Re: Marketing, GNOME 3.0 and subteams

[Shaun McCance <shaunm gnome org>]

On Wed, 2009-04-29 at 12:45 -0500, Brian Cameron wrote:
> Shaun:

Brian, everything you replied to is what Claus said.
I'm in total agreement with you.

> >>> I think we need to think about why we want end-users to use GNOME
> >> 3.0. Or why we want them
> >>> to use GNOME at all. Those are the messages we can market. (And we
> >> know these, freedom,
> >>> accessibility, usability, etc.)
> >> To be frank, these are no benefits. For a potential user, it begs the
> >> question: "Why should I care whether GNOME3 is "free", "accessible" or
> >> "usable"? Millions of people use other desktops that are supposed to
> >> be "less free", "less accessible" or "less usable" and yet these
> >> millions of people do just fine. (And speaking freely, these can't
> >> stand against the other important feature of a desktop: ubiquity.)
> 
> That is simply not true.  Because GNOME is free, the software is far
> less expensive than other proprietary solutions.  Therefore, people
> who might not be able to afford a proprietary solution could consider
> using GNOME instead.
> 
> Using Microsoft Windows as an example.  It does not meet Section 508
> Accessibility requirements out of the box as well as GNOME does.
> Depending on the user's needs, many users need to pay additional money
> to buy quality magnification, text-to-speech, and on-screen keyboard
> software.  In addition, many common applications do not support MSAA,
> so some users need to additionally purchase further applications to do 
> common tasks.
> 
> This can quickly add up to thousands of dollars.  Some people with
> disabilities are also financially disadvantaged (e.g. have trouble
> finding work, or live in a 3rd world country where there are less
> opportunities for the disadvantaged), so these proprietary solutions
> simply are not viable.
> 
> For many users with accessibility needs, the solutions provided by
> GNOME are sufficient and come bundled with the operating system at
> no extra cost.  The ATK framework ensures that most GTK+ based programs
> installed on the system are reasonably accessible, so there is no
> need to purchase additional software.  If you were to touch base with
> people on the gnome-accessibility-list, I am sure you could find many
> people who would confirm that they find GNOME a usable and less
> expensive solution than the alternatives.
> 
> Perhaps it would be good to spend some effort trying to recruit
> npeople from places like the gnome-accessibility-list, and see if
> we could get more marketing involvement from people who understand
> these sorts of benefits in our marketing efforts.  It would
> probably also be helpful to get people from other forums, such
> as from the translation community, who can help articulate the
> benefits of the fact that GNOME is translated in more 3rd world
> languages than proprietary solutions.
> 
> If the GNOME community were better able to market these advantages,
> then it seems likely that more people would be interested to try it
> out.
> 
> This is just using accessibility as an example, since it is one I
> am more familiar with.
> 
> >>  From an economist's point of view, these are "experience qualities":
> >> One has to "buy" the product before one is able to confirm these
> >> qualities. Of course, GNOME is not bought but we need people to invest
> >> their time to install it somehow.
> 
> It is true that, from a marketing perspective, the GNOME community
> could provide more case studies and testimonials to help people who
> haven't tried GNOME to understand how well it works, and can meet
> their needs.  However, it isn't necessary for someone to install
> GNOME to learn about its features and instill a desire to try it out.
> 
> Brian