Re: [board-discuss] Re: [tdf-members] Discussion about options available with marketing plan draft and timetable
On 2020/07/13 14:20, Telesto wrote: >The potential customer has to figure out who to contact themselves. Sending >customers more or less in the dark. I'll grant that the LibO webpage on obtaining professional, paid support, could be clearer. From my perspective, the biggest change to that page that needs to be made, is which organisations provide paid Tier 1 support to individuals. ideally, there would be a matrix: Column headings are: * Type of Support; * Tier 1; * Tier 2; * Tier 3; Row headings are: * Column Headings; * Individual; * Nano-business; * Micro-business; * Small business; * Medium business; * Large business; * SOHO; * SMB; * Enterprise; It probably would be useful for that page to provide definitions for each of those terms. > The quality of the content at Collaboraoffice.com/ CIB.de isn't really > convincing either, IMHO. And the sites are rather technical. Personally, I wouldn't call any of the documents on any of the vendor sites that I've looked at White Papers. (Comic Sans? Seriously? I've forgotten which vendor's White Paper used that font.) Part of the theory is that IT will be browsing the site, not the CEO. Typically, the recommendations of IT are accepted, if the budget is there. If the budget isn't there, either the proposal will be dropped, of somebody that the Board of Director knows, gets the contract, even when it costs twenty times as much, delivers less than a tenth of what IT requested, and none of the required specifications are met. > A CEO or Manager has to be convinced too, That usually occurs after a _Request for Quotation_, _Invitation to Tender_, or _Request for Proposal_, or similar document has been made. The theory is that the suspect will provide contact data to the support vendor, and the follow-up email/phone discussion will go through the wants/needs/requirements of the suspect, before the any of the above documents are issued. The requirements for the above document will list exactly what the support vendor said that they could supply, usually including some trivial thing that only that support vendor can supply. Once the document is in house, then the CEO _might_ go through, and approve/disapprove it. Sometimes, whatever the CEO, or whoever doesn't like, can be negotiated around. > Also terms like L1 and L2 are not to evident. Are those (legally) universal > terms. > So L1/L2 means exact the same thing for every software vendor worldwide? I probably was the one that brought up those terms. For all practical purposes L1 & L2 have the same meaning for every vendor who has anything to with language, writing systems, and the like, around the world. > So even with LTS we end up with multiple LTS version offered by multiple > vendors. Take a look at the current situation. I've forgotten which vendor offered support for which product. Vendor #1 Does one major release a year, offering five years of support for that release. All currently supported released have updates, when security flaws & bugs are found, and fixed. Typically, there are four minor releases, and one or two intermittent releases each year. Included in the contract, is software that enables rapid deployment of the updates throughout the organisation. IT has to authorise the update, and users are not impacted by it. This organisation specialists in integrating LibO with the existing software, and workflow processes used by the organisation. Vendor #2 does two releases per year, and offers three years of support for each release. Minor releases are done, when bugs are fixed, and security flaws patched. This vendor also provides tools to enable the organisation's IT people to deploy updates, when they (organisation IT) are satisfied that it won't break anything. Vendor # 3 does one major release every two years, offering somewhere between six and ten years of support. Minor releases tend to be security patches and bug fixes. Major releases introduce new functionality. Whilst it encourages organisations to migrate to newer versions, they will continue to support the product, for the lifetime of the initial contract. When renewing, you pretty much have to upgrade to the current version --- about the only exception is when their techs can't get the current version to work with whatever other ancient software the customer is using. All of these vendors call their product something along the lines of "VendorName Office". They all acknowledge LibreOffice as being their upstream. Vendor # 4 simply takes the current version of LibreOffice, and backports security fixes & bug fixes to it, for the duration of the LTS contract that they signed with the customer. If you started with LibO 5.0.0.0 back September 2015, and had a ten year contract, you'll be getting updates until 2025, but still on LibO 5.0.0.0.x, where "x" is however many patches & updates have been done since then.) AFAIK, this is the only LibO version that might cause confusion with individuals and organisations other t
Re: [board-discuss] Re: [tdf-members] Discussion about options available with marketing plan draft and timetable
On a upside-down view, my proposal is to have a LibreOffice "as-is" for download from TDF website as Download LibreOffice from Collabora (and have C'bra brand/splash) Download LibreOffice from CIB (and have CIB brand/splash) 2 packages, gratis, open source, same software, no fancy edition, no enterprise chevrons. User choose (click for d/l) what looks better for him. If that doesn't solve the income issues of the ecosystem, it nevertheless brings the ecosystem companies in front of the user. A "ad-sense-like" splash display on each time user starts the software. Olivier (who is sensible to the issues raised) Em 13/07/2020 08:08, Justin Luth escreveu: > I think the best solution probably lies in just using simple branding of > "LibreOffice", and "LibreOffice LTS" for eco-system branding. > > > As many have already said, LibreOffice Personal implies licensing - > which simply isn't true, and so is a particularly bad term. > > LibreOffice Community edition implies crippleware - which currently is > not true, and is not the intended direction. So also a poor term. > > The factual distinction currently between TDF LibreOffice vs Eco-system > versions is rolling releases vs Long Term Support releases. Since > "LibreOffice Rolling" would hold no meaning for most people, it is best > to go with the common suggestion to just stick with "LibreOffice". LTS > is a fairly common term for business-focused open-source, and thus > "LibreOffice LTS / supported by XXX" provides a branding distinction > that immediately conveys confidence and desirability to the business > sector. > > > On a related topic, I also wanted to comment on the underlying tone that > some segments are using LibreOffice, but not contributing. I think that > is hard to measure because open-source is a very large field, and in my > opinion, anyone who invests well in open-source anywhere should have the > moral right to use all open-source products. So for example, a company > that supports a lot of code development for GIMP shouldn't be shamed for > not contributing/donating directly to LibreOffice even if they heavily > use it. For me, it made most sense to "pay" for our open-source use as > a volunteer LibreOffice developer. > > Justin > > -- Olivier Hallot LibreOffice Documentation Coordinator Comunidade LibreOffice Rio de Janeiro - Brasil - Local Time: UTC-03:00 http://tdf.io/joinus -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Re: [tdf-members] Discussion about options available with marketing plan draft and timetable
Op 13-7-2020 om 15:13 schreef Regina Henschel: Hi all, Justin Luth schrieb am 13-Jul-20 um 13:08: I think the best solution probably lies in just using simple branding of "LibreOffice", and "LibreOffice LTS" for eco-system branding. I support this. In addition LibreOffice partners should be allowed to put a "powered by XYZ" on the start screen. Surely preferred above Edition; +1 As many have already said, LibreOffice Personal implies licensing - which simply isn't true, and so is a particularly bad term. > LibreOffice Community edition implies crippleware - which currently is not true, and is not the intended direction. So also a poor term. "Edition" itself is dangerous too, because it implies, that the download from TDF might not contain all features. +1 What still troubling is the position of TDF against the the eco-system partners. The eco-system partners (and other professionals delivering services) are at the same time competing with each other in the same market. The TDF attempts to be neutral. And is really speaking with "Mehl im Mund". The potential customer has to figure out who to contact themselves. Sending customers more or less in the dark. About making a first good impression. I personally would already quite here. You can say that you're be reliable partner, easy to find, clear communication, easy to contact. However at TDF the opposite is true. And the confusion doesn't end at TDF.. The quality of the content at Collaboraoffice.com/ CIB.de isn't really convincing either, IMHO. And the sites are rather technical. A CEO or Manager has to be convinced too, I think. Also terms like L1 and L2 are not to evident. Are those (legally) universal terms. So L1/L2 means exact the same thing for every software vendor worldwide? I would really want to know what I get. So even with LTS we end up with multiple LTS version offered by multiple vendors. Telesto -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Re: [tdf-members] Discussion about options available with marketing plan draft and timetable
Hi Regina, First - thank you for your help getting at least one TDF tender un-blocked to get that ODF 1.3 support implemented. That's much appreciated :-) On 13/07/2020 14:13, Regina Henschel wrote: > "Edition" itself is dangerous too, because it implies, that the download > from TDF might not contain all features. Interesting to see you changed your mind on this; your last mails suggested that some sort of Edition tag would be ok for you IIRC. > Another distinction is the kind of support. As I've said - I don't believe that support by itself is something that companies know they should need and value; they don't expect to get it from Microsoft - they expect an extremely polished product. > To make these more visible, I can think of changes for the download page: > Introduction > Download option "fresh" > Download option "still". I think Mike had plans for wire-frames to consider how the website might look, we can perhaps integrate this. > Introduction > The Document Foundation (TDF) provides LibreOffice releases on a /time > based cycle/. TDF provides a feature release half yearly, followed by > usually six bug fix releases. Why would I not choose that for my company ? > Other versions, including long-term support versions, and special > services for the needs of companies and larger organizations are > available from LibreOffice partners, read // for > more details. This presupposes that people want long term support, or 'special' (ie. which I read as not-for-me) services. Microsoft has been moving the world to a stream of constant updates for Windows 10 with some success. On what basis do we think that highlighting this feature will have any noticeable impact ? That we think that they -should- want those things is fair enough, but that doesn't mean that they do. We can of course do the change, and measure the result - and iteratively A/B test the website until it is effective - if we know what effective is of course. I would suggest that saying "are available" is very short of a concrete endorsement, or a call to action, or ... > Remove the comment "If you're a technology enthusiast, early adopter or > power user, this version is for you!" from "fresh"-rectangle. Hmm? we replace that with ? - my (English) download page doesn't have a Fresh vs. Still thing - just versions. > Replace the comment "This version is slightly older and does not have > the latest features, but it has been tested for longer. For business > deployments, we strongly recommend support from certified partners which > also offer long-term support versions of LibreOffice."> with the comment > "Last bug fix release for this LibreOffice series is in ". So we remove a strong recommendation to use a long-term supported version - and replace it with an implicit suggestion that they might need that, and also with a date ? Well - it may do something, but - I'm deeply skeptical that minor cosmetic re-arrangements here will have any effect at all. We can of course test it easily enough. It would be really sad that TDF no longer strongly recommends support from certified partner. That will impact all trainers, migrators and development companies, as well as the certification program. But - the impact is perhaps limited: we already know that this existing strong recommendation is almost completely ineffective in helping our ecosystem thrive. So - presumably weakening it will have little negative impact. It looks to me like a step in the direction of doing even less to help the ecosystem, and more to spread the myth that TDF + volunteers alone create LibreOffice. > The short time where bug fixes are available for a LibreOffice series, > should make it clear to companies, that they need a different solution > than just downloading LibreOffice. So you're happy to say -something- bad about LibreOffice: that it does not have long term support in order to help the ecosystem differentiate ? That's encouraging - but I assume that other people will also want to point out on the page that there is really no need at all to buy anything and that you can just upgrade to the very latest version when that time limit expires. Still others will want to band together to provide a free LTS version - to help enterprises avid feeling they need to contribute anything back because they're worried support will run out. Others will say this creates FUD that the project is going to end in under six months =) >> On a related topic, I also wanted to comment on the underlying tone >> that some segments are using LibreOffice, but not contributing. I >> think that is hard to measure because open-source is a very large >> field, and in my opinion, anyone who invests well in open-source >> anywhere should have the moral right to use all open-source products. >> So for example, a company that supports
Re: [board-discuss] Re: [tdf-members] Discussion about options available with marketing plan draft and timetable
I support Regina's proposal. S. On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 2:13 PM Regina Henschel wrote: > Hi all, > > Justin Luth schrieb am 13-Jul-20 um 13:08: > > I think the best solution probably lies in just using simple branding of > > "LibreOffice", and "LibreOffice LTS" for eco-system branding. > > I support this. In addition LibreOffice partners should be allowed to > put a "powered by XYZ" on the start screen. > > > As many have already said, LibreOffice Personal implies licensing - > > which simply isn't true, and so is a particularly bad term. > > > LibreOffice Community edition implies crippleware - which currently is > > not true, and is not the intended direction. So also a poor term. > > "Edition" itself is dangerous too, because it implies, that the download > from TDF might not contain all features. > > > > > The factual distinction currently between TDF LibreOffice vs Eco-system > > versions is rolling releases vs Long Term Support releases. Since > > "LibreOffice Rolling" would hold no meaning for most people, it is best > > to go with the common suggestion to just stick with "LibreOffice". LTS > > is a fairly common term for business-focused open-source, and thus > > "LibreOffice LTS / supported by XXX" provides a branding distinction > > that immediately conveys confidence and desirability to the business > > sector. > Another distinction is the kind of support. > > To make these more visible, I can think of changes for the download page: > Introduction > Download option "fresh" > Download option "still". > > Introduction > The Document Foundation (TDF) provides LibreOffice releases on a /time > based cycle/. TDF provides a feature release half yearly, followed by > usually six bug fix releases. > > Other versions, including long-term support versions, and special > services for the needs of companies and larger organizations are > available from LibreOffice partners, read // for > more details. > > [// are meant to be links.] > > Remove the comment "If you're a technology enthusiast, early adopter or > power user, this version is for you!" from "fresh"-rectangle. > > Replace the comment "This version is slightly older and does not have > the latest features, but it has been tested for longer. For business > deployments, we strongly recommend support from certified partners which > also offer long-term support versions of LibreOffice." with the comment > "Last bug fix release for this LibreOffice series is in ". > > > The short time where bug fixes are available for a LibreOffice series, > should make it clear to companies, that they need a different solution > than just downloading LibreOffice. > > > > > > > On a related topic, I also wanted to comment on the underlying tone that > > some segments are using LibreOffice, but not contributing. I think that > > is hard to measure because open-source is a very large field, and in my > > opinion, anyone who invests well in open-source anywhere should have the > > moral right to use all open-source products. So for example, a company > > that supports a lot of code development for GIMP shouldn't be shamed for > > not contributing/donating directly to LibreOffice even if they heavily > > use it. For me, it made most sense to "pay" for our open-source use as > > a volunteer LibreOffice developer. > > This is an important aspect. Shaming people for not paying for > LibreOffice without knowing the background is not the right way. > > Kind regards > Regina > > > -- > To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org > Problems? > https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ > Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette > List archive: > https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ > Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy > > -- *Simon Phipps* *Office:* +1 (415) 683-7660 *or* +44 (238) 098 7027 *Signal/Mobile*: +44 774 776 2816
Re: [board-discuss] Re: [tdf-members] Discussion about options available with marketing plan draft and timetable
Hi Am 13.07.20 um 15:13 schrieb Regina Henschel: > To make these more visible, I can think of changes for the download page: > Introduction > Download option "fresh" > Download option "still". > > Introduction > The Document Foundation (TDF) provides LibreOffice releases on a /time based > cycle/. TDF provides a feature release half yearly, followed by usually six > bug fix releases. > > Other versions, including long-term support versions, and special services > for the needs of companies and larger organizations are available from > LibreOffice partners, read // for more details. > > [// are meant to be links.] > > Remove the comment "If you're a technology enthusiast, early adopter or power > user, this version is for you!" from "fresh"-rectangle. > > Replace the comment "This version is slightly older and does not have the > latest features, but it has been tested for longer. For business deployments, > we strongly recommend support from certified partners which also offer > long-term support versions of LibreOffice." with the comment "Last bug fix > release for this LibreOffice series is in ". > > > The short time where bug fixes are available for a LibreOffice series, should > make it clear to companies, that they need a different solution than just > downloading LibreOffice. +1 Can be done immediately. No preliminary decision on other topics. -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen Uwe Altmann -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Re: [tdf-members] Discussion about options available with marketing plan draft and timetable
Hi all, Justin Luth schrieb am 13-Jul-20 um 13:08: I think the best solution probably lies in just using simple branding of "LibreOffice", and "LibreOffice LTS" for eco-system branding. I support this. In addition LibreOffice partners should be allowed to put a "powered by XYZ" on the start screen. As many have already said, LibreOffice Personal implies licensing - which simply isn't true, and so is a particularly bad term. > LibreOffice Community edition implies crippleware - which currently is not true, and is not the intended direction. So also a poor term. "Edition" itself is dangerous too, because it implies, that the download from TDF might not contain all features. The factual distinction currently between TDF LibreOffice vs Eco-system versions is rolling releases vs Long Term Support releases. Since "LibreOffice Rolling" would hold no meaning for most people, it is best to go with the common suggestion to just stick with "LibreOffice". LTS is a fairly common term for business-focused open-source, and thus "LibreOffice LTS / supported by XXX" provides a branding distinction that immediately conveys confidence and desirability to the business sector. Another distinction is the kind of support. To make these more visible, I can think of changes for the download page: Introduction Download option "fresh" Download option "still". Introduction The Document Foundation (TDF) provides LibreOffice releases on a /time based cycle/. TDF provides a feature release half yearly, followed by usually six bug fix releases. Other versions, including long-term support versions, and special services for the needs of companies and larger organizations are available from LibreOffice partners, read // for more details. [// are meant to be links.] Remove the comment "If you're a technology enthusiast, early adopter or power user, this version is for you!" from "fresh"-rectangle. Replace the comment "This version is slightly older and does not have the latest features, but it has been tested for longer. For business deployments, we strongly recommend support from certified partners which also offer long-term support versions of LibreOffice." with the comment "Last bug fix release for this LibreOffice series is in ". The short time where bug fixes are available for a LibreOffice series, should make it clear to companies, that they need a different solution than just downloading LibreOffice. On a related topic, I also wanted to comment on the underlying tone that some segments are using LibreOffice, but not contributing. I think that is hard to measure because open-source is a very large field, and in my opinion, anyone who invests well in open-source anywhere should have the moral right to use all open-source products. So for example, a company that supports a lot of code development for GIMP shouldn't be shamed for not contributing/donating directly to LibreOffice even if they heavily use it. For me, it made most sense to "pay" for our open-source use as a volunteer LibreOffice developer. This is an important aspect. Shaming people for not paying for LibreOffice without knowing the background is not the right way. Kind regards Regina -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
[board-discuss] Re: [tdf-members] Discussion about options available with marketing plan draft and timetable
I think the best solution probably lies in just using simple branding of "LibreOffice", and "LibreOffice LTS" for eco-system branding. As many have already said, LibreOffice Personal implies licensing - which simply isn't true, and so is a particularly bad term. LibreOffice Community edition implies crippleware - which currently is not true, and is not the intended direction. So also a poor term. The factual distinction currently between TDF LibreOffice vs Eco-system versions is rolling releases vs Long Term Support releases. Since "LibreOffice Rolling" would hold no meaning for most people, it is best to go with the common suggestion to just stick with "LibreOffice". LTS is a fairly common term for business-focused open-source, and thus "LibreOffice LTS / supported by XXX" provides a branding distinction that immediately conveys confidence and desirability to the business sector. On a related topic, I also wanted to comment on the underlying tone that some segments are using LibreOffice, but not contributing. I think that is hard to measure because open-source is a very large field, and in my opinion, anyone who invests well in open-source anywhere should have the moral right to use all open-source products. So for example, a company that supports a lot of code development for GIMP shouldn't be shamed for not contributing/donating directly to LibreOffice even if they heavily use it. For me, it made most sense to "pay" for our open-source use as a volunteer LibreOffice developer. Justin -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
