[Marketing] Fwd: [Sugar-devel] Sugar Labs Roadmap. [SD 61;79]

[Gonzalo Odiard]

To be fair, is not _only_ about marketing.
I don't know how much people is in the marketing mailing list, I just
recently discovered it.

Gonzalo

On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Sean DALY <sdaly.be at gmail.com> wrote:
> yet another marketing thread on the sugar-devel list
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Yioryos Asprobounitis <mavrothal at yahoo.com>
> Date: Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 5:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [Sugar-devel] Sugar Labs Roadmap. [SD 61;79]
> To: "sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org" <sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org>
>
>
>>
>> Does anyone else want to add their thoughts on:
>>
>
> These are all good for now but without the "safety" of the 2-3 million
> default users, SL can not just be the "upstream". There are some more
> fundamental questions now that we need to compete in the "open market".
>
> In a nutshell, whom do we target and which of _their_ needs do we cover
> better than the competition?
>
> 1) Are we targeting (the educational department of) Governments? (ie become
> OLPC-A)
> 2) Are we targeting OEMs? (ie find OLPC-A replacements. Are there any?). If
> yes, which needs of *theirs* do we satisfy better than the competition?
> 3) Are we targeting existing hardware and if yes, only those already running
> GNU/Linux? (The vast majority of hardware in and out of schools although it
> can, does not run GNU/linux let along Fedora, and is very likely to stay
> that way by just adding Android and iOS)
>
> The current html5/js course suggests "door no 3", but I have a hard time
> thinking of something that runs in Windows XP-8.1, OSX 10.6-10.9, major
> flavors GNU/Linux, iOS and Android 4.x all at the same time and all well!
> Not even browsers, let along a UX within a browser.
>
>
> This "open market" course also require some change in the development
> philosophy.
> Do we still tell people how things should be done (a la Apple - and GNOME
> lately) or do we listen to their needs, experience and priorities? If yes
> which ones? Kids, parents, teachers, local/support techs, funding sources,
> all of the above (can we)?
> Do we place Sugar next/parallel to other edu-apps or the "Sugar Desktop" is
> "mandatory"? If the latter, do we integrate (fully sugarize) other apps or
> stick with our native repertoire?
>
> That's a lot of questions with no answers and I can appreciate that these
> can not be addressed or affect sugar .102 or .104 but they may need to be
> decided soon for sugar .106 to materialize.
>
>
> I also think that options 1 and 2 need a much stronger political cloud and a
> political environment of yesterdays to materialize.
> So let me suggest option #4 that I'm sure will "raise some eyebrows" (and
> hopefully not too much more than that :-) Today handhelds have really
> provided cheap and energy efficient computing and communications, and their
> penetrance is increasing rapidly around the globe.
> Thus, build native Sugar for Tablets/Smartphones and *SELL* it for $1.99
> through Google Play (and/or AppStore)  :-o
> Obviously, provide the code and a way for rooted (or jail-broken) devices to
> install it for free, but people/organizations that opt for specific quality
> "locked" hardware and the Sugar software stack QA'ed and supported, must
> contribute (a token really) to its development. If you think of it is like
> what RHEL is doing and actually much cheaper. Or what OLPC was doing paying
> developers to develop software for the hardware that was *selling* to users.
>
> I can appreciate that this "open market approach" is a major shift in the
> culture (but not the reality) of the community from "educational software
> politics and policies" to "proven educational software quality". But isn't
> quality what we primarily want from educational software?
> Although there is plenty of room for improvement, Sugar has this quality and
> an installed base to support this claim, and should not be afraid of this
> course.
> A strong market presence and user endorsement is actually much better than
> any PR event or political/academic endorsement in enhancing its appeal and
> removing the "3rd world/class" label from the project.
> So please consider distributing Sugar .106 through GooglePlay/Appstore!
> _______________________________________________
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Marketing mailing list
> Marketing at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/marketing
>