diff options
| author | Nicolas Vigier <boklm@mageia.org> | 2013-04-14 13:46:12 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Nicolas Vigier <boklm@mageia.org> | 2013-04-14 13:46:12 +0000 |
| commit | 1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0 (patch) | |
| tree | b175f9d5fcb107576dabc768e7bd04d4a3e491a0 /zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/20101021/002535.html | |
| parent | fa5098cf210b23ab4f419913e28af7b1b07dafb2 (diff) | |
| download | archives-master.tar archives-master.tar.gz archives-master.tar.bz2 archives-master.tar.xz archives-master.zip | |
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/20101021/002535.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/20101021/002535.html | 191 |
1 files changed, 191 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/20101021/002535.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/20101021/002535.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..6f5eed36a --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-discuss/20101021/002535.html @@ -0,0 +1,191 @@ +<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> +<HTML> + <HEAD> + <TITLE> [Mageia-discuss] Mageia logo proposals and selection + </TITLE> + <LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" > + <LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-discuss%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-discuss%5D%20Mageia%20logo%20proposals%20and%20selection&In-Reply-To=%3C4CBFC8AA.7040503%40laposte.net%3E"> + <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow"> + <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> + <LINK REL="Previous" HREF="002534.html"> + <LINK REL="Next" HREF="002537.html"> + </HEAD> + <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"> + <H1>[Mageia-discuss] Mageia logo proposals and selection</H1> + <B>andré</B> + <A HREF="mailto:mageia-discuss%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-discuss%5D%20Mageia%20logo%20proposals%20and%20selection&In-Reply-To=%3C4CBFC8AA.7040503%40laposte.net%3E" + TITLE="[Mageia-discuss] Mageia logo proposals and selection">andr55 at laposte.net + </A><BR> + <I>Thu Oct 21 06:59:22 CEST 2010</I> + <P><UL> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="002534.html">[Mageia-discuss] Suggestions +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="002537.html">[Mageia-discuss] Suggestions +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#2535">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#2535">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#2535">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#2535">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + <HR> +<!--beginarticle--> +<PRE>Frank Griffin a écrit : +><i> Gustavo Giampaoli wrote: +</I>><i> +</I>>><i> So, I'm sorry but I agree with the people who want to target this +</I>>><i> "ordinary people". Because I don't think that making Mageia easier and +</I>>><i> friendly hurt or damage advanced users. Linux will be always powerful, +</I>>><i> with the right packages. And any advanced user can make "urpmi +</I>>><i> my-advanced-packages" whenever he/she needs. +</I>>><i> +</I>>><i> We need to attract more non-linux users. +</I>>><i> +</I>>><i> +</I>><i> This is getting very repetitive. Your argument, and the arguments of +</I>><i> those who argue your point of view all make perfect sense and flow +</I>><i> logically, *IF* you accept the premise that the mission of Mageia is to +</I>><i> entice computer-ignorant or computer-antagonistic people, or even just +</I>><i> non-linux newbies, to use Mageia. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> This *might* be a given if Mageia was a company organized to make a +</I>><i> profit. But it's not. It's a group of primarily technical people who +</I>><i> decided to fork Mandriva because they felt that the technical excellence +</I>><i> of the distro was being compromised by Mandriva's corporate goals. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> In a perfect world, where volunteer labor was in infinite supply, and +</I>><i> was paid solely in terms of satisfaction that what they achieved met +</I>><i> their own goals, a community distro would be built up of layers, each +</I>><i> building on the ones below it. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Developers would not need to care about appealing to users on any level +</I>><i> other than providing needed function. They would produce non-GUI +</I>><i> components which had enough configurable options to satisfy anyone from +</I>><i> your grandma to Linus Torvalds. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Other developers who were so inclined would write GUI interfaces to +</I>><i> these services which exposed all of this flexibility, or most of it, or +</I>><i> some of it, or very little of it, depending on whether they were +</I>><i> producing a UI aimed at Linus or grandma or someone in between. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> The same would go for installs: the base install would be componentized +</I>><i> and configurable and open, and interested parties would customize this +</I>><i> for a variety of target audiences. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> The FOSS world isn't perfect, but only in the sense that the volunteer +</I>><i> labor supply isn't infinite. Without an infinite supply, the activities +</I>><i> that don't get performed for resource reasons will be determined by the +</I>><i> satisfaction metric - if the target audience isn't important enough to +</I>><i> some group of technical people to impel them to customize a UI and an +</I>><i> install (and documentation) for that target audience, then that audience +</I>><i> won't see their needs addressed. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> In the corporate world, you have to make a profit. Because you have +</I>><i> limited resources, and because you can't risk basing your enterprise on +</I>><i> packages you don't control, you have to address all of the above tasks +</I>><i> with a finite pool of resources. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Because of that, you can't afford to design your distro to be +</I>><i> configurable and flexible enough to even *potentially* please every set +</I>><i> of target users. Since the number of target user groups determines the +</I>><i> amount of resource you need to satisfy them, it follows that you have to +</I>><i> limit that number in order to satisfy your chosen group or groups with +</I>><i> the resources you can afford. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> This is where marketing becomes invaluable; it uses quantitative +</I>><i> analyses to determine which target group(s) represent the greatest +</I>><i> potential for profit, and the result of those analyses will determine +</I>><i> what development works on, what the tools look like, and what the +</I>><i> install looks like. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> If you accept that the marketing results must be correct, then it makes +</I>><i> no sense for development to build flexibility into software that will +</I>><i> never be used, or for the install team to allow for any install paradigm +</I>><i> that isn't directly oriented to your target user groups. Basically, +</I>><i> marketing drives the truck, and every group associated with production +</I>><i> centers their activity on marketing's objectives. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> This minimizes development costs, and will produce the greatest profit +</I>><i> from the number of sales made. Developers are hired to do only that +</I>><i> work that supports marketing's directives, and the theory is that they +</I>><i> work primarily for the money. They are controlled by Marketing, which +</I>><i> derives its authority from the owners or shareholders ("stakeholders" to +</I>><i> use the fashionable economics term). +</I>><i> +</I>><i> ***That said***,,, +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Mageia is not a company. We have no shareholders, and no financial hold +</I>><i> over the developers. No marketing group has directorial authority over +</I>><i> the developers, because there is no "stakeholder" group which can grant +</I>><i> that authority. No number of users suborned from Windows or Mac or +</I>><i> Ubuntu puts a penny into the pockets of anyone involved in Mageia. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Saying "we believe that a large number of users will switch to Mageia if +</I>><i> we limit our focus to such-and-such" is interesting and may even be +</I>><i> accurate. It is also immaterial, unless the validity of the statement +</I>><i> somehow gives you the authority to direct the actions of the others +</I>><i> involved in Mageia. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> In FOSS, it doesn't. If enough people agree with your objective, you +</I>><i> may find that you have enough critical mass to produce a derived distro +</I>><i> with a face and personality which matches your objectives. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> But to say that the entire community has to direct and/or limit their +</I>><i> efforts to your target group just because you can demonstrate that you +</I>><i> can wean them away from some other product ignores the fact that such a +</I>><i> goal may give no or even negative satisfaction to those expected to do +</I>><i> the technical work. That's not to say that they dispute your skills in +</I>><i> determining a target market, but simply that they derive no satisfaction +</I>><i> in doing or limiting their work to address that market. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Graham is fond of saying that "you can't be all things to all people", +</I>><i> but that's only true in the area of the spectrum where his skills come +</I>><i> into play. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> In development, the entire concept of Software Architecture and +</I>><i> Component-Driven design is directed towards producing components with +</I>><i> enough flexibility to be configured for any possible use of the +</I>><i> functionality represented by that component. When not constrained by +</I>><i> the profit motive, development will produce flexible and adaptable +</I>><i> components, and rely on upstream integrators to tailor or limit their +</I>><i> function to a particular market. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> In reality, this often aligns with the profit motive, since (oh horrors) +</I>><i> it actually may happen that Marketing is wrong, in which case the +</I>><i> company is at least left with saleable software assets as opposed to +</I>><i> software locked into a vision which didn't work. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> The significant costs of trying to be all things to all people, both in +</I>><i> resource cost and opportunity cost, come much further up the product +</I>><i> development chain, in QA, documentation, marketing, sales focus, and +</I>><i> other such non-development areas. That's where you have to decide which +</I>><i> way(s) to go, to the exclusion of others, not at the development layer. +</I>><i> +</I>Right on the mark :) +- André (andre999) + +</PRE> + + + +<!--endarticle--> + <HR> + <P><UL> + <!--threads--> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="002534.html">[Mageia-discuss] Suggestions +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="002537.html">[Mageia-discuss] Suggestions +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#2535">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#2535">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#2535">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#2535">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + +<hr> +<a href="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-discuss">More information about the Mageia-discuss +mailing list</a><br> +</body></html> |