> Oh, I don't know. All three frameworks are based on the original > Rails vision, so they are all similar in that regard, and all these > adjectives apply to all of them. > > I guess the first question is, regarding "Pylons is a lightweight web > framework emphasizing flexibility and rapid development": > - Is it true? > - Are there other aspects that need to be emphasized? > - What other marketing terms would more clearly distinguish Pylons > from Django and Ruby? > > There are three levels of marketing. One is, for lack of a better > term, the Rails-style approach with MVC and routing. Pylons, Django, > Rails, and TG all support this. And in Pylons' earlier days it was > important to emphasize. Perhaps not so much now since MVC has won out > and all the main competitors have it. > > Another level is building upon third-party code in the framework, > which only Pylons and TG do. A third level is adding or replacing > your own components (by the application developer), which you can > perhaps do in all of them but Pylons emphasizes it more than the > others. So that could be a marketing point, except that there are a > lot of users who don't need this and don't want the complication of > thinking about it, so we have to be careful not to overemphasize it.
Hey Mike, thanks for the post. For background, I do a fair bit of sales/marketing for my businesses ( code for one, showbiz for another ). IMHO, it is absolutely *crucial* that you we do indeed emphasize the last point. In marketing, you need to keep your eye on your competitive differentiation, because you need to find the people for whom you really are a good fit. Nobody wins if we market Pylons as if it appeals to the same people as Django or RoR. Maybe they get taken in for a bit, then they leave dissatisfied, and spread the word. Whereas when we attract the customers (users) who really are looking for what makes Pylons different, the opposite happens, they are excited, they spread the word, maybe they contribute back, less FUD and misinformation abound. We need to make sure that the 'right users' are coming to Pylons, and accept that it is going to always be a much smaller user base than rails or django. I think Pylons does a better job of this than TG2 is, but it could still be better. So we need to: - be clear about Pylons is and is not ( I think you guys have done a good job there ) - be clear about what problems are uniquely solved by Pylon's differentiation ( you guys know this, but the website could explain it better ) - be clear about who the user is who needs the above more than what is offered elsewhere - figure out what they need as far as marketing and outreach and support and provide that ( by support I mean what they need to see to stick around ) The last two are where I think the public face of Pylons could be improved. I hope that helps somewhat, I would certainly be interested in helping out here as I definitely want to be able to keep my clients happy that we are using Pylons! Iain ( for example, here is our website, I think we've done very good job of making sure people know who we are, what we do, and who should be paying attention to us: http://www.flyingnotfalling.com ) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
