[web site] Marketing - another try
Thanks to everyone who responded to the "Marketing?" thread! Rather than try to reply individually, I've tried to roll everyone's comments and suggestions into a modified home page and a new "background" page (for managers). See http://www.esva.net/~beman/boost-home/index.htm and http://www.esva.net/~beman/boost-home/more/background.html Comments? Is this heading in the right direction? --Beman
Beman Dawes wrote: [snip]
I'd prefer a more visible link on the main page.
and http://www.esva.net/~beman/boost-home/more/background.html
Excellent content. Just what I would expect if I were a manager. Thanks for taking care of this! Regards, -- Andreas Huber When replying by private email, please remove the words spam and trap from the address shown in the header.
"Andreas Huber" <ahd6974-spamgroupstrap@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:dahc8s$nhe$1@sea.gmane.org...
Beman Dawes wrote: [snip]
I'd prefer a more visible link on the main page.
and http://www.esva.net/~beman/boost-home/more/background.html
Excellent content. Just what I would expect if I were a manager.
Thanks for taking care of this!
Regards,
-- Andreas Huber
When replying by private email, please remove the words spam and trap from the address shown in the header.
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
"Andreas Huber" <ahd6974-spamgroupstrap@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:dahc8s$nhe$1@sea.gmane.org...
Beman Dawes wrote: [snip]
I'd prefer a more visible link on the main page.
Hum... I've added a bold "Background" teaser. That may help. I'll update the draft on the web as soon as I've incorporated the comments from others.
and http://www.esva.net/~beman/boost-home/more/background.html
Excellent content. Just what I would expect if I were a manager.
Thanks for taking care of this!
Well, thanks to everyone for their feedback! --Beman
Beman Dawes wrote:
Thanks to everyone who responded to the "Marketing?" thread!
and http://www.esva.net/~beman/boost-home/more/background.html
Comments? Is this heading in the right direction?
I have just a couple of comments: - "less program bugs" should be "fewer program bugs," or just "fewer bugs" - using boost doesn't eliminate reinvention of the wheel, it just reduces it; at least, that is, until boost contains libraries for doing everything that someone else has already implemented ;-) - The quote from Stroustrup has too many ellipses for my tastel; it reminds me of a movie advertisement that quotes some critic as saying "... A spectacular .... success" or "Two ... thumbs ... up ... !" Jonathan
"Jonathan Turkanis" <technews@kangaroologic.com> wrote in message news:dahho5$i74$1@sea.gmane.org...
Beman Dawes wrote:
Thanks to everyone who responded to the "Marketing?" thread!
and http://www.esva.net/~beman/boost-home/more/background.html
Comments? Is this heading in the right direction?
I have just a couple of comments:
- "less program bugs" should be "fewer program bugs," or just "fewer bugs"
Fixed.
- using boost doesn't eliminate reinvention of the wheel, it just reduces it; at least, that is, until boost contains libraries for doing everything that someone else has already implemented ;-)
Fixed.
- The quote from Stroustrup has too many ellipses for my tastel; it reminds me of a movie advertisement that quotes some critic as saying "... A spectacular .... success" or "Two ... thumbs ... up ... !"
Agreed. I've lengthened the quote a bit to eliminate all except the last ellipse. Thanks for the help, --Beman
Beman Dawes wrote:
Thanks to everyone who responded to the "Marketing?" thread!
Rather than try to reply individually, I've tried to roll everyone's comments and suggestions into a modified home page and a new "background" page (for managers).
See http://www.esva.net/~beman/boost-home/index.htm
and http://www.esva.net/~beman/boost-home/more/background.html
Comments? Is this heading in the right direction?
This is a lot better. Yes, this is definitely heading in the right direction. "Productivity" is one big plus. Another one, from a manager point of view, is safety of investment: the fact that libraries from Boost ended up in TR1 indicates that the effort of adding Boost to a company's tool chest is not a waste. In fact, it gives you a head-start in adopting new technologies. Regards, m Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
"Martin Wille" <mw8329@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message news:42CC51D7.6070002@yahoo.com.au...
Beman Dawes wrote:
Thanks to everyone who responded to the "Marketing?" thread!
Rather than try to reply individually, I've tried to roll everyone's comments and suggestions into a modified home page and a new "background" page (for managers).
See http://www.esva.net/~beman/boost-home/index.htm
and http://www.esva.net/~beman/boost-home/more/background.html
Comments? Is this heading in the right direction?
This is a lot better. Yes, this is definitely heading in the right direction.
"Productivity" is one big plus. Another one, from a manager point of view, is safety of investment: the fact that libraries from Boost ended up in TR1 indicates that the effort of adding Boost to a company's tool chest is not a waste. In fact, it gives you a head-start in adopting new technologies.
Ok, I've added wording to that effect, including your "head-start" phrase. Thanks for the suggestion, --Beman
From: Beman Dawes <bdawes@acm.org>
Rather than try to reply individually, I've tried to roll everyone's comments and suggestions into a modified home page and a new "background" page (for managers).
See http://www.esva.net/~beman/boost-home/index.htm
and http://www.esva.net/~beman/boost-home/more/background.html
Comments? Is this heading in the right direction?
Much of the background.html information should be on the home page and much of the index.htm information should be on a different page. My point is that the home page should sell Boost to visitors. They don't need all of the background.html information at once, but you have to hook them. Frequent users of boost.org will then bookmark not the home page, but the page to which the previous home page content is moved. (I'll worry about grammar and the like later.) -- Rob Stewart stewart@sig.com Software Engineer http://www.sig.com Susquehanna International Group, LLP using std::disclaimer;
"Rob Stewart" <stewart@sig.com> wrote in message news:200507062226.j66MQDfL008644@weezy.balstatdev.susq.com...
From: Beman Dawes <bdawes@acm.org>
Rather than try to reply individually, I've tried to roll everyone's comments and suggestions into a modified home page and a new "background" page (for managers).
See http://www.esva.net/~beman/boost-home/index.htm
and http://www.esva.net/~beman/boost-home/more/background.html
Comments? Is this heading in the right direction?
Much of the background.html information should be on the home page and much of the index.htm information should be on a different page. My point is that the home page should sell Boost to visitors. They don't need all of the background.html information at once, but you have to hook them.
My first try had the marketing stuff on the home page, and people didn't like that. I was already a little uncomfortable myself, for the same reasons mentioned by others. I'm much more comfortable with the "Background" stuff on a separate page. It is programmers we want to launch into the Boost orbit, and programmers are less likely to be interested in the "Background" stuff until they absorb the technical stuff. Managers will follow in due time. It is also pretty clear from the reactions that others also like the separate "Background" page better. Thanks, --Beman
From: "Beman Dawes" <bdawes@acm.org>
"Rob Stewart" <stewart@sig.com> wrote in message news:200507062226.j66MQDfL008644@weezy.balstatdev.susq.com...
From: Beman Dawes <bdawes@acm.org>
Rather than try to reply individually, I've tried to roll everyone's comments and suggestions into a modified home page and a new "background" page (for managers).
See http://www.esva.net/~beman/boost-home/index.htm
and http://www.esva.net/~beman/boost-home/more/background.html
Comments? Is this heading in the right direction?
Much of the background.html information should be on the home page and much of the index.htm information should be on a different page. My point is that the home page should sell Boost to visitors. They don't need all of the background.html information at once, but you have to hook them.
My first try had the marketing stuff on the home page, and people didn't like that. I was already a little uncomfortable myself, for the same reasons mentioned by others.
I'm much more comfortable with the "Background" stuff on a separate page. It is programmers we want to launch into the Boost orbit, and programmers are less likely to be interested in the "Background" stuff until they absorb the technical stuff. Managers will follow in due time.
I didn't say precisely what information should be moved between the pages, but the mix isn't right. You're right that you don't want the home page geared to managers, but note that I said you need to sell to visitors of the site, not to managers. You have to pick your primary target and sell to them. Developers are the right primary target, but a long-winded "news" section won't sell Boost to them. Information about why they should use Boost libraries, which you have on the background.html page, will do that. You can include rather technical details in that, but the goal should be to make the home page sell Boost to those developers. Whatever is on the home page now that doesn't sell Boost should be on other pages. There can even be a second home page, if you will, that will be of interest to frequent visitors.
It is also pretty clear from the reactions that others also like the separate "Background" page better.
I think you read too much into my suggestion and others may not have considered my point yet. -- Rob Stewart stewart@sig.com Software Engineer http://www.sig.com Susquehanna International Group, LLP using std::disclaimer;
"Beman Dawes" wrote:
Rather than try to reply individually, I've tried to roll everyone's comments and suggestions into a modified home page and a new "background" page (for managers).
Perhaps the page should keep standard style of hyperlinks (blue and underlined). Effects only reduce attention to content. /Pavel
Pavel Vozenilek wrote:
"Beman Dawes" wrote:
Rather than try to reply individually, I've tried to roll everyone's comments and suggestions into a modified home page and a new "background" page (for managers).
Perhaps the page should keep standard style of hyperlinks (blue and underlined). Effects only reduce attention to content.
I'm fine with the text being black, if anything I'd consider this less distracting than the "standard style". That said, the links seem far too mellow to me, the underlines are light enough that I don't notice them as I'm reading, while I prefer to notice them. I'd bump them up to as visible as the :hover underlines. Also, the title anchors on the right side are also having the :hover effect applied (Firefox 1.0.4) which is rather distracting. Also, something's weird with the images for the search - they're overlapping. Matter of fact, that whole area is messed up. Images: http://pandamojo.no-ip.info/gallery/album01
Michael B. Edwin Rickert wrote:
Also, something's weird with the images for the search - they're overlapping. Matter of fact, that whole area is messed up.
All that works just fine in the current front page... http://boost-consulting.com/boost/ So don't worry about it. It's the content Beman wants feedback on. -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim - Grafik/jabber.org
"Rene Rivera" <grafik.list@redshift-software.com> wrote in message news:42CCAF2B.7090204@redshift-software.com...
Michael B. Edwin Rickert wrote:
Also, something's weird with the images for the search - they're overlapping. Matter of fact, that whole area is messed up.
All that works just fine in the current front page...
http://boost-consulting.com/boost/
So don't worry about it. It's the content Beman wants feedback on.
Yep. I'll depend on Rene to address any style-sheet and appearance issues. That is really his project, and I want to stay focused on content. Thanks, --Beman
Here are my editorial comments:
The Boost web site provides free peer-reviewed portable C++ source libraries.
"Boost provides free peer-reviewed portable C++ source libraries."
The emphasis is on
"We emphasize"
libraries which work well with the C++ Standard ^^^^^ "that"
Library. The libraries are intended to be widely useful, and usable ^^^ "Boost"
by thousands of programmers across a broad spectrum of ^^^^^^^^^^^^ scratch that. You might also scratch "by programmers;" it adds nothing but awkwardness.
applications. The Boost license encourages both commercial and non-commercial use.
A further goal is to
I was taught that you can't have "a further goal" without "a goal." Maybe "We aim to"
establish "existing practice" and provide reference implementations so that Boost libraries are suitable for eventual standardization. Ten Boost libraries are already included in the C++ Standards Committee's Library Technical Report (TR1) as a step toward becoming part of a future C++ Standard. More Boost libraries will part of the upcoming TR2.
Getting started. You can download, build, and install the latest ^ shouldn't that be a colon?
Boost release from SourceForge. Popular Linux and Unix distributions such as Fedora, Debian, and NetBSD also include pre-built Boost packages. Or Boost may already be available on your organization's internal web server.
You don't build and install the Boost release from Sourceforge, you only download it. I was taught that you can't start a sentence with "Or." Anyway, nothing after the first sentence tells me how to get started. So, <strong>Getting Started:</strong> Follow the <a href="more/getting_started.html">Getting Started Guide</a> to download and install Boost, or to begin using a pre-installed Boost release that may already be on your system.
The background information page has introductory material that may be of interest to managers wondering if their organization should use Boost.
I don't know what to say about that one. I don't like the tone much; it seems to apologize for itself, and does little for marketing, which was your original intention. I agree with Rob Stewart when he says that Much of the background.html information should be on the home page {and much of the index.htm information should be on a different page}. My point is that the home page should sell Boost to visitors. They don't need all of the background.html information at once, but you have to hook them. Though I'm less sure about the part in braces. Also, I wonder if some of the information in the "background" page doesn't belong on our FAQ?
Boost Background Information Why should an organization use Boost?
In one word, Productivity. Use of high-quality libraries like Boost ^^^ "a" speeds initial development, is likely to result in less program bugs, eliminates reinvention-of-the-wheel, and cuts long-term maintenance costs.
That's why ten of the Boost libraries are included in the C++ Standard Library's TR1.
You really think that "productivity" is the reason ten Boost libraries were included in TR1? I don't. Strictly speaking I don't think "productivity" _can_ be a reason for anything.
Indirectly, most organization are probably already Boost users via programs which internally use Boost, like Adobe Acrobat Reader 7.0.
What does this have to do with "Why should an organization use Boost?"
Who else is using Boost?
See the Who's Using Boost page for a sampling. We don't know the exact numbers, but a release gets around 100,000 downloads from SourceForge, and that is only one of several distribution routes.
What do others say about Boost?
Bjarne Stroustrup, in Abstraction, libraries, and efficiency in C++, says: "The obvious solution for most programmers is to use a library that provides an elegant and efficient platform... ...Boost...
That doesn't work, as pointed out by others.
Scott Meyers, in Effective C++, 3rd Ed., says "Item 55: Familiarize yourself with Boost."
Herb Sutter and Andrei Alexandrescu, in C++ Coding Standards, say "...one of the most highly regarded and expertly designed C++ library projects in the world."
I think you should use standard epigraph format for quotes: Familiarize yourself with Boost. -- Scott Meyers, Effective C++ 3rd Ed., Item 55 one of the most highly regarded and expertly designed C++ library projects in the world. -- Herb Sutter and Andrei Alexandrescu, in C++ Coding Standards
How do users get support?
For relatively straight-forward support needs, users rely on the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ straightforward mailing lists and newsgroups.
I would just say "the Boost mailing lists," and drop "newsgroups." They are just mirrors of the mailing lists.
One of the advantages of Boost is the responsiveness of both other users and Boost developers.
I think you can strike "both."
For more involved needs, Commercial Support is also available. What about license issues?
Boost has its own license, developed with help from the Harvard Law School. The Boost license polices encourage both commercial and non-commercial use, and the Boost license is not related to the GPL or other licenses which are sometimes seen as business unfriendly. ^^^^^ ^ "that" I think you need a hyphen
What about other intellectual property issues?
The Boost libraries tend to be new, fresh, and creative designs. They are not copies, clones, or derivations of proprietary libraries. Boost has a firm policy to respect the IP rights of others. The development of Boost libraries is publicly documented via the mailing lists and version control repository. The source code has been inspected by many, many knowledgeable programmers. Each Boost file has a copyright notice and license information. IP issues have been reviewed by the legal teams from some of the corporations which use Boost, and in some cases these lawyers have been kind enough to give Boost feedback on IP issues. No guarantees, but those factors all tend to reduce IP risk.
You need a subject and verb. Maybe "We offer no guarantees" or "There are no guarantees"
Why would anyone give away valuable software for free?
Businesses and other organizations contribute everything from tiny patches up to complete libraries, when doing so is cheaper and/or ^^ strike that higher quality than commercial software.
"doing so" can't be "higher quality than commercial software." That needs to be rephrased.
This is particularly true for software they have a need for,
"This and "they" don't have clear antecedents. "have a need for" would be better replaced by "need."
but don't consider proprietary because it is of a general or utility nature.
What I like to say is that "organizations often prefer to have code developed, maintained, and improved in the open source community when it does not contain technology specific to their application domain, because it allows them to focus more development resources on their core business." -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
"David Abrahams" <dave@boost-consulting.com> wrote in message news:ud5puvd8q.fsf@boost-consulting.com...
Here are my editorial comments:
The Boost web site provides free peer-reviewed portable C++ source libraries.
"Boost provides free peer-reviewed portable C++ source libraries."
The emphasis is on
"We emphasize"
libraries which work well with the C++ Standard ^^^^^ "that"
Library. The libraries are intended to be widely useful, and usable ^^^ "Boost"
by thousands of programmers across a broad spectrum of ^^^^^^^^^^^^ scratch that. You might also scratch "by programmers;" it adds nothing but awkwardness.
applications. The Boost license encourages both commercial and non-commercial use.
A further goal is to
I was taught that you can't have "a further goal" without "a goal." Maybe
"We aim to"
establish "existing practice" and provide reference implementations so that Boost libraries are suitable for eventual standardization. Ten Boost libraries are already included in the C++ Standards Committee's Library Technical Report (TR1) as a step toward becoming part of a future C++ Standard. More Boost libraries will part of the upcoming TR2.
Getting started. You can download, build, and install the latest ^ shouldn't that be a colon?
Boost release from SourceForge. Popular Linux and Unix distributions such as Fedora, Debian, and NetBSD also include pre-built Boost packages. Or Boost may already be available on your organization's internal web server.
You don't build and install the Boost release from Sourceforge, you only download it. I was taught that you can't start a sentence with "Or." Anyway, nothing after the first sentence tells me how to get started.
So,
<strong>Getting Started:</strong> Follow the <a href="more/getting_started.html">Getting Started Guide</a> to download and install Boost, or to begin using a pre-installed Boost release that may already be on your system.
OK, all of those have been changed.
The background information page has introductory material that may be of interest to managers wondering if their organization should use Boost.
I don't know what to say about that one. I don't like the tone much; it seems to apologize for itself, and does little for marketing, which was your original intention.
I've reworded it in an attempt to make it less awkward.
I agree with Rob Stewart when he says that
Much of the background.html information should be on the home page {and much of the index.htm information should be on a different page}. My point is that the home page should sell Boost to visitors. They don't need all of the background.html information at once, but you have to hook them.
Though I'm less sure about the part in braces.
I don't know what to say. Some people want the material one place, some another.
Also, I wonder if some of the information in the "background" page doesn't belong on our FAQ?
Perhaps. But the FAQ tends to be more factual and less marketing oriented. As it should be, IMO.
Boost Background Information Why should an organization use Boost?
In one word, Productivity. Use of high-quality libraries like Boost ^^^ "a"
Changed.
speeds initial development, is likely to result in less program bugs, eliminates reinvention-of-the-wheel, and cuts long-term maintenance costs.
That's why ten of the Boost libraries are included in the C++ Standard Library's TR1.
You really think that "productivity" is the reason ten Boost libraries were included in TR1? I don't. Strictly speaking I don't think "productivity" _can_ be a reason for anything.
I'd already reworked that paragraph. It should be better now.
Indirectly, most organization are probably already Boost users via programs which internally use Boost, like Adobe Acrobat Reader 7.0.
What does this have to do with "Why should an organization use Boost?"
It is an attempt to show that Boost isn't something scary that causes your computer to melt down.
Who else is using Boost?
See the Who's Using Boost page for a sampling. We don't know the exact numbers, but a release gets around 100,000 downloads from SourceForge, and that is only one of several distribution routes.
What do others say about Boost?
Bjarne Stroustrup, in Abstraction, libraries, and efficiency in C++, says: "The obvious solution for most programmers is to use a library that provides an elegant and efficient platform... ...Boost...
That doesn't work, as pointed out by others.
Yes, and it has already been fixed.
Scott Meyers, in Effective C++, 3rd Ed., says "Item 55: Familiarize yourself with Boost."
Herb Sutter and Andrei Alexandrescu, in C++ Coding Standards, say "...one of the most highly regarded and expertly designed C++ library projects in the world."
I think you should use standard epigraph format for quotes:
Done.
How do users get support?
For relatively straight-forward support needs, users rely on the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ straightforward mailing lists and newsgroups.
I would just say "the Boost mailing lists," and drop "newsgroups." They are just mirrors of the mailing lists.
Done.
One of the advantages of Boost is the responsiveness of both other users and Boost developers.
I think you can strike "both."
Done.
For more involved needs, Commercial Support is also available. What about license issues?
Boost has its own license, developed with help from the Harvard Law School. The Boost license polices encourage both commercial and non-commercial use, and the Boost license is not related to the GPL or other licenses which are sometimes seen as business unfriendly. ^^^^^ ^ "that" I think you need a hyphen
... No guarantees, but those factors all tend to reduce IP risk.
You need a subject and verb. Maybe
"We offer no guarantees"
or "There are no guarantees"
Done.
Why would anyone give away valuable software for free?
Businesses and other organizations contribute everything from tiny patches up to complete libraries, when doing so is cheaper and/or ^^ strike that higher quality than commercial software.
"doing so" can't be "higher quality than commercial software." That needs to be rephrased.
This is particularly true for software they have a need for,
"This and "they" don't have clear antecedents. "have a need for" would be better replaced by "need."
but don't consider proprietary because it is of a general or utility nature.
What I like to say is that "organizations often prefer to have code developed, maintained, and improved in the open source community when it does not contain technology specific to their application domain, because it allows them to focus more development resources on their core business."
That's better. Changed. CVS for both files has been updated. Thanks for all the suggestions, --Beman
"Beman Dawes" <bdawes@acm.org> writes:
I agree with Rob Stewart when he says that
Much of the background.html information should be on the home page {and much of the index.htm information should be on a different page}. My point is that the home page should sell Boost to visitors. They don't need all of the background.html information at once, but you have to hook them.
Though I'm less sure about the part in braces.
I don't know what to say. Some people want the material one place, some another.
I understand. But it seems that most of those who want the material relegated to another page feel uncomfortable about the whole idea of promoting Boost in the first place, and you've attempted to compromise between the various points of view. I'm not in favor of half-measures. I say, either we decide that we're going to "let the technology speak for itself" and just forget this idea, or we should be serious about putting enough promotional material on the home page to draw people in. Nobody's going to visit a secondary page if the home page doesn't get them interested.
Also, I wonder if some of the information in the "background" page doesn't belong on our FAQ?
Perhaps. But the FAQ tends to be more factual and less marketing oriented. As it should be, IMO.
Well, some of that background information is really FAQtual, IMO. I suggest at least reading through the FAQ and comparing the questions there with what's on your background page. When I did that, to me they didn't seem to have very distinct purposes or domains.
Indirectly, most organization are probably already Boost users via programs which internally use Boost, like Adobe Acrobat Reader 7.0.
What does this have to do with "Why should an organization use Boost?"
It is an attempt to show that Boost isn't something scary that causes your computer to melt down.
I think the connection is a little too obtuse. Maybe Isn't Boost full of scary Bleeding-Edge Technology? No. Boost is an established tool in mainstream software development. Popular programs like Adobe Acrobat Reader 7.0 use Boost internally, so you may already be using Boost indirectly. Boost library authors apply advanced C++ techniques when doing so can make their interfaces more powerful and easier to use. We manage complexity so that *your* code can be simpler and more elegant. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
From: David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com>
The Boost web site provides free peer-reviewed portable C++ source libraries.
"Boost provides free peer-reviewed portable C++ source libraries."
Boost provides free, peer-reviewed, portable C++ source libraries. ;-)
by thousands of programmers across a broad spectrum of ^^^^^^^^^^^^ scratch that. You might also scratch "by programmers;" it adds nothing but awkwardness.
Agreed.
You don't build and install the Boost release from Sourceforge, you only download it. I was taught that you can't start a sentence with "Or." Anyway, nothing after the first sentence tells me how to get started.
So,
<strong>Getting Started:</strong> Follow the <a href="more/getting_started.html">Getting Started Guide</a> to download and install Boost, or to begin using a pre-installed
Omit the comma. With it, I read that sentence like this: Follow the Getting Started Guide to download and install Boost. If that's not appropriate, then to begin using a pre-installed....
The background information page has introductory material that may be of interest to managers wondering if their organization should use Boost.
For more information on why your organization should use Boost, refer to the background information page.
I don't know what to say about that one. I don't like the tone much; it seems to apologize for itself, and does little for marketing, which was your original intention. I agree with Rob Stewart when he says that
Much of the background.html information should be on the home page {and much of the index.htm information should be on a different page}. My point is that the home page should sell Boost to visitors. They don't need all of the background.html information at once, but you have to hook them.
Though I'm less sure about the part in braces. Also, I wonder if some
Do you agree with my point that if it isn't selling Boost (to developers), then it shouldn't be on the home page?
of the information in the "background" page doesn't belong on our FAQ?
FAQs can be muddled with many questions that wouldn't be of interest to a manager. If the FAQ were divided so the manager could find the Q's in an appropriate section, it would work.
Strictly speaking I don't think "productivity" _can_ be a reason for anything.
Really? It makes sense to me that you'd take a productivity hit to learn something new in order to gain long term productivity gains. IOW, you're willing to take a schedule hit to improve time to market due to more rapid development and reduced error rate. Isn't that a reason to choose Boost?
Indirectly, most organization are probably already Boost users via programs which internally use Boost, like Adobe Acrobat Reader 7.0.
What does this have to do with "Why should an organization use Boost?"
Your competitors, or vendors of products you presently use, probably rely on Boost now. That's an appeal to authority and to expediency, perhaps, but it will strike a chord with a manager, won't it?
Why would anyone give away valuable software for free?
Businesses and other organizations contribute everything from tiny patches up to complete libraries, when doing so is cheaper and/or ^^ strike that higher quality than commercial software.
"doing so" can't be "higher quality than commercial software." That needs to be rephrased.
There's also the problem that "contributing" software isn't "cheaper and/or higher quality" than anything. IOW, it's that free software is cheaper and/or higher quality than commercial software and being part of that bolsters the process.
but don't consider proprietary because it is of a general or utility nature.
What I like to say is that "organizations often prefer to have code developed, maintained, and improved in the open source community when it does not contain technology specific to their application domain, because it allows them to focus more development resources on their core business."
Nice. -- Rob Stewart stewart@sig.com Software Engineer http://www.sig.com Susquehanna International Group, LLP using std::disclaimer;
participants (10)
-
Andreas Huber -
Andrey Melnikov -
Beman Dawes -
David Abrahams -
Jonathan Turkanis -
Martin Wille -
Michael B. Edwin Rickert -
Pavel Vozenilek -
Rene Rivera -
Rob Stewart