> Your comments have been good in that they have made me think deeper (Great, what more could anyone hope for?)
Anyway, I think you might be selling OSGeo short -- our very presence indicates an implicit level of coordination and maturity that people will intuitively and implicitly grok. -mpg > -----Original Message----- > From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss- > boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Cameron Shorter > Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 3:25 PM > To: discuss@lists.osgeo.org > Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] 5 Star OSGeo project maturity rating > > Michael, > Your comments have been good in that they have made me think deeper > about what OSGeo stands for and then how we market that. Successful > product companies first find out what the market wants, the build a > marketing message, then build the product to fit the market. Developing > a shiny product then discovering no-one wants it is a sad but common > story. > > In our case, we have created a brand called "OSGeo Incubation". What > does that mean? Why is it valuable? How can we get that message across > to our target market of GIS users who are interested in Open Source but > don't know what OSGeo is? > > If OSGeo Incubation doesn't represent quality or maturity (which is > what > the market are looking for) then what is the point of spending years of > volunteer time going through incubation? > > I'm afraid that "OSGeo Project" is not a compelling sales message to > our > target market, unless we can tie the message to quality or maturity (or > another word with similar meaning). > > Unless we can provide such positive marketing, I expect that we will > have spin off projects or organisations "defect" from OSGeo create > their > own marketing message. (I wouldn't be surprise if OpenGeo had similar > thoughts before they created and then marketed the OpenGeo suite.) > > Marketing like everything else has positives and negatives. > Positives: > + Lots of users which draws in money and developers and we all make > money and thrive > > Negatives: > - We need to distill our messages down into marketing sound bytes and > generalised rating systems and the like > > - We need to be honest in describing ours and others projects because > that is what the market wants to hear before they will spend money on > us > > > On 08/06/10 09:17, Michael P. Gerlek wrote: > > Since this is an OSGeo-based CD, presumably with the OSGeo logo all > over it in various places, I'd suggest there are only three kinds of > projects: > > > > - those which are "Approved by OSGeo" > > - those which are "Undergoing OSGeo Approval" > > - everything else > > > > With two simple logos you can indicate projects of the first two > categories; I don't think much explanation should be required up front, > especially if one avoids jargon words like "graduated" and > "incubation". > > > > -mpg > > > > > > From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss- > boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Cameron Shorter > > Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 3:57 PM > > To: discuss@lists.osgeo.org > > Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] 5 Star OSGeo project maturity rating > > > > There have been some passionate views against rating projects. > > > > Maybe I should start by explaining the drivers which led to the > proposal for a 5 star rating. > > > > Previously only OSGeo graduated and incubation projects were promoted > by OSGeo at conferences and the like, however, with the OSGeo LiveDVD, > we are packaging and hence promoting many non-graduated projects. How > do we credit that a project has gone through the extensive graduation > process in our marketing material in a manner that will be understood > by the target audience? > > > > Unfortunately, putting "OSGeo Graduated" against a project is > meaningless because the target audience usually hasn't heard of OSGeo > and is even less likely to know what "Graduated" means. > > > > We could write a paragrah explaining what OSGeo and Graduation are on > each Project Overview flier, but that wastes valuable marketing real- > estate. > > > > Note: I'm basing our target audience on the typical profile of people > who drop by the OSGeo booth at conferences. They pick up a LiveDVD and > fliers which have "Open Source" on the cover. They are typically GIS > users, have heard of Open Source and want to know what Open Source > packages are available to replace their existing XXXX, but usually > haven't heard of OSGeo and almost certainly don't know about the > graduation process. They want to know about the best 2 or 3 packakges > they should consider, and they definitely don't want to have to trawl > through 350 software packages on http://freegis.org . They spend 5 to > 20 minutes talking at the OSGeo stand, then walk onto the other 50 > exhibition booths at the conference. > > Visitors to the OSGeo website are probably similar in profile, but we > don't get such a good opportunity to meet them face to face as we do at > conferences. > > > > So the challenge is: > > * How do we credit OSGeo Graduated projects in a manner > understandable to GIS users new to Open Source? > > * How can we credit other stable Open Source projects, while still > acknowledging the extra kudos of passing graduation? > > * How can we provide this message distinctly on marketing material so > that it doesn't waste valuable marketing real-estate? > > > > > > On 08/06/10 02:30, Michael P. Gerlek wrote: > > [foolishly stepping in where I should fear to tread.] > > This has been asked for before, but historically some projects have > not step up to the plate for providing such materials - for a variety > of reasons, some good and some not so good. > > OSGeo should simply put a link to the project's "marketing" section, > and if the project owners provide content on the other end, then good - > if not, then so be it. > > I'm all about providing quality user experiences, but anything more > than that is likely not worth the effort required. Our users are, for > the most part, a very savvy and discriminating bunch. And for apps > that are explicitly targeting users outside of the normal open source > types, it should be up to them to provide the "marketing" materials > they deem appropriate. > > -mpg > > > > From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss- > boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Bob Basques > > Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 9:24 AM > > To: OSGeo Discussions > > Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] 5 Star OSGeo project maturity rating > > > > All, > > > > Did anyone else hear that thunder in the distance? :c) > > > > That's what I've been trying to say, let the projects handle this > sort of thing themselves, but OSGEO CAN (and SHOULD in my mind) > coordinate a standardized look and feel to such things. > > > > bobb > > > > > > > > > >>>> Howard Butler<hobu....@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > > On Jun 7, 2010, at 11:03 AM, Bob Basques wrote: > > > > > >> Wouldn't it seem prudent to classify the projects before trying to > compare them? > >> > > /me screams into a room that no one can hear. Stop it! > > > > This whole exercise is quite frankly, masturbatory, and does nothing > to help the projects who would be rated, provides very little to those > "users" of said ratings, and calls into question our credibility by > having the arrogance to rate *our own* projects in any way. OSGeo is > doing enough by providing visibility for the projects, and it is up to > them to pull them in as users with the quality of their software, the > quality of their documentation, and the quality of their community. A > silly sticker by us or anyone else isn't going to sway that process in > any way. > > > > It would be more valuable to collate a series of "elevator pitch"- > type material from each project who wishes to participate to make their > case to the envisioned users of this rating. Projects who do not > participate in this for whatever reason implicitly make a statement > about their quality. That's going to be far more useful to both the > projects and the users than an elongating graphic. > > > > Howard_______________________________________________ > > Discuss mailing list > > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org > > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Discuss mailing list > > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org > > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Cameron Shorter > Geospatial Director > Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050 > Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254 > > Think Globally, Fix Locally > Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source > http://www.lisasoft.com > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss