RE: [Desktop_architects] Applications and pre-installed machines
On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 11:49 -0800, Bastian, Waldo wrote: On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 09:57 -0800, Bastian, Waldo wrote: The one business issue that is going to be hard to overcome for the general market is the vast differences in market segment sizes. Lets use the numbers of 90% Windows 5% Mac 5% Linux Now the Mac market segment is a little different in that it used to be a much higher percentage and for certain usage models I would imagine that it is the 90% and MS is the smaller number. So if you are looking to enhance the revenue for your product you look at the relative sizes of the market segments for a given industry if the above numbers are close then which ports do you support? Well if you assume that you can gain the same penetration in each of the different desktop environments then the numbers tell you. Let's say that you feel that you can quickly capture 10% of a given application segment. I think the assumption of uniform penetration opportunities should be challenged. Sure - lets say that it is 20% for the new one. i.e. You are the first one on Linux and there isn't anybody else there. Of course if that is true then their probably won't be a good penetration. So: MSSDesktop Penetration % 90% MS Windows10% 9% 5% Mac 10% 0.5% 5% Linux 20% 1% == 10.5% MSSDesktop Penetration % 90% MS Windows11% 9.9% 5% Mac 11% 0.55% 5% Linux 00% 0% == 10.45% I always use the would a venture capital guy buy this test. And a there is nobody using Linux for X so we will quickly be able to gain 20% of the Linux desktops as a target market segment share isn't one that would fly with the smarter ones. Unless it was moving people from an established desktop and then that would involve a corresponding drop in the established sales. Yes, that's part of it. The idea is that the value offered by (my product + linux) is better than (competitor product + windows) The point you make is a good one: The interesting data point isn't current Linux MSS share, but projected Linux MSS growth. You want to capture 100% of the people that are going to use Linux for X and it will be your job to make it happen. Your company is going to make rain and catch it all. Your raincloud doesn't show up yet in the IDC weather forecast and when it does your competitors will be too late because you are already out there. Yea getting ahead of the curve is what the marketing folks are supposed to do. But they are herd beasts and none of them want to be the first to drink from the new waterhole. :-) The numbers have to work for a small penetration into the new segment nobody believes 100% MSS. That is the TAM not a realistic expectation. :-0 The other part that the above numbers don't show is the positive impact that offering your customers the option of migrating to Linux at a later date can have on your current windows sales. That is related to the number of organisations considering to deploy Linux. No idea how much advantange you can get out of that though. I agree but I'm not sure how to present that to an ISV without a set of customers that have large Linux deployments. If I had customer data. i.e. Mr/Mrs/ ISV did you know that 80% of your Windows customers are deploying Linux desktops for special functions? That would be a strong argument in favor of getting ahead of the curve. Yea, they could be fixed function devices. (Order entry and the like) but it would show the ISV that their is movement and at least raise the flag that if they didn't address it there was a possibility in the future of the Windows sales moving to something that worked in both environments. Of course once the movement starts to happen then the ISV's will move because they see a change in the relative % of MSS for the different desktops. But that is an after they see a trend for a few quarters or even years. Sure, but you don't get a competitive advantage by moving along with the curve, you need to move ahead of it for that. Linux creates an opportunity for an ISV to do that. It seems to me that a company like Xara understood the opportunity here, maybe Bryce can comment on what motivated them to port to Linux. Cheers, Waldo -- Timothy D. Witham - Chief Technology Officer - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Open Source Development Lab Inc - A non-profit corporation 12725 SW Millikan Way - Suite 400 - Beaverton OR, 97005 (503)-906-1911 (office)(503)-702-2871 (cell) (503)-626-2436 (fax
Re: [Desktop_architects] Most wanted Application: Email
On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 17:35 -0500, Mike Shaver wrote: On 21-Dec-05, at 4:58 PM, Timothy D. Witham wrote: 1) Good sync with handheld devices. Phone, Blackbeary (sp?) and Plam or pocket PC Evo does that in many cases, I thought, but yeah, I can totally see that being a barrier. Seems like something that is mostly client-side. But not reliably - I've setup my Pilot about 5 times and still it all goes away every once in awhile. I've talked to other folks who have the same sort of issues. 2) Group calendaring including meeting scheduling. i..e. I want to check if Tom, Bill, Linus and Buddy the wonder dog are available at 10:00 PM. This includes a laptop resyncing when it gets back to a connected state and the last know schedule being available on a server. That's not email, but OK, I definitely believe that it's a barrier to adoption. Evo has that capability with Exchange now, though -- what are the cases in which that breaks down? It is to the corporate people. It is important to remember who is the customer. They might not always be right in their definitions but they are always the customer. (I have a harder time believing that OpenOffice was is a more important browser application or plug-in to support than QuickTime, Windows Media, or _Java_and_ActiveX_. Is there a way to see what the results look like if we limit to the set of respondents whose jobs would indicate that they are specify/approve/purchase?) 3) Proxies for executives. i.e. Setup an admin to be able to respond to the executive's mail so that it appears to be coming from the executive so the lower folks don't know that the executive doesn't read most of their own mail. I must not be understanding this requirement, because that sounds like the sort of thing that is done by setting up the admin's mail client to point at the same IMAP account as the executives. If that's really the #3 issue, though, it sounds like we're in good shape. It is sort of close but not the same. The issue is the admin setups the meeting and then responds as the admin. What they want is the admin to respond as the executive. This seems to be the problem as folks keep doing new clients when the issues is the server side stuff. I don't understand -- Linux desktop deployment is gated by there not being open source servers on Linux for mail and calendaring? Why are those related? The Linux desktop could deploy against Exchange/ GroupWise/Notes/etc., no? It is one of those things. Well if I'm going to keep all of this other stuff around I'm going to keep the desktop I know also. In short they don't see the whole move so it gives them the easy way out of moving at all. Strange but true. Thanks for the list, though -- what's the source of those pain points? From the comments in the survey? From places like the LUAC and talking to large end user CIO's. (I was at a conference two weeks ago with a big group of these folks. I haven't seen 90+ suits in a room in about a decade.) But this is a big issue to them. Tim Mike -- Timothy D. Witham - Chief Technology Officer - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Open Source Development Lab Inc - A non-profit corporation 12725 SW Millikan Way - Suite 400 - Beaverton OR, 97005 (503)-906-1911 (office)(503)-702-2871 (cell) (503)-626-2436 (fax) ___ Desktop_architects mailing list Desktop_architects@lists.osdl.org https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop_architects
