Hi Charles, *
Here are my few and humble thought...
First of I think we should define our target. Who are we aiming at.
Secondly we should define our preferred available channels.
Third is to define our mission (didn't we actually do that already?)
We have already convinced the free software environment that we are not
only the best product, but also has the best "heart and soul". So we
should move on and find new targets: The "free as in free beer" market.
Sorry, but on the Windows platform users can't distinguish between open
source and freeware. We need Windows (and mac) users too.
In stead of spending our time and effort on Apache Open Office and IBM
(hey - we have already beaten them) we should emphasize all the
different efforts for the enterprise market: Easier installation on
large scale Windows, Certification program, higher stability, huge
documentation etc. I'm a little bit tired of all the internal
discussions about Rob Weir and his FUD. Forget about him for a while and
concentrate on our primary competitor: Microsoft! (please). This is
where our future users are to be found.
And Rob? We can tackle him. His project can't deliver - we can!
By the way: about a year ago i made an open source evaluation of some of
the most prominent open source project including The Document
Foundation. The evaluation was done by the use of a objective
(mathematical) method but also about 50 interviews. One of the results
was that we need two things:
* A clear roadmap. Perhaps we have one, but it must be more clear and
have a prominent place on our website. A roadmap is one of the first
things enterprise CIOs are looking for.
* A more clear decision flow within our own organization.Who is
actually deciding what? One of the cases has been the new design
project (the old renaissance project from OO.o). A lot of mock-ups
and sketches has been seen but nobody has picked it up and made a
corporate decision. But the problem is that users can't find out who
that in fact should be.
Where are all the local marketeers? I see some around but not many. I
for my self is running my own game here in my sweet little country but I
can't see there is a coordinated effort. Okay we share information but
not enough. Italo has done a great job on the international (English
speaking areas), but what suits everybody doesn't really suit anybody.
What story do we want to tell? Is our goal to convince that our product
is the best? the cheapest? Are we trying to convince users to download
and use LibreOffice or to become engaged and participating?
Michael Meeks has had a few nice posts about large organizations using
LibreOffice (and open source software in general) and not giving
anything back. I believe that this is one of the stories we want to
tell. The question is how.
Another story I personally would like to hear is about "mother tongue".
I'm native speaker of a very small language and in *my* marketplace this
is a big issue. I don't fear Apache Open Office in Denmark because
Apache don't have a localization project for Danish. Lately I have been
involved in setting up the Kalaallisut (Greenlandish) localization
process and you can believe that the issue is important in a country
with only 56.749 citizens. LibreOffice might be the FIRST computer
program in Kalaallisut ever published.
Lets look back and enjoy the first two years here in the summer
vacation. But when we get back we should look ahead. I'm sure we have
made a lot of mistakes during these two years but not much we should
regret. I'm proud to be a part of The Document Foundation ;-)
On 05-07-2012 16:37, Charles-H.Schulz wrote:
This might be a long thread and I wish we will all stay on topic, as it
is an important subject.
The Document Foundation and the LibreOffice project will soon be two
years old. Well, not TDF the entity of course, but the LibreOffice
project. Needless to say, from my perspective at least, it's been two
years that have changed me, taught me a lot and brought a lot of
happiness and good moment. We have arrived in many ways at the end of a
chapter of our story, and by that I don't mean that it's time to go to
bed and sleep :-).
The Foundation, as an entity, is properly established, although certain
processes have yet to be fully set. Some pieces are somewhat lacking,
but otherwise it's running well. The project is doing well, we have an
ever increasing flow of volunteers and developers.
What is missing, at this stage, is some blocks that are needed to take
the project to the next step. We have achieved an important thing in
less than two years: we have proved that a community-led project can be
strong, sustainable, and is able to turn around situations that were
previously deemed to difficult to change. We have stopped being seen as
the young and foolish dreamers that refuse the reality. We are now seen
as mature, and we have given the world the best free and open source
software office suite. We can be proud of that. But it's time to move on
to something bigger.
We have seen that the transition from OpenOffice.org to LibreOffice has
generated quite a lot of "creative destruction". We kept much content
from the former Openoffice.org infrastructure, and most of the community
moved happily to LibreOffice. But in several places, processes that got
disrupted never quite came back to what they were. And in others, broken
things or unreached goals have not been reached (yet). Today, on this
list, I would like to focus on something that took a long time to
achieve in OpenOffice.org, if it ever was achieved. I'm talking about
the need to define a marketing strategy. Mind you, we have marketing
material on the wiki. We have presentation slides, we have visual and
graphical elements, we have the calendar (thanks Marc!) , the web
clippings, etc. But that does not make a marketing strategy. What we
need is higher level goals most of us agree with, and we need a way to
structure the marketing team, who should not just be marketing contacts
for this or that region/country, but actual volunteers actively working
on marketing. Also, we need a way to ackowledge their contribution, or
rather we need to make their contribution rewarding and pleasant. But
that's another part of the discussion.
As I said, we need a marketing strategy. Right now everytime LibreOffice
gets released we have release notes. These notes are interesting pages
to be sure, but we need to think and decide how we position ourselves;
how we communicate our brand in order to raise its awareness, whether we
push forward a product or a community (or both). We need some higher
level churn up.
As for myself -but that's me- I am very interested in how we position
the brand positioning. I'm not so interested -marketing wise- in product
strategy, first of all because such a thing does not work in an open
source project (since you can't really tell a volunteer what to do
unless you find one that will work things out with you) and second
because LibreOffice is a complete and full featured office suite
catering to pretty much any existing and potential market out there. But
again, it's time to define this strategy and help grow the adoption of
Apologies for the long message,
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Defining a marketing strategy · Tom Davies
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Defining a marketing strategy · Jean Weber
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Defining a marketing strategy · leif
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Defining a marketing strategy · Dave Johnson
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy