> I think the problem is that most good software engineers see 'beauty' in > the elegant component based, object oriented architecture of Wicket - we > can all go "oooh" and "aaaah" just thinking about how truly beautiful > Wicket has been 'engineered'. > > We see beauty beyond the external presentation. > > People out in the real world however, or developers who don't get the > "oooh/aaah" value from elegant design and architecture, are usually > 'beauty is only skin deep' people - and given then don't care about > elegant engineering 'under the hood' their evaluation of the 'goodness' > of something is based totally on the appearance of the 'skin'. > > I think we have to grasp the concept that there are two different types > of people and they're on opposite ends of the spectrum - the less > 'engineering' someone is the more they crave 'funky look and feel'. > > Because of the above, and maybe I'm going out on a limb here, IMHO > Wicket's much wider adoption is totally reliant on improving the Wicket > website's 'looks' to newcomers on their first visit.
as expressed before: emotions. e... motion > motion > movement. the nice emotions you experiment as an engineer on wicket, the same non-techs experiment on render-side. but at the end what moves you, and other people, the hole world: emotions. so let's speak that language at the non-dominated side yet, but not only in look & feel (design), also in strategy (marketing). --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
