Allow me to retort. You've just contributed Silky, we've just rationalised the problem into basically "you would like to see compensation per idea to a charity" and it's up to us to now implement such idea. Now comes the question, how much do you want for the idea of the compensation idea and which charity and why.
That's my underlying point and welcome to the community Silky and your admission fee is simple, contribution. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of silky Sent: Monday, 31 March 2008 2:34 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [OzSilverlight] Silverlight 3.0 wishlist, now's your chance. On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 2:12 PM, Scott Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That's flawed logic. no, it isn't. > Let's assume we do compensate folks for ideas. Firstly how does one > differentiate the idea from the > actual usage. In that should we just cut a blank cheque per idea? - what's > the expected amount to be > paid and does personsA idea get more than personsB idea? More to the point > how do we further know > whether or not personA was inspired by personB's idea (they should get > compensation). Let's impose a > tax & patent system on potential ideas. that's not our problem; it's yours. if you can't figure out a solution reward a charity. your whole email here is totally disingenious. > Then once the potential becomes reality, in that the ideas are put into the > runtime and introduced into > the worlds install base. Do we then carve out an amount for our time in > marketing and development? (as > those engineers in Redmond etc don't work for free) Should we then impose a > tax per usage on all > developers in its use - more to the point, how does one gauge which parts are > being used and which > ones aren't as with a large number of features already in place, doesn't mean > that everyone's used 100% > of them. Oh also we should really have this on a context based compensation > position, as who's to say > FeatureX didn't lead to the use of FeatureY and so shouldn't the owners of > that feature also be > compensated? again, not my problem. you're the company that is soliciting ideas. it should be appropriate to have a ranking structure, etc. how that works is up to you [make it public]. [unless you are also asking me how _that_ should work; which is pretty ironic]. > Now comes the scary part, once this precedent is put in place, than what's to > say other companies - > our competitors - don't fall victim to this model. Next thing you know, > innovation is starved, software > industry spirals down to a 2008 "good old days" and ideas are bided against > on eBay - but then how > does one really articulate they have the "killer idea"... is it a case of "I > have a killer idea, bidding starts at > 20,000 USD - will tell you once you win bid". ideas are worth money. > Silky, you appear to think you have the angles all figured out but in > reality you're not informed. eh? getting personal? > The Evangelists for example are effectively a workforce self-funded so that > you - are kept informed via > our events, presentations or indirectly via MVP's etc that we work closely > with. If you wanted to > breakdown what part of the Sales vs. Marketing component Evangelism falls > under, it's in fact marketing > (just like all Evangelists in all companies worldwide). The idea also behind > Evangelists are to ensure the > customer and business are connected, and that's why Evangelists work closely > with > partners/community. i know that. > Frank Arrigo is a prime example of this, try and figure out how he made > Microsoft millions by connecting > people who suddenly got unemployed to employers, all so they could keep > working on what they loved > and chose to do as a career. i can't make sense of this statement; but it seems like you are saying that you don't know how microsoft even profits? [i.e. msdn licenses is one component]. > We aren't a company focused on nickel and diming everyone we see and always > looking for a quick > buck. sure. > As that's sure, a short term win but in the end long-term loss (buyers > remorse happens fast). It's simply > a case of build a platform & tools, put our best ideas and technology first, > pause, take customer > feedback and look at ways to meet their next wave of expectations (Rinse, > Lather & repeat). uh huh. > So... > > Anyone else with some ideas around Silverlight 3 and what THEY would LIKE to > see in it :), my inbox is > always open. except criticism. no critiquing allowed. -- http://lets.coozi.com.au/ There's not a problem I can't fix, because I can do it in the mix. ------------------------------------------------------------------- OzSilverlight.com - to unsubscribe from this list, send a message back to the list with 'unsubscribe' as the subject. Powered by mailenable.com - List managed by www.readify.net ------------------------------------------------------------------- OzSilverlight.com - to unsubscribe from this list, send a message back to the list with 'unsubscribe' as the subject. Powered by mailenable.com - List managed by www.readify.net
