The best marketing is making a better product - either technically or with improved documentation, accessibility, etc.
I know that's wrong, at least as far as marketers are concerned. Marketeers are like lawyers - they get paid to defend people and make them look their best even if they are guilty. So a lot of shoddy products pay heaps to marketeers to make them look good. Problem is that must be a cheaper/more effective strategy than actually putting in the technical effort. I don't think your hours were wasted Pascal. Ian On 17 Nov 2010, at 13:33, Pascal Robert wrote: > > Le 2010-11-16 à 20:55, Chuck Hill a écrit : > >> On Nov 16, 2010, at 5:16 PM, Ian Joyner wrote: >>> On 17 Nov 2010, at 11:43, Chuck Hill wrote: >>>> On Nov 15, 2010, at 8:43 PM, Ian Joyner wrote: >>>>> >>>>> One student in his experience report mentioned that professional >>>>> programmers should spend extra time on making their stuff usable and >>>>> easily installable if they are going to expect people to use their >>>>> systems. Salient advice all around and I think he scored 100%. >>>> >>>> I think an important distinction here is between "expect people to use >>>> their systems" and "allow people to use their systems". Wonder largely >>>> falls in the second category. "I made this because I found it interesting >>>> and you can use it if you want." Neither WO nor Wonder are now marketed >>>> products and there is little incentive to make them appear like they are. >>> >>> Well I meant expect more in the sense of (cmd-ctrl-d) "regarding something >>> as likely to happen" and from the Thesaurus in the anticipate sense, not >>> the require or insist on sense. >> >> I understood what you meant. But it seems to me that most of what is in >> Wonder was really added from a perspective of "you can use this if you want, >> if you don't then I don't care". Which explains the lack of documentation >> and tutorials. People are willing to share, but they don't have the time >> and resources to go out of their way to make it easy for you. "If you want >> to know, read the code." A major reason for this is that most contributions >> come from a single person's efforts (meaning someone working alone). >> Everyone like to complain about documentation, but no one likes to write it. >> >> >>> People use Rails, Django, and Pylons because they think they're cool. Don't >>> know how to get that cool factor into WO. But removing each hurdle would >>> help. Perhaps development on different platforms would help - if we wanted >>> to teach WO, we couldn't because that would require students to go out and >>> buy Macs (something we subtly encourage but don't 'expect'). >> >> >> I suspect that most people using WO don't care about the cool factor so they >> don't spend a lot of time trying to push it. Most of us have been around >> long enough to know to disbelieve stories of Technology X being a Silver >> Bullet. It seems to me that the driving forces behind technologies like >> Rails, Django, and Pylons tend to be younger or more idealistic (or is that >> fanatical?). I just don't have the energy for that. I don't know what the >> answer is. Maybe we are all too busy and too tired to go out and evangelize >> beyond adding to Wonder and presenting at WOWODC. > > And maybe because it's only a very small group of people who try to do some > marketing. Counting the time I took to cleanup the wiki, WOWODC organization, > WOWODC presentations, wocommunity.org, mailing lists, etc., I have spent more > than 250 hours this year on community stuff. And I'm starting to think that > those 250 hours were wasted... > > > -- > Pascal Robert > prob...@macti.ca > > AIM/iChat : MacTICanada > LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/in/macti > Twitter : pascal_robert > _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
