Re: [WebDNA] WebDNA future
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2010
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 104484
interpreted = N
texte = Another angle is to basically follow Apple's lead. Macs are a "me too" product given their low market share compared to PCs and are really no different than PC when you remove all the window dressing ... yeah yeah I know Macs are prettier and "more friendly" and they made the iPhone and iTunes, etc, but regarding computers, they run software just like PCs do, they help us get work done just like PC's do and they crash just as often as PC's do. Thing is, despite being 3 to 5 times more expensive than PC's, they managed to capture the hearts and minds of the people and position themselves as cool and innovative and friendly and they did this through years of clever, focused marketing ("I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC") and they also got themselves into the school systems -- get em hooked while they're young. I think these are viable marketing options for WebDNA. ...and I'm not trying to fan a mac/pc flame war -- I use both. Also, I hear a lot of people talking about what WSC needs to do to thrive and compete, etc, but when you look at php, one of the biggest things that php has going for it is an army of people willing to work for free. Hard to compete against that, you know? So maybe rather than pointing out the flaws and complaining about what WSC needs to do, why not help to do it? If you think the docs are crappy, then why not offer to help update them? Maybe we could have a wiki and police each other? You get the idea. Full disclosure: I am a license owner and a shareholder of WSC, and I am not speaking on behalf of WSC, I am merely expressing my own individual opinion. Just sayin' P.S: I am not talking about anyone specifically who is complaining, I am talking generally. -Dan On 1/14/2010 11:07 AM, Brian Fries wrote: > In order to win over new customers, WebDNA needs to have a clearly defined advantage over the competition, especially since the primary competition (PHP) is free. > > As a long-time user of the product, I understand the advantages in terms of rapid development, simplicity of coding, easy learning curve, etc. These characteristics plus an extensive body of code that I have already developed and am loathe to convert to a different environment are enough to keep me in the WebDNA camp, so long as the product has good support (thank you WebDNA Corp). > > These are not clear enough, however, to convince someone new to invest in the platform or to convert from a different platform. > > To entice switchers / new adopters, the advantages need to be clearly defined, enhanced to increase the advantages, then marketed in a few big bold bullet points that the uninitiated can understand. WebDNA cannot be a me-too product and expect to gain significant new customers. > > The chosen bullet points must communicate how WebDNA can help a site developer perform his or her job faster, better and/or less expensively than the alternatives. > > For example, if you want to market the ease of learning and rapid development of custom dynamic pages, you need to enhance the features that provide this. Clarify confusing language syntax. Provide simple, complete and accurate documentation. Create tutorials and guided lessons to introduce key concepts. Build visual coding tools for assembling pages from modular and customizable building blocks. Provide syntax-checking and debugging tools. Create clean integration with existing text and html editors. Then market the hell out of these very real and clearly defined advantages. > > Brian Fries > BrainScan Software > > > On Jan 14, 2010, at 10:13 AM, Kenneth Grome wrote: > > >>> What is the 1 thing that you think SMSI could have done better when >>> they owned WebDNA to make it a more successful product (aside from the >>> blatantly obvious end-of-support)? >>> >> Marketing. >> >> So far every entity that has owned it has failed to market it effectively. >> >> Remember, Bill Gates did not have a better product, he simply marketed what he had. >> >> Sincerely, >> Kenneth Grome >> www.KenGrome.com >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list
. > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us > old archives: http://dev.webdna.us/TalkListArchive/ > Bug Reporting: http://forum.webdna.us/eucabb.html?page=topics&category=288 >
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
Another angle is to basically follow Apple's lead. Macs are a "me too" product given their low market share compared to PCs and are really no different than PC when you remove all the window dressing ... yeah yeah I know Macs are prettier and "more friendly" and they made the iPhone and iTunes, etc, but regarding computers, they run software just like PCs do, they help us get work done just like PC's do and they crash just as often as PC's do. Thing is, despite being 3 to 5 times more expensive than PC's, they managed to capture the hearts and minds of the people and position themselves as cool and innovative and friendly and they did this through years of clever, focused marketing ("I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC") and they also got themselves into the school systems -- get em hooked while they're young. I think these are viable marketing options for WebDNA. ...and I'm not trying to fan a mac/pc flame war -- I use both. Also, I hear a lot of people talking about what WSC needs to do to thrive and compete, etc, but when you look at php, one of the biggest things that php has going for it is an army of people willing to work for free. Hard to compete against that, you know? So maybe rather than pointing out the flaws and complaining about what WSC needs to do, why not help to do it? If you think the docs are crappy, then why not offer to help update them? Maybe we could have a wiki and police each other? You get the idea. Full disclosure: I am a license owner and a shareholder of WSC, and I am not speaking on behalf of WSC, I am merely expressing my own individual opinion. Just sayin' P.S: I am not talking about anyone specifically who is complaining, I am talking generally. -Dan On 1/14/2010 11:07 AM, Brian Fries wrote: > In order to win over new customers, WebDNA needs to have a clearly defined advantage over the competition, especially since the primary competition (PHP) is free. > > As a long-time user of the product, I understand the advantages in terms of rapid development, simplicity of coding, easy learning curve, etc. These characteristics plus an extensive body of code that I have already developed and am loathe to convert to a different environment are enough to keep me in the WebDNA camp, so long as the product has good support (thank you WebDNA Corp). > > These are not clear enough, however, to convince someone new to invest in the platform or to convert from a different platform. > > To entice switchers / new adopters, the advantages need to be clearly defined, enhanced to increase the advantages, then marketed in a few big bold bullet points that the uninitiated can understand. WebDNA cannot be a me-too product and expect to gain significant new customers. > > The chosen bullet points must communicate how WebDNA can help a site developer perform his or her job faster, better and/or less expensively than the alternatives. > > For example, if you want to market the ease of learning and rapid development of custom dynamic pages, you need to enhance the features that provide this. Clarify confusing language syntax. Provide simple, complete and accurate documentation. Create tutorials and guided lessons to introduce key concepts. Build visual coding tools for assembling pages from modular and customizable building blocks. Provide syntax-checking and debugging tools. Create clean integration with existing text and html editors. Then market the hell out of these very real and clearly defined advantages. > > Brian Fries > BrainScan Software > > > On Jan 14, 2010, at 10:13 AM, Kenneth Grome wrote: > > >>> What is the 1 thing that you think SMSI could have done better when >>> they owned WebDNA to make it a more successful product (aside from the >>> blatantly obvious end-of-support)? >>> >> Marketing. >> >> So far every entity that has owned it has failed to market it effectively. >> >> Remember, Bill Gates did not have a better product, he simply marketed what he had. >> >> Sincerely, >> Kenneth Grome >> www.KenGrome.com >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list. > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us > old archives: http://dev.webdna.us/TalkListArchive/ > Bug Reporting: http://forum.webdna.us/eucabb.html?page=topics&category=288 >
Dan Strong
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
Generating Pages (1999)
Counting LineItems (2000)
Make sure I understand this??? (1997)
WebCatalog f2 Installation (1997)
emailer error -108 (1997)
[append] and SSL (1997)
[WebDNA] A universal version of WebDNA ... (2008)
Comments in db? (1997)
Re:Searching for ALL / empty form field (1997)
two unique banners on one page (1997)
WebCat2final1 crashes (1997)
Look out kiwis! (2003)
WebCat2: Items xx to xx shown, etc. (1997)
BUG REPORT -- Refusing connections! (1999)
Not really WebCat- (1997)
Math with Time (1997)
emailer (1997)
WCf2 and nested tags (1997)
New WebDNA Solutions ... (1997)
RE: Loss in form (1998)