I was starting to write a point-by-point answer but then realized that we agree on nearly everything. You clarified a couple of points that I agree with but didn't elaborate on in my last post.
Just one thing (see below): On Sunday, October 28, 2012 14:10:10 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > On Sunday, October 28, 2012 12:22:39 Inge Wallin wrote: > > So who are the intended users? > > what i do want to avoid is a system that is really good for the 3 groups > you listed (or whatever specific market segment(s)) and not great for the > rest of humanity. there are many reasons for that, but without going into > the "why", the general tablet using public remains a use case target for > me, if not an initial target market. > > there is a distinction to be made between "who is the software designed to > be usable by" and "which demographics / target markets do we approach as > early adopters." > > i'd also add 4: office use > > * we have good productivity and groupware apps, the two key items > * activities fit naturally into many typical office workflows > * we do not require 100k apps in an app store to service this market > * there is very little direct targeting of this market by current systems > > > 3. Educational organizations. Here I think of both public ones and > > in-house > > ... > > > So... I bet that these groups have very different needs and priorities. > > My personal interest lies with category 3, but I also think that this > > group needs the most mature system. And I know that Aaron likes to say > > that "we can't play the number-of-apps game" but I think that the lack > > of apps for will be seen as a big problem for this group even though > > it's not strictly a problem for their intended use in itself. > > ah, but we don't need to play the number-of-apps game for these people. > it's perfectly fine if we don't have 100,000 apps covering every city > transit system, every sports league, etc, etc. we just a need a set of > good-to-great quality applications with educational focus. if we had 40-50 > (or, dreaming, 100 :) such apps, we'd be able to compete quite effectively > based on functionality provided that is relevant to this audience. I agree that a much smaller number of apps is sufficient. But what is the reality or actual need is not always reflected in purchasing decisions. A purchase is done for many different reasons and I suspect that having few apps will be a liability when the decision is made, no matter if it should or not. > > It's interesting though to see that the suggested focus for PA4 is books > > and reading. I have the feeling that this suggestion was made before any > > analysis was done about the intended users. > > one very common use of tablets is to read books, periodicals and web > content. > > it is also something we have quite a bit of functionality for already. in > terms of creating strengths so that we have outstanding features (versus > larger numbers of mediocre ones) it makes sense to spend some time > improving this further. > > i don't think it should be *the* focus for PA4, however. > > > This means that we should try to get group 2 on board as soon as > > possible. And for the long term I don't think we should dismiss > > compatibility with Android out of hand. > > no one is dismissing it, but someone needs to do the actual work (and then > maintain it) _______________________________________________ Active mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/active
