Hi Sukender, On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 1:05 PM, Sukender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I agree with 99% of what you say. And I would like to insist on the fact that > visivility (marketing/web site/etc.) is a weak point of OSG. It's really too > bad since OSG has a great source code and great community. Maybe some threads > would be started about that? For instance search engine's visibility, or web > site content/maintenance/appearance/whatever, or on general > marketing/advertisement. Maybe donations would be used to pay some > advertisments?
Or perhaps get adverts to pay for adverts :-) One could potentially put advertisements on the osg websites, although I don't think we have enough traffic to make too much cash this route. Perhaps projects similar to the OSG that do provide advertisements might be willing to share how much revenue they generate this route, if it ain't much it ain't worth pursuing. An effective advertisement would also just be becoming a bit better at promoting new releases and events, writing articles, promoting active users to blog about there work. This type of activity needn't cost more than time. I personally have been meaning to start a blog for a few years but my intray is practically never never empty enough for me to go spend time blogging. > Where I don't totally agree is on the game market. I guess we mainly are > engineers/researchers, not marketing professionals; so concentrating on OSG's > features is logical. Of course we have to keep OSG's strongest points. But > the game market has to be infiltrated by OSG! The benefit for OSG would be to > have a different use for its code, and thus giving it more varied > contributions. Why is there so few people wanting to work on osgAudio, and > osgPhysics? Why did we have to wait so long before osgWidget and > osgAnimation's integration? IMHO, the game market is an (the?) answer. We > could use the power of vis-sim and virtual-reality features in games, and > vice-versa. > Remember that it's awfully difficult to get from "very good" to "perfect", > whereas it's easy to go from "nothing" or "very bad" to "acceptable". At > least a few things about gaming would provide us much. In the case of NodeKit's like character animation, audio, 3D GUI widgets and physics end users have been largley rolling their own. Some of these areas have had OSG style NodeKits developed, but few have been appropriate for integration with the core OSG. One could stuff a whole load of functionality quickly into the core OSG but doing so would break the coherence of the overall toolkit. For instance for the vis-sim market threading and multi-context support are essential, but these features do take more care and understanding to handle than is often taken by 3rd add-ons libs that solve a specific subset of end users needs. The OSG also has to remain practical to maintain, which means not overloading the core developers and community with lots of new software technology that has to be tested, debugging, ported and maintained. Pulling in extra manpower from a wider community can help, but it can also be a burden. Software projects effectiveness don't usually scale with manpower well, quality of engineering talent is actually far more important than quantity. > And as I already told, I'm ready to help for a bit of management, but I'm > also ready to help on marketing/visibility/etc. > > Sukender, determined to fight the weak points ;) Your enthusiasm and willing to help is appreciated ;-) In terms of priorities, my own are getting a stable OSG-2.8 out the door with binary packages for the main platforms in a timely manner. Once 2.8 goes out then we can go try our collective hand at marketing the release/project in general. Robert. _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
