[willvarfar]

Jelly Bean was sponsored?

Calling the version "KitKat" was basically product-placement.

[ape4]

Who is sponsoring who?

[willvarfar]

Nestle paid for product placement of 'kitkat'.

Nestle have given press releases describing their 'collaboration', and even set up this website. Its inconceivable that Google did not demand payment; Google could have called it something generic like all their previous versions.

Google of course probably approached Nestle. They created a new revenue generating angle on creating an OS.

Debian ought to go get money from other brands through similar version naming.

Seriously, why isn't the next Ubuntu called "Head&Shoulders"?

[deelowe]

> Nestle paid for product placement of 'kitkat'.

I haven't seen that anywhere. All reports thus far have said that neither side is paying for this.

[kevincennis]

There was an article on The Verge yesterday about the Google/Nestlé thing. They said no money changed hands.

[gdilla]

Right. Why does Google need to paid for this? Any dollar figure would be insignificant, not scaleable and not part of their core business. Selling naming rights to their SDKs?! Are these baseball stadiums?

[ape4]

Might become a thing. Of course, Android is more famous than Ubuntu (to the masses)