Recent Posts376
General Software Discussion / Re: Fairware: an interesting experiment in getting paid for Open Source
« Last post by Paul Keith on September 15, 2011, 12:27 AM »I think one thing that should also be cleared up is how marketing does not need to be marketing in the sense of how modern business should do it.
For example: When a developer, who has their own site, posts their applications here to "share" - that's marketing.
I don't know how obvious the above example is but the beauty of marketing is that it does not need to be linked to sales efforts or to the intent of marketing.
Marketing is like graphical user interface design with extra-consideration for the end user. It's a way of communicating and better emphasizing how the tools can help an audience with less effort on the person's side to understand the manuals, the functionality...even the intent to buy.
In this sense, it's very possible to be a marketer without realizing that you're being a marketer.
All these is mute though if the developers have to guess for themselves how to communicate. Example, if no one tells me that I need to add a screenshot or fix some other thing in my post I might not have realized the problem.
This is really where the inherent system/group is supposed to alleviate many of the problems with intent.
Not to beat kickstarter into a dead horse but look at the interface:
You can separate the comments/complaints from the backers from the updates. Video is not only at the fore front but it's designed in such a way that the paused video can double serve as a screenshot. Not only that, the sidebar social proofs itself with little help from the submitters.
This doesn't mean Kickstarter should be the standards for donationware. If anything the site overall is mediocre. There have been multiple problems with not only getting people to fund a project but getting the distribution right and it's still a site that gives biases to those who are somewhat below the radar as opposed to totally unknown submitters. You can't even just totally jump into the site and submit something. (without reducing your chances of being funded)
...however it's a step towards eliminating some of the exposure problems without requiring random exposure from popular blogs...and I think this type of delivery system is the fundamental requirement.
Clarity...interesting product... how many examples have we seen in our lifetime of totally boring examples that make no sense to us, gain massive interest? Why recently a scarf brought down Target's site.
For example: When a developer, who has their own site, posts their applications here to "share" - that's marketing.
I don't know how obvious the above example is but the beauty of marketing is that it does not need to be linked to sales efforts or to the intent of marketing.
Marketing is like graphical user interface design with extra-consideration for the end user. It's a way of communicating and better emphasizing how the tools can help an audience with less effort on the person's side to understand the manuals, the functionality...even the intent to buy.
In this sense, it's very possible to be a marketer without realizing that you're being a marketer.
All these is mute though if the developers have to guess for themselves how to communicate. Example, if no one tells me that I need to add a screenshot or fix some other thing in my post I might not have realized the problem.
This is really where the inherent system/group is supposed to alleviate many of the problems with intent.
Not to beat kickstarter into a dead horse but look at the interface:
You can separate the comments/complaints from the backers from the updates. Video is not only at the fore front but it's designed in such a way that the paused video can double serve as a screenshot. Not only that, the sidebar social proofs itself with little help from the submitters.
This doesn't mean Kickstarter should be the standards for donationware. If anything the site overall is mediocre. There have been multiple problems with not only getting people to fund a project but getting the distribution right and it's still a site that gives biases to those who are somewhat below the radar as opposed to totally unknown submitters. You can't even just totally jump into the site and submit something. (without reducing your chances of being funded)
...however it's a step towards eliminating some of the exposure problems without requiring random exposure from popular blogs...and I think this type of delivery system is the fundamental requirement.
Clarity...interesting product... how many examples have we seen in our lifetime of totally boring examples that make no sense to us, gain massive interest? Why recently a scarf brought down Target's site.
