Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 00:10:50 -0000 From: Frank Pawlak <fpawlak@wi.rr.com> To: Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com>, "Roger 'Rocky' Vetterberg" <listsub@401.cx>, Simon Burke <simon.burke@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-www@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: RE: FreeBSD's Visual Identity: Outdated? Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.2.20041228011612.0285ccd8@pop-server.wi.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNKENCEPAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> References: <41D0AF75.6040500@401.cx> <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNKENCEPAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This beyond a doubt is one of the best explanations that I have seen, heard, expressed, etc., of how the fsck'ed up world of business does IT stuff, and I have done IT consulting on various levels for over 18 years. Very well said Ted. It points out quite well why BSD in general has a bad time in the marketplace. Regards, Frank At 11:36 PM 12/27/2004, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > > [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Roger 'Rocky' > > Vetterberg > > Sent: Monday, December 27, 2004 4:57 PM > > To: Simon Burke > > Cc: freebsd-www@freebsd.org; freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; > > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org > > Subject: Re: FreeBSD's Visual Identity: Outdated? > > > > > > Simon Burke wrote: > > [snip] > > >>2. If it wasn't for the interesting content and structure of the FreeBSD > > >> website, it would be among the less beautiful. Yes, it serves its > > >> purpose well by being simple and straight to the point. But > > a redesign > > >> could offer just the same -- simplicity and accuracy -- without being > > >> ugly. > > > > > > > > > Aesthetics are not everything, the web site does what its supposed to > > > do. Also i actually like how it looks. > > > A lot of people have strong feelings about all these all singing all > > > dancing webistes. There is just no need. Keep it simple and easy to > > > navigate around thats all thats really important. If the aesthetics > > > really matter more than function to such people who use BSD then they > > > would probably be not using BSD but either windows or linux, where you > > > have a nice pretty GUI to look at all the nice pretty sites. > > > > This is where I think a lot of people simply does not understand the > > problem. > >Roger I understand the problem, I wrote a book on FreeBSD integration >in 2000. The problem is I think you don't understand the problem. > > > Im a FreeBSD user. I like FreeBSD because it does not have all the > > flashy installers and pretty GUI's that many linux distros seems to > > have today. > >That frankly isn't the reason you should like it. You should like it >because it works better than most commercial operating systems let >alone most operating systems. > > > But still, Ive been screaming for years for someone to > > improve the website. Why? > > Anyone that has stood in front of a boardroom full of CEO's or similar > > and tried to promote the use of FreeBSD in a big organisation knows > > why. They might like all the facts about the os, the rock-solid > > stability, the lightning-fast performance and its solid reputation as > > a server os, but one look at the website and they will run screaming > > towards the nearest linux advocate instead. > >Most of the CEO's I've dealt with don't give a shit on a shingle about >a product website. What they care about is: 'can what I need done >be done in a way that is a) cheap and b) works and c) won't lock me >in to you' > >FreeBSD meets criteria A and B really well but it does not meet C. Linux >meets A and B but BARELY meets C. Windows definitely meets C and usually >meets B and doesen't usually meet A. > >The problem of course is that A and C are related. If I am a CEO and >I sign a FreeBSD or Linux deal - and you are a sole-source provider, >then once I have all my business processes into you, I'm locked into >you. Once that happens my thought processes are that your going to become >very expensive to me - why, because there's no competition to you out there. >I'm not going to do that unless I trust you implicitly. And there's very >few business people I am ever going to trust implicitly, save perhaps unless >your a son or daughter, and even then I may not. > >You have to understand of course that this is old-school knee-jerk >thinking. The CEO's are scared to death of you Roger. They don't >understand what your selling, they don't understand how to integrate >technology into their systems, they don't even understand their >current system. > >CEO's choose Windows because they think that there's enough Windows >guys out there that if they don't like the one they have they can >boot him out and get another. They only will give up choosing Windows >if they either absolutely cannot afford it, or if Windows simply won't >do what they need done. > >If they cannot afford it, what they will then do is keep dragging >Windows consultant after Windows consultant in to present to them, >until they stumble over an ignoramus (which is not hard) who over >commits himself and promises the world. They will then burn up >this guy, threatening lawsuits and everything else until they have >extracted the last drop of free work they can, then they will >jettison him. If they simply cannot find any ignoramuses then >I've seen them try deputizing some sales guy or secretary to manage >their Windows deployment, and finally a year afterwards when they >have a house full of Windows XP Home edition and no server, and >a giant workgroup that's falling apart, and they have lost some >critical files because they wern't backing up Sally Sue's workstation >and her disk crashed, then they will panic and overspend on a >Windows installation. > >The CEO's that choose FreeBSD or Linux are the ones where even the >Windows consultants they drag in all tell them "I can't do that" >either because Windows cannot do it, or because the price they >want it done at is so unbelievably cheap that even the ignoramus >Windows consultants can see that it's impossible. > >My take on it is that about 90% of the FreeBSD production installs >are least-cost deals. All of the ones we have ever sold to >customers (and we do both Windows and UNIX projects) are like this. >I'm sure that one of these days we might get a plum contract that >is a high-power server that cannot be done with Windows and the >customer knows it, and wants it done UNIX, it's only a matter of >time. But I would be willing to bet that after they ask if we can >do UNIX and we say yes, their next question will be if we can do >Sun, which we can. And frankly the cost of Solaris for a server is >nothing compared to the labor cost. > >I've frankly never seen a Linux-vs-FreeBSD deal where Linux won >if the consultant wanted to use FreeBSD, and the customer was willing >to deviate from Microsoft. VERY few customers are willing to deviate >from Microsoft, at least not in the Western states. And the ones >that are willing almost always want to do it themselves, and only >want us to come in and set everything up for them while they watch >us over the shoulder and try to get us to teach them how to >do it - because these are people who are too lazy to read the manual >and learn how to do things themselves, they just want someone to >set it up and teach them how to maintain it, so they can pay the >minimum amount of money for the specialist, and spend the minimum >amount of time learning how to do anything. > > > We, the users, might not care about our image, but if we want to be > > taken seriously by the rest of the world we better do something about it! > > > >I would suggest that if you really are this lit up about this issue >that you direct your customers to you OWN website which is quite obviously >superior to the FreeBSD one. > > > > > Clearly, you have not tried to "sell" FreeBSD to a big corporation. > > > >Roger you are just being impatient. You haven't defined 'big' here >but if you mean 'big' in that the company has over 500 employees >in an office building, then even you must know that the check signers >in these companies are almost never under the age of 40. Most >of them are over 40 and most of them came up through the sales ranks, >and not through the technology ranks. These are people who 25 years ago >were partying their way through a business degree in some university >and the only thing that they really know well is how to sell their >companies products. That's why they work at a big company, didn't you >know? Deep down they know they are incompetents and they are too >scared to go out on their own even when they could make triple the >money if they really knew what they were doing. > >They don't really understand anything about technology >infrastructure and they certainly didn't go to grade school or high >school with a personal computer in the house, like kids today. And >the worst part is that they matriculated during the time that in >business education in this country that the 'cog in the machine' aspect >of workers was totally emphasized. Their professors drilled into >their heads the idea that every worker in the company must be >interchangable and they deep down detest and hate the idea of there >being any such thing as 'key employees' > >Why do you think that the current federal government administration >just takes the position that workers need to retrain to the new >economy, as if just retraining 100 million people every 5 years to >new jobs is a good way to run the economy? This is a message that >comes straight out of that generation and resonates with todays >big business movers and shakers. That is why these people are doing >such a terrible job mucking up American big business today, the current >debacle with the airline industry is proof of that, and the amount >of bankruptcies over the last 6 years has been breathtaking. Very >few of these idiots are anything more than closet control freaks. > >To be successful in todays market you have to be able to individualize >your products to what the customers in the market want, and there >is no way for a big business to do that without really drastically >increasing the complexity of it's business workflow. Customers today want >you to stock 100 variations of your product and build all of them to order, >and they want it for the same price that 20 years ago they would >buy the cookie-cutter version you could sell them for. The only >way to do that is to integrate technology completely in every last >speck of business process that a big company does, and it takes a crew of >key technicians to do that. The few big companies that have learned >this aren't asking consultants what the damn operating system is >going to be on the computer systems they are asking the consultants >to build for them. They are telling the consultants 'this is what >the end result needs to be, you either figure out how to get it >for us using whatever things you want to use to get there, or get >the hell out' > >Roger, you really need to be dumbing down your presentations, these >CEO's your presenting to really don't understand all those big >words. Instead of using "FreeBSD" use "UNIX" It's shorter and >even the most sheltered of them understand that yooouu-nikx is >something that runs computers like winders is. And rather >than telling them how many mega-bytes and giga-bits the nice >new server is going to run at, just tell them it's going to be >big, and fast and powerful like Arnold Schwartznegger. Get >them sold on the idea that your providing a -solution to their >problems- not that your providing them some freebsd system >that is real cool and does something they are pretty fuzzy >about exactly what. If they start asking you exactly how your >going to do this don't get sidetracked into a technologists >conversation. > >In fact you might just consider hiring a professional salesperson >that doesen't really know too much about what your selling. These >CEO's really are more interested in things like when your going to >be finished building the new system, who is going to train the >end users, how is it going to help them make money, how much money >are they going to have to pay for it upfront, and how much money >they are going to have to pay for it ongoing. The salesperson should >be figuring all that out with them first. You shouldn't even >be talking about operating systems until you have sold them on >yourself and your company, and if FreeBSD really is an objection >to them, then they should like you enough so that they want you >to build a Linux solution for them. Once you get them hooked and >after a year or so you can switch them over to FreeBSD. > >Ted > >_______________________________________________ >freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org mailing list >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-advocacy-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > >-- >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.5 - Release Date: 12/26/2004 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.5 - Release Date: 12/26/2004 _______________________________________________ freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6.0.3.0.2.20041228011612.0285ccd8>