Ian, Andrew, I think that the problem here is more to compete with offers like http://www.intuit.com/ (in US) http://www.sage.com/ (in EU) and convince end users that OFBiz is the right tool !
Anyway a good wide strategy is surely a very good thing ! Jacques PS : I did some comparaison between Sage 100 and OFBiz for a client (in french including POS with multi-sites) and I was happily surprised how OFBiz was facing the challenge :o) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew Sykes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <ofbiz-user@incubator.apache.org> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 4:54 PM Subject: Re: What does "OOTB front-end accessibility" mean to you? > Ian, > > A fascinating insight, perhaps you could go a bit further in explaining > a strategy? > > I wonder how relevant OfBiz is to the very small end of the market, > there's an awful lot to learn and (from a small business perspective) an > awful lot that could go wrong. > > I almost think that you are talking about a different product perhaps > "OfBiz Lite" or something... > > - Andrew > > > On Wed, 2007-01-03 at 10:15 +0000, Ian McNulty wrote: > > I've been having this email discussion with David which he's asked me to > > move out onto this mailing list. I guess that probably means I'm in for > > a good kicking. But here goes anyway > > > > First, some background to give some kind of handle on where I'm coming from. > > > > I started working with computers in the late 60s as a physicist > > modelling plasma dynamics. I've switched careers several times since, > > but my relationship to computers remains the same. As a user, interested > > not so much in the tool itself, but with what it can do. > > > > I first came across OFBiz a month ago whilst researching a client's > > request for back-end integration with osCommerce. As someone who was > > raised in a generation that really did believe that 2001 was going to be > > like Stanley Kubrick said it was going to be, I can count on one hand > > the number of times a piece of technology has had enough wow to stop me > > dead in my tracks. OFBiz would be one! > > > > From the outset it was clear that it was way too big a leap for any > > client I know of to contemplate making. But the technology looked so > > sweet I just had to find out more. > > > > The more I looked the more fascinated I became. Platform independent. > > Modular. Scale-able. Open Source. Wow! What a magnificent tool this > > could be! Why would anybody ever want to use anything else? > > > > This is a tool for running any kind of business you like. None of us can > > survive without connection to some kind of business or other. This could > > be monumental. The next big leap forward. > > > > I didn't expect installation to be easy, and it wasn't! But then again, > > I've just installed XP on new PC and that wasn't all that easy either > > (what version of Windows ever was?) > > > > I managed to get pilot installations of OFBiz (opentaps flavour) running > > on Windows and Linux without too much trouble. But then again, I do have > > some experience of this kind of thing. When it comes to setting up new > > tools, I have several magnitudes more patience than anybody else I know. > > Which means that if an application is going to be of any use to anybody > > else apart from me, I have to hone usability down to the point it's a > > no-brainer! > > > > So I'm running opentaps and slowly working my way through the various > > manuals and documents trying to get a handle on what this thing can > > really do. > > > > Pretty quickly I discover at least one glaringly obvious problem. So > > obvious that if I demonstrated it to a client they would laugh me out of > > the building in minutes. > > > > The problem itself is trivial. A simple matter of somebody sitting down > > for a few days and writing the necessary code. But who is going to do > > that? Not me surely? I have the Java textbook, but still haven't found > > time to sit down and read more than the first couple of chapters. > > Finding other people with the expertise and the time to do that would be > > the key. Or at least that's what I thought at the time! > > > > So I go back to the web sites and start looking at the organisation and > > the people rather than the code. > > > > Who could fix this problem? How much would it cost? Why hasn't it been > > fixed already? > > > > From the outset it's obvious that the Apache Incubator site is a > > marvellous resource for engineers. But looking it from the user's POV - > > as someone who wants to contact an engineer rather be one himself - > > there isn't much I can get a handle on here. > > > > Opentaps, Opensource Strategies and Undersun look much more like what I > > need. Clean. Crisp. Elegant designs. Engineering 'talkback' mixed down > > low in the background. You don't have to be an engineer to understand > > that, for enterprise-level installation, these guys look like the business. > > > > But enterprise-level means high-end, expensive! Corporate lawyers can > > charge thousands an hour. Maybe these guys know they're worth more? I > > have seen odd references to multi-million dollar installations. Sounds > > par for that kind of course to me. > > > > So where does that leave the ordinary Joe? > > > > All businesses I personally deal with are small. 1 to 50 employees max. > > > > OFBiz looks like it should be scalable, could be of value to all of them. > > > > But how much value, and how much cost? > > > > If I was running the IT department at the White House I'd be inviting > > the OFBiz guys in and showing MS the door. With the prospect of > > high-end, high-value contracts in the pipeline, I guess these guys just > > won't have time to even think about making this stuff accessible to the > > average Joe in the street. Oh well. Better start lowering my sights and > > start thinking about cobbling together some low-level XSLT plugins for > > the existing kit rather than thinking about a complete revamp of the > > whole machine. > > > > Then I discover Si's Jan 09/06 blog - exactly a year ago! - meditating > > on exactly these issues. > > > > "If open source is to gain popularity and move "up the stack", however, > > open source software will need other advocates in the enterprise. > > Somebody else besides the IT department must also be able to convince > > enterprise users that open source software is indeed a credible > > solution. Whether that advocate ultimately is a consulting firm, a > > distributor, or an ISV using open source software, we don't really know yet. > > > > What we can be certain of is this: whoever makes open source a credible > > in the enterprise would ultimately win the "Linux wars." > > > > Aha. Now then. That's interesting. > > > > So credibility on the enterprise level isn't such a done deal after all > > then. > > > > So who could those advocates outside the IT department be? Is it the > > consulting firm, the distributor, the ISV? Or is it all or none of the > > above? > > > > Rereading Si's blog, I was struck by this: > > > > "Most buyers of commercial software don't actually verify that its > > features are bug free or check out its support lines. Instead, their > > "due diligence" consists of making sure that there are other users using > > the software, including, most importantly, their golf buddies." > > > > How important an insight is that? > > > > So the key to credibility in the decision making process lies with those > > who know absolutely nothing about the technicalities and most probably > > care even less! > > > > Why else would IBM spend many millions advertising enterprise level > > technology on prime time television? How many viewers are actually in > > the market for Blade servers? > > > > I doubt anybody in IBM marketing believes they're spending that money to > > advertise servers. They're spending it to make sure that not only the > > average golf-buddy, but also his wife, kids, and grandmother all know > > that IBM is a credible player. Because they know that's how the big > > decisions are actually made. Emotionally, by people who are so far up on > > the bridge of the ship, away from the engine room, that they probably > > know less about the mechanics of it than their grandmothers! > > > > So making OFBiz emotionally accessible to the average Joe Soap's > > grandmother could be the key to unlocking both enterprise level and > > wider markets. > > > > From an outsiders perspective, it seems that Si in particular has > > already done a considerable amount of work in this direction. As someone > > with formal financial rather than technical training, he is perhaps more > > focused on markets than most. But Si is in no way representative of the > > average user. His blog tells me his parents were postgrad programmers > > who taught him everything they knew. Most programmers would give their > > eye teeth for a background like that! How many management wonks would > > relish the idea of lifting up the bonnet everytime they wanted to start > > their car? They chose their roles in life precisely to keep away from > > that kind of thing. As indeed did Si when he chose a career in finance. > > > > The moral of this would be that what is accessible to Si or most other > > users on this forum is not necessarily even slightly accessible to the > > average businessperson on the street. > > > > If you wanted to maintain an elite group of cognoscenti who are in the > > position to charge highly for their services then you may want to keep > > it that way - or not as the case may be. > > > > I would argue that the code is so radical and so deep that some levels > > will always remain expert only. Increasing accessibility to a wider user > > group would not threaten that core and could only lead to a wider user > > base and larger market share. > > > > OOTB, front-end, user accessibility to me means minimising any factors > > which take time and attention away from getting on with the job the tool > > was designed to do. From a purely user's POV, these are nothing more > > than distractions, irritations and ultimately objections to buying into > > the programme. Noise drowning out signals on the marketing channels if > > you like. > > > > As in all user applications, a proportion of time spent tooling-up and a > > level of unwanted noise is to be expected. But in the job-efficiency > > equation, this is a drag component to be optimised out. In the > > development of sleek, user-friendly implementations, a zero tolerance > > policy on noise, friction and drag is the only way to go! > > > > To me, OOTB accessibility means exactly what it says on the tin: I don't > > need a degree in anything to install or run it. It does everything it > > said it would do. Is easy to maintain. Has cost exactly what they told > > me it would. A brilliant tool for the job. Wouldn't even think of using > > anything else. > > > > But creating something like that means taking at least some of the focus > > away engineering a better mousetrap, to looking at the way it appears to > > the average mouse. Is it easy for them to get to the cheese, or are > > there still too many wires and cogs in the way? Closing a sale means > > overcoming all the objections. Making offers people don't see any reason > > to refuse. > > > > The marketing proposition from Undersun and Opensource Strategies looks > > fine - if you're only interested in high end, enterprise-level applications. > > > > The engineering proposition on Apache incubator looks fine - if you're > > interested in being an engineer. > > > > But where is the low-end proposition for the average businessperson in > > the street? Something his golf playing buddie's grandmother might > > understand? > > > > It could be concluded that what I'm angling for here is a series of > > television adverts. > > > > If I thought OFBiz had a couple of mill lying around spare then this > > would certainly be the case. If it's good enough for IBM... > > > > But I doubt OFBiz is anywhere near that kind of position at the moment. > > > > I just kinda don't see any reason why it shouldn't be at some time in > > the foreseeable future. > > > > But there would need to be a will to go in this direction and the > > deliberate diversion of at least some of the time, creativity and > > resources away from strictly engineering matters, into making the > > application more accessible - acceptable - applicable, to a wider user base. > > > > That would mean opening up whatever channels of communication with the > > wider public are available and boosting the signal well above the noise. > > > > Almost everybody has need of OFBiz. They just don't know it yet! > > > > Ian > > > -- > Kind Regards > Andrew Sykes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sykes Development Ltd > http://www.sykesdevelopment.com
