MESSAGE
| DATE | 2008-07-08 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] Maybe its because lindows just sucked
|
On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 03:18:04PM -0400, Ronny Abraham wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 1:50 AM, Ruben Safir wrote:
> > Corel screw up their target market by using a lot of non-free software in their crap and then failing to market it. The product was fine. It was down right impressive.
>
> Ruben, I have not used the Corel office suite. I don't need to.
> Because I know how fast Java apps at the time worked. But I like to
> think of myself as fair. So I'll tell you what, if you manage to get
> the Corel Beta of the time running at good clip on an x386 machine
> then I'll concede the entire argument. Not a 486 or a 586, but a 386.
> Because that is what most of the office workers were typing on.
>
Just to say it, Corel Office for Linux was put out in 2002.
That was the year the Pentium 4 came out, which was wildly adopted. The
smallest possible machine anyone used it on was a PII and they were an
aging bunch at that point, over 5 years old. my servers are running
Duron 850 chips, about that same power as I recall.
> > Yeah, those points are death to any product. You do not give customers what
> > they want, you drive a new business by exceding their expectations and
> > teaching them what they want.
> >
> > This is marketing and PR 1.0
> >
> > You create markets with advertising, and public realtions.
>
> So according to this reasoning, products don't fail because they don't
> deliver, they only fail because there wasn't enough PR.
>
Yes. read Kenneth Galbraith and the works of Edward L. Bernays. Gilbrath is
an economist who is one of the 4 keystone contributers to that field along
with Adam Smith, Milton Friedman and John Maynard Keynes. In fact, the
rise of the consumer ecomomy was the key economic driving force behind the
development of the middle class. For that see Eugene Weber, Historian.
Let me quote a small review of Galbraith:
"The Dependence Effect
According to Galbraith, modern capitalism is dominated by large enterprises and characterized by an abundance of contrived wants that are the product of corporate planning and massive advertising:
As a society becomes increasingly affluent, wants are increasingly created by the process by which they are satisfied.... Wants thus come to depend on output. In technical terms, it can no longer be assumed that welfare is greater at an all-round higher level of production than at a lower one. It may be the same. The higher level of production has, merely, a higher level of want creation necessitating a higher level of want satisfaction. There will be frequent occasion to refer to the way wants depend on the process by which they are satisfied. It will be convenient to call it the Dependence Effect.[18]
It is not consumers who are sovereign in the modern industrial system, but rather the gigantic firms that produce and market goods and services. "
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2006/04/john_kenneth_ga.html
> Did it ever occur to you that the PR people are the ones who want you
> to believe that because they like having jobs?
>
No. Never. Maybe the econimists ar trying to protect their colleagues
at Ernest and Young (what is better than being both Young and Earnest I ask
you)
>
> > Did you ever see the film Tucker?
>
> No, but it's probably a better example than Rockefeller.
>
>
> > Its a wiki, go to a business library and look it up.
>
> Not happening. I simply don't care enough to go to a library and read
> a book on a subject in order to understand a point you are making. If
> you want to make a point to me, you have to do more of the work than
> say "go to a library".
>
> > Bullshit. IBM invented the market. They just didn't care to compete after they
> > had the Department of Justice kick them around but good.
>
> Fair enough. Like I said, I don't have hard facts in that case, so
> you can take it for what it's worth.
>
> > What? Sometimes you are a little weird.
>
> Rubin, if you gave me one or two examples, then sure, I'd put out the
> time to understand it. Especially if I thought that it would improve
> my general knowledge. But if you hand me five examples to one
> argument, I am simply not going to hunt down every one of them. I am
> not a historian, I am not a lawyer. I am totally uninterested in
> going to a library to read a book to better comprehend some obscure
> point being made in a conversation that probably isn't going to change
> anyone's opinion.
Except, it's not a small point. People spend 25K a semester at Stern
Business School to learn this. Its the cornerstone of business and essential
to an indiviuals ability to undertand the basic economic facts of what
happens around them. Everyone is in business, right? If your going to
work for web advertising company, it might help to understand what they're
selling, how they might succeed, and why they might fail.
> My point was, give me one or two counterexamples
> that illustrate what you are trying to say. This isn't a "two men
> enter, one man leaves" argument. This is about how we can best
> utilize our time. Given that the entire GNU/Linux enterprise is
> successful because people like you and me devote our time, I think
> that's actually an important question.
>
> Now the reason I am actually arguing this with you is very simple. I
> think and feel, very very strongly that "marketing is everything" is
> total and complete bullshit. I have heard Democrats make that
> argument, I have heard Republicans make that argument. I have heard
> the guys from Sun make that argument too. And the truth is, marketing
> definitely has impact. But it is not even close to everything.
>
It is the very life line and the cause of success of every sucessful business.
> Distribution is a factor
> Cost of risk vs. reward is a factor.
> Ease of use is a factor
> Convenience in getting it up and running is a factor
> Need is a factor.
> Stabilitity is a factor.
> Learning curve is a factor
>
> Now Linux is very good, at the present time, in filling some of these
> requirements. It is very stable, and thanks to the fast internet
> connections it's distribution is fantastic, but regarding all the
> other points, it is simply NOT THAT GREAT.
>
Name anything better?
> >
> > No, when my system craps out patients DIE DIE DIE.
> >
> > Gee, you think that would be incentive. Or to what 500 million dollars of
> > arbitrage go past you on the Chicago exchange?
> >
> > Some businesses actually do something.
>
> Businesses are run by people. People want to cover their ass. People
> stick with a brand because it's worked "well enough" as far as they
> are concerned ... I can't believe I'm actually arguing over something
> this obvious.
>
What - Consummers are lazy and don't even go to the library to even
read about a 20 million dollar investment in an objective fashion?
No kidding? People but computer systems as if they're shopping for
a pair of shoes? Wow
> this is ridiculous.
>
> You know what Ruben? If you really believe everything you are saying,
> then why don't you stop bitching about it, and take courses in
> marketing and PR, and then do something about it?
I do do something about it. I can't even tell you any more how many
people I've put onto GNU. It's gotten past the point that I can count.
And every couple of years a new generation of technophile kids come
around and shoot the product in the foot with their "objective"
analysis of of the computing economy.
> You are one of the
> smartest guys I know, you can probably be successful at anything you
> like, so just do it. You're effectively telling me, that he who
> controls PR controls the world, so go for it.
I'm running for Mayor and Adam Kosmin is my campaign manager ;)
> If it's as important
> and certain as you make it out to be, there shouldn't be any risk
> whatsoever in moving to ad agency right?
>
> After all, if marketing is everything, then anyone who is good at it
> will make the company a bundle of cash right? Given that you are a
> very smart and capable man, you should be able to master it fairly
> quickly. Therefore, you should be able, with a minimum of effort and
> almost no risk whatsoever be able to switch jobs and make a bundle.
> So do it.
>
> But of course, marketing isn't everything.
It's everything when it comes to the failure of universal GNU adoption.
> PR is not everything.
> Being able to talk your way is not always going to cut it. If you
> tried that you'd be risking quite a lot which means you'll never do
> it. Because, you are, in fact, a smart guy and not an idiot.
>
No, its because I can't AGAIN just abaandon a 140K income to take a
volunteer position marketing GNU like I did when I started NYLXS. Nor
can I afford to start a new career at 40K as a PR intern to market
Toilet Paper.
> > The only way for any business to succeed is to INOVATE and create a NEW MARKET,
> > especially when competing against a legal monolopy which would also break
> > any law, take any action, pursue in court any competitor, in order to crush them
> > and maintain their monopoly.
>
> If what you said was true, then Ford wouldn't be about to go bankrupt,
Say again? What has Ford inovated since the Ford Tarus?
> and the Japanese wouldn't be taking over the auto industry.
>
Say again? The Japanese constantly redine the automobile and market
their new designs vigorously.
> >
> >
> >> I believe this so much, that the second I get a chance I'm
> >> going to start donating time to WINE.
> >>
> >
> > I'd have to be more insulting then I care to be to answer that. What can be
> > said? This has been tried for a decade and failed.
>
> I'm a sucker for a lost cause.
>
> > You haven't seen them?
>
> No, where can I find them? I'm very interested.
Everywhere. Try Googling for Linux Windows Integration. Lindows was a prime
example, followed by Ximian, Novel, Cadera, and more.
Ruben
--
http://www.mrbrklyn.com - Interesting Stuff
http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://fairuse.nylxs.com DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002
"Yeah - I write Free Software...so SUE ME"
"The tremendous problem we face is that we are becoming sharecroppers to our own cultural heritage -- we need the ability to participate in our own society."
"> I'm an engineer. I choose the best tool for the job, politics be damned.<
You must be a stupid engineer then, because politcs and technology have been attached at the hip since the 1st dynasty in Ancient Egypt. I guess you missed that one."
© Copyright for the Digital Millennium
|
|
