|Re: [e4-dev] What *are* we doing here??? <g>|
I agree with you that it is very important to think about e4 from a marketing point of view. Especially since we have explored a good number of areas and should be thinking about what we want to deliver (both short term and long term).
It's kind of funny that you are mentioning marketing now. Just yesterday, I came across a blog posting about "marketing for geeks" which I found interesting as someone who had a small software company in the past. After enjoying all the parallels with what I experienced a couple of years ago, it occurred to me that many of the issues apply to the e4 project as well, in particular this one: http://www.ericsink.com/Positioning.html
Ideally, we'd come up with a position statement about e4, maybe something like your (1) below but shorter. Any suggestions?
About (2), I don't think the phrase "architecture clean-up" is something you can use for marketing purposes. :-P It's not about the intrinsic properties, it's about what you can do with it.
Dave Orme wrote on 01/27/2009 03:22:56 PM:
> Awhile back we put together a few paragraphs describing what E4 is
> about from a (dirty) marketing point of view. Beware: if you read
> onward, you might need to take a bath. ;-)
> Seriously though, what occurred to me last night is that E4 is
> really about two themes:
> 1) Eclipse has always been about providing great infrastructure.
> SWT gives us great infrastructure horizontally across operating
> system platforms. eSWT, eRCP, however, broaden Eclipse vertically
> down into the embedded space. E4 is about moving Eclipse up in the
> vertical space so that it can also be a platform for cloud-based applications.
> After E4, we will cover all major desktop and server operating
> systems horizontally and the embedded through cloud space
> vertically. The enabling technologies here are Equinox, RAP, and
> [[the second E4 theme]] which is:
> 2) Code and architecture clean-up. Singletons are (nearly) always
> evil, but especially so in a multi-user environment like RAP.
> Resources can be anywhere. Declarative UIs are nice. Etc... I
> won't re-hash any more of this here as we're all well-versed in it by now.
> My Question:
> Does this sound like a good way to describe and position E4?
> OK, maybe that's a silly question to ask a bunch of engineers. ;-)
> But does anyone think I'm missing anything important or glossing
> over something that I shouldn't be.
> Dave Orme
> e4-dev mailing list
Back to the top