On Tuesday 02 February 2010 4:30:44 pm Rob Napier wrote:
> Josh
>
> If that is the way you wish to be viewed, don't change a thing.
>
> E.g. I mentioned the importance of language. 'Extensible' is good,
> 'hackable' has too many negative connotations.
>
> Community-owned. Nice but it should be near the bottom of the list. It also
> has negative connotations in the corporate sphere. Not just a bit hokey, it
> also can suggest undisciplined, under funded, and a few other prejoratives
> that come to mind.
>
> BUT when linked to approachable: That can be a good thing. Mozilla is
> community owned but they are particularly careful about the way their image
> is developed.
>
> AND international: That implies strength, stability and accessibility.
>
> The rest of your list is about the product. The technology needs to be
> presented in more marketing terms.
I guess it comes down to who we are 'selling' to. My sense is it is not the
ultimate user but the intermediary, in other words the techie. For instance, do
your customers for Once:radix participate in the Postgres community or do they
rely on you to do that? For them Postgres is at the bottom of stack that goes
Web browser --> Tomcat/Java --> Postgres. From what I have seen a lot of the
larger business use cases are in that situation. There is a middle layer of
personnel that deal with the app/db and then present it to the purchaser in a
manner they understand. The Postgres community should be reaching that middle
layer in manner they understand, technical points. The business marketing
should be left to those who appreciate it, the folks further up the food chain.
>
> I hope this is making some sense.
>
>
> Regards
>
> Rob Napier
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@gmail.com