Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • Sad to hear that the branding exercise turned out so poorly (though not entirely surprising). I suspect that any attempt to work with a marketing agency that is not focused on marketing technology is going to result in something similar.

    There's also lots to be said about the " pinko marketing [pbworks.com]" approach, for brands that have such a huge user community: i.e., marketing from the bottom-up vs. top-down.

    I jotted down some thinking on the "branding Perl" question in a recent blog post: "Getting to the root of P [newint.org]

    --
    Keeping technology simple since 2003
    • I really like the post you linked to and some of the responses. I can agree with the message. Back when I sold cars, I learned a couple of interesting things. First, selling Japanese cars was hard because I didn't give a damn about cars. Customers came in armed with invoice price lists, Consumer Reports, news articles, etc. They really were focused on value. When I switched to selling American cars, many people came in to "buy American" and while the cars were demonstrably a lesser value -- 3 versus 5 year warranties, poorer gas mileage, higher defect rather -- many customers were buying a brand and value for money was a secondary consideration (more than once people told me "I ain't gonna buy none of that Jap shit"). I found selling American cars was much easier.

      I also discovered that customers who paid the most for their cars were the happiest. They were sold on value, not on price. That's why a lot of commercial products are more widely deployed than free, open-source products. Though my first-hand experience with Bricolage showed that the added value of the commercial products was negligible (negative in some cases), people still perceived that commercial products must have a higher value. This is one issue that Perl is not likely to overcome directly.

      And the "creative power" message from raiph sounded great, but if coupled with TIMTOWTDI, I wonder if it would backfire. TIMTOWTDI clearly helps individual programmers, but it can backfire tremendously in large-scale environments when 20 products are doing identical things in 20 different ways. This is one of the obstacles we're struggling with at the BBC right now. If we did not have a reputation for TIMTOWTDI, I think "creative power" would be fantastic. Right now, I'm hesitant, but still like it. Might be a fantastic tag line.

      • I must admit, I also like the "Creative power" messaging also. For me it's reminiscent of "Making Easy Things Easy and Hard Things Possible" -- which has always resonated for me when thinking about Perl's strengths.

        But that "creative power" message is probably aimed squarely at developers, and not business executives. And that's where I was going in the post referenced above: There could be -- and probably should be -- different messaging to each potential audience. For developers, Perl is "creative power

        --
        Keeping technology simple since 2003