions on your legal right to give your friend a |
| 17 |
> copy, should they need or want one. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> So it appears you care rather more about branding than you claim. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Ha, I feel silly now for not adding 1+1. I'd read all about the |
| 22 |
Debian iceweasel stuff, but never stopped to consider why Gentoo was |
| 23 |
calling it 'Bon Echo' or why the logo was missing the orange splash. |
| 24 |
Thinking I still really don't care all that much... |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Wil |
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |
Archives