Do you feel the same way about "Mac OS X by Apple", considering how much of that operating system (FreeBSD, Darwin, GNU, KHTML, llvm etc) started life in the open source community?
I'm as big an open source booster as anyone, but I can't say it upsets me in the slightest to see Google taking credit for Chrome in adverts. If anything, it makes me feel like the open source model has won - it's so widespread now it isn't even noteworthy.
Yeah, I do feel the same way about Apple. Apple claims credit a lot more than Google. Google is definitely way more free software friendly than Apple in my experience - like a whole different magnitude of more friendly :)
I see your point, but without giving proper credit, the developers of open source projects will not get credit outside of the project. They won't get the credit from the press or from The People.
Even in other open source projects it would be nice to give credit more evenly. As an example, many interviews or articles mention 'Guido the creator of python'. Whereas the reality is that thousands of people have contributed to python to make it what it is today.
It's hard to give credit even when you try your hardest to. Also, where do we draw the line? Do we start with crediting Persian, Egyptian, and Greek mathematicians and artists? Do we need to give a whole raft of references each time a trumpet is blown? Do we list individual contributors? Or just major contributors, or founders? Or perhaps not mentioning anyone at all - which many hackers do. An 'open source community project' is a nice compromise as it gives credit to everyone.
Perhaps 'Made by the people of the world, for the people of the world' would have been a better advertisement.
I'm as big an open source booster as anyone, but I can't say it upsets me in the slightest to see Google taking credit for Chrome in adverts. If anything, it makes me feel like the open source model has won - it's so widespread now it isn't even noteworthy.