Re: [boost] [web site] Marketing - another try

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-07-07 14:35:56

"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:ud5puvd8q.fsf_at_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