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

From: Rob Stewart (stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-07-07 15:08:47

From: David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>
> 
> > 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_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer                     http://www.sig.com
Susquehanna International Group, LLP  using std::disclaimer;