Re: Marketing list action: Market Research for GNOME and GNU/Linux

[Claus Schwarm <c schwarm gmx net>]

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 11:53:29 +1300
"John Williams" <JWilliams business otago ac nz> wrote:

> > A differentiation might be useful:
> > 
> >  * Indirectly derived demand: Low number of companies developing for
> >     GNOME Linux, thus less professional developers that spend 
> > the whole
> >     day on contributing.
> >  * Directly derived demand: Number of developers contributing.
> >     ("Scratch the own itch")
> Check.
>  
> > Nice example of the network economics we operate in: 
> > No apps -> No users -> No apps.
> > No hardware -> No users -> No hardware.
> > 
> > Again, this points to what the central goal of our efforts should
> > be: More users!
> I like this line of reasoning.  And the more I think about it, the
> more I think a super-duper gee-whizz, holy shit! Live CD is the way to
> go.(I am downloading Ubuntu as I type.)  I mean that it has to do
> _everything_ that WinXP and OSX can do.  This means no missing
> multimedia, office suite or net-app functionality.  And stunning
> graphics. Preferably running the Doom3 demo, and perhaps a WINE
> installation and some DirectX games.
> (Note: I couldn't give a shit about those things, but I think they
> will sell.)
>  
> 

Yesterday, somebody mentioned on the GNOME Journal IRC channel, that a
Live CD build system is in the works. So, a super-duper LiveCD might be
doable. :)

I just like to add that GNOME Linux is bad, and will continue to be bad
on the 3D Games front. A super duper Live CD might still be nice to
have, though. :-)

But we might combat on the special needs front: University faculties.
There are scientific applications available, see

http://gnome-apps.berlios.de/apps.php?action=browse&cat_id=9

and these will sell GNOME. Science is close to Open Source. Lots of
GNOME users are studying. They need stable software to write their
papers, their thesis, etc. Student journals are usally looking for
content, so it's easy to place promotional articles here. Also,
revolutionary or unsusal ideas historically spread around universities.
They often have no money. LiveCD's could be spread on the campus. User
groups are easier to organize. Install fests are easier to organize.
People are young, and high qualified and will bring Linux experience
into the companies. In a few years, the eventual "Linux TCO disadvantage
due to training costs." may be reduced.

Lets make 2005 the GNOME Linux University year!  ;-)

> > GNOME marketing list members should not use the term "we", 
> > IMHO, because
> > depending on context it might mean:
> > 
> > * GNOME foundation
> > * GNOME developers
> > * GNOME community
> > * GNOME marketing list
> > * GNOME users
> > 
> > The GNOME foundation is the only institution GNOME got. In 
> > the end, they
> > must decide about money, for example.
> 
> I also like this reasoning.  It seems to me that we (subsribers to
> this list) could say and do whatever we want, but if someone with
> MONEY comes along and starts a promotional campaign about GNOME, how
> could we possible combat it.  I am saying: the people who define the
> strategic goals of GNOME have to be the people who put HAVE THE MOST
> MONEY TO SPEND on it.  Who are these people?  Is it, in fact, the
> GNOME foundation?  Who else could possibly be motivated to promote
> GNOME?
> 

This reminds me on the "What product attributes matter most to
consumers" question: Security is very important for car tires in
surveys, but it's not the selling argument because everybody _assumes_
every car tire to be very secure.

The desktop is very important for the OS but it's not the selling
argument because everybody assumes the existance of a desktop that is
easy to use, good looking, etc.

Once more, this is a free rider problem: For example, Sun changes the
default look of GNOME, adds a few Java apps, and the sells it as Java
Desktop System. If they wouldn't pay some developers and return code,
nobody would be very amused. They have no incentive to promote
GNOME to others. Same holds for RedHat, think Bluecurve, or Novell,
think the Ximian/Suse mixture.

The only ones interested in the GNOME default desktop are users. They
don't want to learn a new desktop whenever they change companies. They
want the default.

Maybe the list members may start thinking if the GNOME foundation could
act as a "middle-men" (not sure about the english, here): A sort of
bounty organization in a lesser degree. If I remember correctly, the
foundation got a certain percentage of the bounties.

Smaller, local companies might be interested in spending money to get
certain apps developed. They usually don't have the resources to do it
on their own. They have local business contacts. They set up networks,
web servers, etc. and probably have Linux experience.

Users also have, in general, no incentive to start developing their own
apps. But they might be willing to spend, say, 50$ a year each to get
certain features implemented. They might be more willing to spend money
if they know what they get in return.

I know this is a very unusual thought: GNOME not only as a desktop and
development platform but also as a market platform, a sort of eBay.
Probably too advanced, right?

Well, just a thought....

Back on topic, GNOME does not need to fear somebody will put money into
promoting our desktop. They will promote whatever GNOME looks like in
their distributions.

So we should concentrate on those that will probably no be affected by
these companies: Science, Education, maybe Government in non-western
countries.

Claus