I think another point to add to my previous novel is that JQuery should present itself as it is without regard to some of the traditional mainstays of "if you have product a you have to market the b way".
The idea behind JQuery is what makes it important and useful. If the idea itself is promoted, and it is made obvious through the communications with the outside world that this IS an important and useful idea for others, people will naturally gravitate towards the it. JQuery - 'The way JavaScript should be' ... the communications/marketing will stand out just like the concept does. Solid Source wrote: > > Of particular importance to JQuery I believe is finding a way to help > developers understand VERY OBVIOUSLY that this is not another > Prototype/Dojo///, but rather a very different way to address the issue of > DOM interaction in a concise not overly verbose manner. I have used every > major(and minor for that matter) lib out there for various projects/apps > and I am absolutely committed to JQuery after all my experimenting. > > You all know why ... :) > > The only reason it took so long for me to convert was that I saw JQuery > initially as just another lib. JQuery was less publicized at the time and > that made for easy oversight of it's true value. > > If you/we find a way to make it obvious at first glance(wherever the first > glance lives) what we have here is special in a way you haven't > experienced yet in your libquest(s), along with a very concise and > simple(layman's terms) why, I feel this would be a huge benefit. > > So I pointed out a problem so here's a few ideas/solutions: > > 1. Change the slogan "New Wave Javascript" to something more along the > lines of explaining what it does or how it does it rather than what it is. > Everyone thinks they are new wave right? :) > > 2. The jquery.com homepage has this text as the first paragraph at the > top, "jQuery is a new type of Javascript library. It is not a huge, > bloated framework promising the best in AJAX - nor is it just a set of > needlessly complex enhancements - jQuery is designed to change the way > that you write Javascript.". Along with the first section heading, "What > is jQuery?". > > Why did this not sink in for me the first few times I visited the site? > I'll choose some libraries that I have used in the past, before > converting, and break out their home pages ... > 1. dojo: "Dojo is the Open Source JavaScript toolkit that makes > professional web development better, easier, and faster." > 2. prototype: "Prototype is a JavaScript framework that aims to ease > development of dynamic web applications" > 3. scriptaculous/proto: "script.aculo.us provides you with easy-to-use, > cross-browser user interface JavaScript libraries to make your web sites > and web applications fly." > 4. mochikit: "Makes JavaScript suck less." - I love this one > 5. rico: "An open-source JavaScript library for creating rich internet > applications. Rico provides full AJAX support, drag and drop management > and a cinematic effects library." > > commonalities: they all make JavaScript development better, easier, and > faster of course :). This was what stuck everytime I crawled the web for a > new library, so I was looking unconsciously for something to stand out > other than the obvious. > > I think the JQuery homepage explanation is very honest, but it "sounded" > like it was going to make my development better, easier, and faster. I > didn't want to spend the time(I hit JQuery after proto,script,mochi,rico) > to try yet another lib, especially if it is less known - probably meaning > rel. cycles are low, community is small, plug ins obsolete. I might have > taken the time if I had somehow "got it" without having to dig around a > commit a lot of time. So ... long winded point comes ... if the homepage > featured very little text describing JQuery, and a lot more functional > concise examples, and talk of community, plugins, etc ... I think the > segways from what do I need, to hey that looks nice, to let me try that > with my problem, to why didn't I start using this sooner mean new JQuery > users faster. > > closing example: JQuery homepage-marketing landing page > > JQuery - "some catchy, maybe slightly off topic phrase" - remember Mochi - > "Makes JavaScript suck less." > > example > brief expl. 1 $() method, maybe - why is this different than prototype? > > brief how > dom manipulation example 1 - link to demos > > brief how > effects example 1 - link to demos > > brief how > dom manipulation example 2 - link to demos > > - start hitting the what and whys of JQ > > brief how > .get() - .post() - .load() example 1 - link to demos > > ... > > ... > > - really get into the what and whys of JQ > > Thinking out loud here :). > > > > > thumblewend wrote: >> >> Hi Rey, >> This is slightly off-topic of me but I'm not sure how else to get in >> contact with you. I just want you to know that I replied to your >> direct email a few weeks ago (regarding the case study), but I think >> my email didn't get past your junk filter. Please advise if you are >> still interested, and maybe add my email to your address book so I >> get through to you. >> Sorry for this email everyone else, please forgive me. >> >> Joel Birch. >> >> On 08/12/2006, at 12:45 AM, Rey Bango wrote: >> >>> Guys, some of you may know of my efforts to get jQuery more exposure. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> jQuery mailing list >> discuss@jquery.com >> http://jquery.com/discuss/ >> >> > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Efforts-to-Convert-Folks-to-jQuery-tf2774482.html#a7749080 Sent from the JQuery mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
