I don't know Tomeu, what do you think? Sean
On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 8:09 PM, Tomeu Vizoso<[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 16:37, Sean DALY<[email protected]> wrote: >> OK Tomeu >> >> To be clear, I'm making a distinction between marketing (in the >> spreading the word to regular people sense, not in the FOSS community >> building sense) and deploying. I fully agree we need to nurture a >> large and wide downstream FOSS community. > > I'm a bit confused, how does this affect the guy who works on Sugar > and releases source tarballs every 6 months? > > Thanks, > > Tomeu > >> So there's no narrowing of who deploys it, but a prioritization of how >> we can get the word out to the most teachers and parents. >> >> I hope to see Sugar included in distros, but I hope even more they >> make an effort to get it out to classrooms. To me, such an effort >> would merit our marketing support. I actually think distros could be >> much more out in front in the education sector, and Sugar could help >> distros leap ahead in K-6, an opportunity they should seize. Look at >> the Dell education netbook: Ubuntu went to the trouble of being the >> standard OS on it (Windows on option), but they missed the boat on >> making Sugar a central part of their K-6 offer. I'd like to work on >> that with them. Dell claims 500 school districts have already ordered >> the netbooks; rather than write them off, I'd like those buyers to >> know that they could run Sugar off an SD-Card for each Learner, a >> nominal expense to obtain the best learning environment for smaller >> children. >> >> Distros are not good at "vertical marketing", something Apple for >> example excels in and which Microsoft has copied these past few years >> (look at their medical industry push). There are historical and >> traditional reasons for that, but the situation is that distros are >> ill-prepared to make a difference in education without helpers. We can >> be a helper, in fact we are uniquely qualified to help in K-6. Perhaps >> a different way to look at it is to enumerate the places where there >> have been major GNU/Linux projects in K-6 education and concentrate on >> those? >> >> Any model where we can help OEMs sell netbooks is a model that can >> broaden distros' tiny marketshare. That's no betrayal of our education >> mission, because we don't exclude running Sugar on an old PC with a $5 >> USB stick, or on a Mac, or even on Windows with virtualization - Sugar >> can arrive in front of a Learner by many technical means. >> >> If breaking out of marginal marketshare is interesting to distros, we >> can help them do that together. It requires marketing work on their >> part though, the technical work is a necessary prerequisite but is >> insufficient. >> >> Sean >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 4:01 PM, Tomeu Vizoso<[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 15:39, Sean DALY<[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Now is a good time to work on this, as the SoaS launch is behind us. >>>> >>>> My understanding is that Sugar Learning Platform releases such as >>>> v0.84, v0.86, v0.88 are of interest to our downstream partners and >>>> projects... distros naturally, but in particular the OLPC XO-1.5 and >>>> the Sugar on a Stick Fedora-based distribution + tools. >>>> >>>> The XO-1.5 is of interest to everyone involved in OLPC projects but >>>> particularly Learners, who certainly have things to tell us about the >>>> Sugar they have if they could. >>>> >>>> Sugar on a Stick is of interest to everyone in K-6 education: >>>> teachers, school management and buyers, parents of kids in school. >>>> >>>> At this time, the distros do not have the reach or potential impact of >>>> these two projects. I feel therefore our marketing priority should be >>>> on these two projects, and especially Sugar on a Stick, here's why. >>>> >>>> The enormous OLPC installed base is the source of our credibility and >>>> adding potentially hundreds of thousands more Learners through SoaS >>>> makes us news, in particular SoaS running on other large installed >>>> bases such as Intel Classmates and old PCs. >>>> >>>> From a marketing perspective, dialogue and coordination with our >>>> partners and projects is community liaison and is best served through >>>> direct contact, information sharing and negotiation. Should any >>>> distros become motivated to market Sugar to educators (as opposed to >>>> just adding it to their distro), we could of course be very helpful. >>>> >>>> But our two biggest ongoing projects, the XO-1.5 refresh and SoaS, >>>> require separate and I believe higher priority marketing strategies. >>>> >>>> 1. The XO-1.5 refresh. >>>> >>>> OLPC has probably not given a lot of thought to XO-1.5 marketing, >>>> although I feel they certainly should, for several good reasons: >>>> * silencing naysayers who talk about the "failure" of the OLPC project >>>> * making clear what the XO-2 strategy and timetable is (in the absence >>>> of this info there will be confusion and speculation) >>>> * sharing OLPC Stories, showing the worldwide impact of OLPC, and not >>>> only in midsize and small developing countries >>>> * explaining unambiguously what the dual default Gnome-Sugar desktop >>>> is, how it works, and what the advantages are >>>> * communicating that a newer improved version of Sugar will be on it >>>> * publishing some deployment numbers so serious journalists will know >>>> what's what >>>> * giving some indication as to what the Windows on XO status is. >>>> >>>> They will probably not want to say that the Windows pilots have not >>>> resulted in contracts. However, it's entirely possible that the >>>> updated hardware will allow XP or even Windows 7 to run, which could >>>> still lead to contracts, so I feel it's not something for Sugar Labs >>>> to crow about beyond stating the obvious, that buyers prefer Sugar. >>>> Journalists, analysts and pundits will want to know what's up with >>>> Microsoft though and OLPC will need to address that to avoid >>>> confusion. >>>> >>>> For us, the refresh is an opportunity to say that OLPC has made a vote >>>> of confidence by choosing the latest version of Sugar (or "a later" >>>> version, if the refresh arrives after Sept.18th), for the benefit of >>>> hundreds of thousands of Learners to come. The dual desktop is no big >>>> deal since we are positioning ourselves as best-in-class K-6 and it's >>>> natural that older Learners will want to explore free software and >>>> tools beyond Sugar. (By the way, many Intel Classmate projects boot by >>>> default into a locked-down kids' desktop such as EasyBits Magic >>>> Desktop, allowing access to Windows only through a password exiting >>>> tthe desktop.) >>>> >>>> It's my wish to work with OLPC on the refresh message, it's their >>>> golden opportunity to reverse the negative associations amongst >>>> journalists and in the blogosphere and pave the way for the XO-2. The >>>> availability of SoaS means interested observers can have the core >>>> experience of the XO-1.5 on any other machine. >>>> >>>> >>>> 2. Sugar on a Stick. >>>> >>>> I would venture that the importance of this "distro" far outweighs all >>>> the others, because no one else is marketing Sugar to educators like >>>> we are and SoaS is our project - in its current incarnation it depends >>>> on Sugar upstream and Fedora upstream, a solid partner since Fedora is >>>> an active project with known release dates. Could there be an >>>> alternate SoaS non-Fedora distribution? I feel the answer is yes and >>>> we could certify the name for another, but only if the quality and >>>> ease of use (including stick loader) could match or surpass the >>>> Fedora-based one. The underlying distro should not be visible anyway, >>>> inasmuch as it is in a support role and the distros can't bring any >>>> brand value to teachers and educators at this time. >>>> >>>> Sugar on a Stick is a game changer, disrupting the status quo in >>>> bypassing the stranglehold of preinstalled systems (98% of which are >>>> not distros). Its very low cost and very high quality make it a >>>> compelling choice for classrooms. The possibility of relieving kids of >>>> lugging computers around, yet keeping their environment with them, is >>>> an incredible advantage. The next few months are our opportunity to >>>> prepare SoaS for classroom deployments and to find the missing pieces >>>> of the puzzle such as school server, documentation, hardware >>>> compatibility notes including Macs, Local Labs to help with >>>> implementation while school system integrators get up to speed. >>>> >>>> Our biggest marketing efforts should be on Sugar on a Stick, and in my >>>> view the ideal release timing >>>> is three months before the new school year (June in the Northern >>>> Hemisphere), giving educators enough time to evaluate, plan, and test >>>> its deployment. However, the actual timing is not as critical as >>>> making sure we can maximize marketing impact; ideally, creating buzz >>>> during or prior to NECC in the USA for example, or another key >>>> educators conference. >>>> >>>> SoaS v1 Strawberry F11/v0.84 could very well be SoaS v1.1 Strawberry >>>> F12/v0.86 by the way, if the Learner experience is close enough. In >>>> other words, the numbering/naming should be based on the end-user >>>> experience, and not what techno goes into it. Our wide coverage was a >>>> direct result of positioning SoaS as our first major standalone >>>> release, replacing the complicated numbering system with a simple one >>>> instantly understandable to everyone; it may well make more sense to >>>> plan the v2 "another flavor" for a year from now and not sooner. In >>>> the meantime, we can build the brand value of Sugar on a Stick by >>>> building its ecosystem, learning from the GPA pilot, building the >>>> Activity and ebook offers, and of course repeating our >>>> differentiators. >>>> >>>> An OEM deal targeted to education could change this strategy, but at >>>> this time I feel this is the best way forward. >>> >>> I think this is a very good plan for the downstream part of SLs, but >>> unfortunately plays very bad with my work as an upstream developer. It >>> makes a lot of sense for you to focus on some ways to deploy Sugar and >>> thus on one (or two?) distros, but Sugar as an upstream project needs >>> to nurture an as big as possible downstream community. >>> >>> Or could you make a case on how I as an upstream developer would win >>> anything by narrowing the people that can use my stuff? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Tomeu >>> >>>> thanks >>>> >>>> Sean >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Simon Schampijer<[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> On 07/02/2009 12:27 PM, Tomeu Vizoso wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 18:18, David Farning<[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 7:14 AM, Tomeu Vizoso<[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 00:40, David Farning<[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> This thread is an attempt to help clean up a couple of issues that >>>>>>>>> have been cropping up over the past couple of months. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There have been a couple of instances of suboptimal communication >>>>>>>>> between different parts of the project. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Several times recently, external organizations have been looking for a >>>>>>>>> big picture view of what is happening at Sugar Labs. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The .84 release was pretty easy to coordinate. The development team >>>>>>>>> picked a release date about six months after .82. The developers >>>>>>>>> followed the time line pretty well. Simon did a fantastic just with >>>>>>>>> just a stick and a handful of carrots as release manager getting >>>>>>>>> getting the release shipped on time. The only two external >>>>>>>>> organizations we worked with closely were Fedora and OLPC. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> With the midterm release of Strawberry, we have seen the importance of >>>>>>>>> improving communication with more internal groups and external >>>>>>>>> organizations. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Internally, we have seen the importance of synchronizing development, >>>>>>>>> marketing, and the project as a whole's time lines and goals. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Externally, we have seen a significant increase in external >>>>>>>>> organization participation. Several university have express >>>>>>>>> interested in working with SL. Several distributions are becoming >>>>>>>>> more involved. Several new pilots and deployments are participating in >>>>>>>>> Sugar development rather than just consuming Sugar. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> A first step will be to start working on project and team level road >>>>>>>>> maps which assign dates and champions to significant events. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sugar Labs and each team already have roadmap pages listed. Over the >>>>>>>>> next couple of weeks, I would like to work with the development, SoaS, >>>>>>>>> marketing, infrastructure teams to create roadmaps and goals. (This >>>>>>>>> is not to exclude any other teams participation.) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Then using iteration and project level goals we can start linking the >>>>>>>>> roadmaps together. >>>>>>>> Sounds great! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Tomeu >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is now a very rough draft/outline at >>>>>>> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Roadmap . >>>>>> >>>>>> First of all, you mention several times a "release" but don't specify >>>>>> what gets released. Also, is the Sugar Learning Platform the upstream >>>>>> project? What about SoaS? Also, what is "Unified SoaS"? >>>>>> >>>>>> "Release dates up to and including .86 have been determined by the >>>>>> development team. Starting with .88, the release schedule will be >>>>>> determined by the Sugar Labs oversight board." >>>>> >>>>> Is this picking a date for the release or deciding what goes into a >>>>> release? >>>>> >>>>> For the date - we have picked it to align to our downstream projects - >>>>> the linux distributions. So far this worked quite well. So the current >>>>> dates are not picked arbitrary. >>>>> >>>>> Features: Depending on the Fedora policy I hacked up this one for >>>>> features: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Policy >>>>> >>>>> To reduce overhead, like an engineering steering commitee I took out the >>>>> Fesco part. I think for the near future we are fine with such a 'simple' >>>>> policy. >>>>> >>>>>> I didn't knew that the oversight board was supposed to take such >>>>>> day-to-day decisions. In any case, I hope that the date that the SLOBs >>>>>> decide for the Sugar Learning Platform is the same as the development >>>>>> team decides, because otherwise we are going to have a big conflict >>>>>> here. >>>>> >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Simon >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > _______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
