Wow --Robyn-- amazing feedback! Clearly you've been there before. Hugely helpful! -Sally
>________________________________ > From: Robyn Bergeron <rberg...@redhat.com> >To: marketing@cloudstack.apache.org >Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2014, 18:28 >Subject: Re: cloudstack survey > > > > >----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Giles Sirett" <giles.sir...@shapeblue.com> >> To: marketing@cloudstack.apache.org >> Cc: "sebgoa" <run...@gmail.com> >> Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2014 7:08:02 AM >> Subject: cloudstack survey >> >> All >> >> I have been working with Sebastien to create a cloudstack usage adoption >> survey. >> >> We have a beta survey here: >> http://www.formwize.com/run/survey3.cfm?idx=505d040e080008 >> >> >> >> Some of you have previously given some great input on this, and I have tried >> to accommodate that input. >> Mark H shared a previous survey he put out (cloudstack pre-ASF days) . >> Although I have lifted some questions from that, I felt that a lot of it was >> generalised cloud computing questions and that including them would increase >> the overall length and potential drop out rate >> >> Please could I ask some people to go through this survey and provide comments >> of the questions/format > >Hi, > >I have a bunch of comments/fixes/thoughts. (I've done this a few times, and >thus just trying to spare you guys the pain that I have lived with in the past >:D) > >I may have more thoughts but this is probably overwhelming enough of an email >as it is. :) If anyone has questions about my questions/comments I'm happy to >elaborate. There are a couple of typo/spelling type things but just wanted to >address the bigger picture things. Or at the bare minimum: Fixing question 28. >(Detailed below.) :D > >-robyn > > >General Comments: > >* Since the survey is somewhat long-ish (More than 2 minutes of work to fill >out) it might be worth looking into whether or not a token can be generated >and sent to the user after filling out their initial information so that if >they can't complete it all at once, they can come back to finish the survey >from the point they were at later on. > >* It may be helpful to specify something around "Who should fill out this >survey?" "Users"/usage is somewhat nebulous in this space; it might be helpfu >to qualify this a little bit not necessarily to *exclude* people, but more to >ensure that people feel like their "usage" qualifies. (Somewhat related to >that: One of the pages of questions has quite a few details that I am guessing >not all "users" will necessarily know - just want to make sure they dont' get >there and then start thinking, "Oh, they want a different type of >user/operator") > >* Re: Free-form boxes on likes/dislikes/etc - a few things: >** When I see questions like this early on in a survey, EVEN IF THEY ARE >OPTIONAL, I start wondering if the whole survey is going to be like this and >if I'm goign to have to be doing a lot of typing, which disincentivizes me >from moving on I suggest having questions like this at the end. >** Having recently done a survey of engineers at my lovely company with >free-form text boxes - and getting 1600 respondents to each fill out 3 >free-form text boxes similar to these -- (1) HOLY CRAP, it really, really >sucks to go through and parse and sort and turn into anything useful, (2) Is >someone actually going to DO SOMETHING with that information. Because asking >people to spend time really thinking about this kind of stuff (and those that >care really will put their hearts into it, believe it or not) and then having >nothing ever happen with it can be less than awesome. And disincentivizing in >the future. > >Comments/thoughts on specific questions: > >Intro comments - "we would like to... include you on our list of users" - it >might be useful to link to what that list looks like. When I read the words >"include me in your list" I immediately think I'm going to be added to a >mailing list, not a wiki / web page, so adding clarity there may be helpful. >(There is a bit more clarity when you read down further into the questions and >it says "share my organisations name as a user".) > >2. "The Apache CloudStack PMC can share my organisations name as a user of >CloudStack" -- This might be better done as a follow-up if they are willing to >be contacted. I would be willing to guess that not everyone who thinks this is >a great idea is not always going to be the person authorized to make that >decision :) > >4. "Address" -- One line, not clear if city/state/province/country/postal code >is required. >Also: Is this the address of my organization? Or my personal address? > >7. "Where are you based" -- was this not covered in "Address"? >(And again: Is this where my company is based, or where I am based?) > >8. "Where do you go for information about using CloudStack?" >* Should note that they can select all that apply. >* Suggest also using an Other box that they can fill (as part of same question) > >16. "Specify the workloads that you are currently running" >* Add "select all that apply" > >17. "If running other workload types" - suggest adding this as an other with >#16 as "If other, add here" - that way you get a full representation for math >/ percentage / etc. purposes with #16. > >BONUS on 16/17: Why is "CURRENTLY" in all caps? Is another useful question >knowing what workloads they are planning to deploy in the future? > >19. What CS releases are you currently using? >* Add "I don't know" > >20. NW Model >* "I don't know" > >21. Network Isolation Model >* Add "I don't know" > >24. Do you also use an S3 compatible object store - plz specify >* Should be a radio button "Yes, No" and then "If yes, then specify" type of >question. The survey software should be able to force this. Otherwise you're >going to get a result back that says 100% of respondents are using an S3 >compatible object store, and 50% of them are running an S3-compatible object >store called "no" :) Which is not fun to weed out of results. > >25. Compatability APIs. >* add "I don't know" > >26. Config mgmt tools >* Perhaps add saltstack? > >28. What OS do you use to run CS? >* WHERE IS FEDORA >* NO, REALLY, I AM WOUNDED >* Seriously. >* Don't make the CloudStack Monkey cry. Please add Fedora. > >Would also add: >* Are you aware of our Conferences? (Have you attended, etc) > >> >> The tool we've used (kindly donated by BT) will allow us to embed the survey >> in CS.org - I would propose doing that once we've got the questions >> bottomed out >> >> >> Kind Regards >> Giles >> >> Giles Sirett >> CEO >> >> [Description: Mail Logo Bottom Align] >> >> D: +44 20 3603 0541 | S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +44 796 111 2055 >> >> giles.sir...@shapeblue.com<mailto:giles.sir...@shapeblue.com> | >> www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com/> | >> Twitter:@shapeBlue<https://twitter.com/#!/shapeblue> >> >> >> Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services >> >> IaaS Cloud Design & Build<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//> >> CSForge - rapid IaaS deployment framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/> >> CloudStack Consulting<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/> >> CloudStack Infrastructure >> Support<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/> >> CloudStack Bootcamp Training >> Courses<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/> > > > > >> >> This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended >> solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or >> opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily >> represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the >> intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based >> upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender >> if you believe you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a >> company incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a >> company incorporated in India and is operated under license from Shape Blue >> Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company incorporated in Brasil >> and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered >> trademark. >> > > >
