Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] CodeEnvy continues to use deceptivewording that's harmful to Eclipse

[Jesse McConnell]

I think Eclipse (the Foundation) does a disservice to itself every year
with its naming scheme for Eclipse (the IDE).  The word 'Eclipse' is either
a book about vampires to most people, or a fancy code editor to more
technically inclined people.  While pushing all the projects to prepend
Eclipse to all of the project names I get that they are trying to broaden
the usage of the Eclipse moniker but by seemingly changing the name of the
IDE every year it just clouds the whole naming problem.  Is it really
Eclipse or Eclipse IDE? or Eclipse Neon? Indigo or Neon? Eclipse IDE the
Fancy Editor?

In that way I think it is fine that CodeEnvy is saying what they are since
there is no clear name from the Eclipse Foundation for their flagship fancy
editor...at least that I am aware of...because to me it just changes every
year.

--
jesse mcconnell
jesse.mcconn...@gmail.com

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 9:49 AM, Konstantin Komissarchik <
konstantin.komissarc...@oracle.com> wrote:

> > I do not believe the foundation as such should restrict a specific
> projects
>
> > ability to market it self as long as it is not directly deceiving nor
> outright lying.
>
>
>
> I contend that the wording is used expressly for the purpose of deceiving
> Eclipse user base into thinking that Che is the future roadmap for the
> traditional Eclipse IDE.
>
>
>
> People wouldn’t object if Che marketed itself based on merits of it’s
> features or even if it had a slogan, such as:
>
>
>
> “Eclipse Che, the next generation IDE”
>
>
>
> Since “IDE” is understood to be a generic term, everyone in the industry
> would read that statement as a marketing promotion.
>
>
>
> Since “Eclipse IDE” is not understood by vast majority of people familiar
> with the brand to be a generic term, the wording is easily interpreted as a
> statement of technical roadmap and seeds confusion in the marketplace.
>
>
>
> I understand that there are some that wish “Eclipse IDE” to be a generic
> term, but wishes don’t make fishes.
>
>
>
> Just like Ford wouldn’t get away with marketing itself as the next
> generation Chevy, Che shouldn’t be allowed to promote itself in this manner.
>
>
>
> Of course, continued investment in the desktop IDE is paramount, but that
> doesn’t mean that we should let the brand that some of us invested close to
> a decade into deteriorate.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> - Konstant
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Max Andersen 
> *Sent: *Thursday, June 30, 2016 12:37 AM
> *To: *Cross project issues 
> *Subject: *Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] CodeEnvy continues to use
> deceptivewording that's harmful to Eclipse
>
>
>
> Hi Konstantin,
>
> Below is my opinon as an Eclipse community member (not speaking on behalf
> of the foundation nor my employer)
>
> I recognize the wording CodeEnvy or rather the Eclipse Che project is bold
> and for some maybe even directly threatining - but I do not believe the
> foundation as such should restrict a specific projects ability to market it
> self as long as it is not directly deceiving nor outright lying.
>
> And Che stating it is a next generation Eclipse IDE is not false, neither
> was it when the similar wording was used by the press when Eclipse Orion
> was starting off.
>
> If we (the desktop Eclipse IDE community) want desktop Eclipse IDE to
> survive and grow we should not be scared about words stated by other
> communities inside or outside Eclipse.
>
> We should be encouraged to show show the desktop Eclipse IDE also can grow
> and not stay stagnated as it have done for a while now.
>
> This really is nothing new and sure we can "blame" IBM and other companies
> for retracting its original people investement into desktop Eclipse IDE -
> but that are those companies choice, not the Foundation. We'll either need
> to replace those people or change how we do things. I've helped where I can
> from my role in Red Hat but just like IBM couldn't pull it of forever
> alone, neither can Red Hat.
>
> This is why I've done what I can and will continue to do in future on the
> desktop Eclipse platform features, and I encourage everyone to do what you
> can too. Talk to your companies, talk to your contributors and encourage
> collaboration and more contributions to grow the desktop Eclipse IDE.
>
> And in that, we cannot ignore there are other markets where a cloud IDE
> like Eclipse Che has its major advantages over desktop Eclipse - just like
> desktop Eclipse IDE has advantages over cloud IDE's.
>
> We are entering a world where there no longer will be a "single" IDE, the
> community both inside and outside Eclipse foundation have spoken stating
> that one IDE does not fit all. Some don't even want a full IDE, just a
> fancy editor.
>
> As a long time contributor to desktop Eclipse IDE and other tools out
> there, I understand that there are limited number of people who will
> actually be able to contribute to a single platform. Thus the "multi-IDE"
> world do 

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] CodeEnvy continues to use deceptivewording that's harmful to Eclipse

[Konstantin Komissarchik]

> I do not believe the foundation as such should restrict a specific projects
> ability to market it self as long as it is not directly deceiving nor 
> outright lying.

I contend that the wording is used expressly for the purpose of deceiving 
Eclipse user base into thinking that Che is the future roadmap for the 
traditional Eclipse IDE.

People wouldn’t object if Che marketed itself based on merits of it’s features 
or even if it had a slogan, such as:

“Eclipse Che, the next generation IDE”

Since “IDE” is understood to be a generic term, everyone in the industry would 
read that statement as a marketing promotion.

Since “Eclipse IDE” is not understood by vast majority of people familiar with 
the brand to be a generic term, the wording is easily interpreted as a 
statement of technical roadmap and seeds confusion in the marketplace.

I understand that there are some that wish “Eclipse IDE” to be a generic term, 
but wishes don’t make fishes.

Just like Ford wouldn’t get away with marketing itself as the next generation 
Chevy, Che shouldn’t be allowed to promote itself in this manner.

Of course, continued investment in the desktop IDE is paramount, but that 
doesn’t mean that we should let the brand that some of us invested close to a 
decade into deteriorate.

Thanks,

- Konstant





From: Max Andersen___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] CodeEnvy continues to use deceptive wording that's harmful to Eclipse

[Doug Schaefer]

Great words Max. Whole heartedly agree.

I think the real issue started at EclipseCon where they presented themselves as 
“the next generation Eclipse IDE”, not “a next generation Eclipse IDE", or as I 
see now their web pages simply stating "Eclipse Che Next Generation Eclipse 
IDE” which implies “the” if you read it that way. Funny how that one word has 
triggered such an emotional response.

At any rate, as we keep hearing from Steve O’Grady’s “The New Kingmakers” book, 
developers will decide, not marketing people as much as they try. Che does have 
value as a cloud-based IDE for those who want to use such things. I don’t think 
that impacts much the need for our veteran Eclipse IDE much.

As I’ve stated many times, I’m more worried about developers dropping their 
IDEs for fast editors-come-IDEs like Sublime and VS Code. We have enough to 
work on to compete there.

Doug.


From: 
>
 on behalf of Max Andersen >
Reply-To: Cross project issues 
>
Date: Thursday, June 30, 2016 at 3:36 AM
To: Cross project issues 
>
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] CodeEnvy continues to use deceptive 
wording that's harmful to Eclipse

Hi Konstantin,

Below is my opinon as an Eclipse community member (not speaking on behalf of 
the foundation nor my employer)

I recognize the wording CodeEnvy or rather the Eclipse Che project is bold and 
for some maybe even directly threatining - but I do not believe the foundation 
as such should restrict a specific projects ability to market it self as long 
as it is not directly deceiving nor outright lying.

And Che stating it is a next generation Eclipse IDE is not false, neither was 
it when the similar wording was used by the press when Eclipse Orion was 
starting off.

If we (the desktop Eclipse IDE community) want desktop Eclipse IDE to survive 
and grow we should not be scared about words stated by other communities inside 
or outside Eclipse.

We should be encouraged to show show the desktop Eclipse IDE also can grow and 
not stay stagnated as it have done for a while now.

This really is nothing new and sure we can "blame" IBM and other companies for 
retracting its original people investement into desktop Eclipse IDE - but that 
are those companies choice, not the Foundation. We'll either need to replace 
those people or change how we do things. I've helped where I can from my role 
in Red Hat but just like IBM couldn't pull it of forever alone, neither can Red 
Hat.

This is why I've done what I can and will continue to do in future on the 
desktop Eclipse platform features, and I encourage everyone to do what you can 
too. Talk to your companies, talk to your contributors and encourage 
collaboration and more contributions to grow the desktop Eclipse IDE.

And in that, we cannot ignore there are other markets where a cloud IDE like 
Eclipse Che has its major advantages over desktop Eclipse - just like desktop 
Eclipse IDE has advantages over cloud IDE's.

We are entering a world where there no longer will be a "single" IDE, the 
community both inside and outside Eclipse foundation have spoken stating that 
one IDE does not fit all. Some don't even want a full IDE, just a fancy editor.

As a long time contributor to desktop Eclipse IDE and other tools out there, I 
understand that there are limited number of people who will actually be able to 
contribute to a single platform. Thus the "multi-IDE" world do scare me, mainly 
since it means more work for me and my team ;/

Backing the language service protocol is my way to try and build the technical 
bridges between these multiple IDE's - if it works, all will grow. If not, one 
will grow stronger faster and win.

This is how opensource works. This is how (almost) anything works and evolves.

I encourage you and everyone else to help grow the world of Eclipse IDE's to be 
a player in the  world of next gen IDE's - it is together we win. No individual 
person or single company will carry this.

Thank you,
/max



On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 6:11 PM, Konstantin Komissarchik 
> 
wrote:
I was just reading the latest Microsoft/RedHat/Codenvy press release and came 
across the problematic wording that we’ve seen before.

Microsoft Visual Studio Code and Eclipse Che, the next-generation Eclipse IDE, 
have added support for the protocol.

https://www.redhat.com/en/about/press-releases/red-hat-codenvy-and-microsoft-collaborate-language-server-protocol

I think it’s great that Eclipse Foundation is getting more technologically 
diverse, but I find it very concerning that Eclipse Foundation is allowing 
Codenvy/Che to continue to use wording like 

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] CodeEnvy continues to use deceptive wording that's harmful to Eclipse

[Stephan Herrmann]

On 06/30/2016 10:27 AM, Eike Stepper wrote:

Hi All,

I have not a very strong opinion on this wording, but it strikes me that their wording is 
unnecessarily biasing. "Next-generation"
does imply that it's a newer and better variant of something that's older and 
less good.


IMHO, "next generation" implies even more: that the "old generation" is no 
longer actively developed.
If that sinks in in people's mind, that would be doing real harm.

BTW: when Orion was new, I remember people like Mike M. making it more than clear that 
Orion is *not* "Eclipse in the browser".

my 2c.
Stephan
___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] CodeEnvy continues to use deceptive wording that's harmful to Eclipse

[Eike Stepper]

Hi All,

I have not a very strong opinion on this wording, but it strikes me that their wording is unnecessarily biasing. 
"Next-generation" does imply that it's a newer and better variant of something that's older and less good. I would 
appreciate if they just tried to avoid this connotation and rather focused on the functional differences. I'm also not a 
good expert of what their different functionality actually is, but wouldn't it be possible to tag it "Eclipse Remote 
IDE", or "Eclipse Web IDE", or whatever?! That would definitely minimize confusion of the user community and reduce bad 
thoughts among our traditional IDE developers and contributors.


Cheers
/Eike


http://www.esc-net.de
http://thegordian.blogspot.com
http://twitter.com/eikestepper




Am 29.06.2016 um 18:11 schrieb Konstantin Komissarchik:


I was just reading the latest Microsoft/RedHat/Codenvy press release and came across the problematic wording that 
we’ve seen before.


/Microsoft Visual Studio Code and *Eclipse Che, the next-generation Eclipse 
IDE*, have added support for the protocol./

https://www.redhat.com/en/about/press-releases/red-hat-codenvy-and-microsoft-collaborate-language-server-protocol

I think it’s great that Eclipse Foundation is getting more technologically diverse, but I find it very concerning that 
Eclipse Foundation is allowing Codenvy/Che to continue to use wording like this. Current Eclipse users will read this 
statement as an official statement of the roadmap for the desktop Eclipse IDE or whatever the hell we are supposed to 
call it now that Eclipse IDE doesn’t mean anything, apparently.


I understand why Codenvy would use wording like this as it helps them to promote Che. What I don’t understand is why 
Eclipse Foundation, through inaction, is allowing this to continue.


Thanks,

- Konstantin



___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev



___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] CodeEnvy continues to use deceptive wording that's harmful to Eclipse

[Max Andersen]

Hi Konstantin,

Below is my opinon as an Eclipse community member (not speaking on behalf
of the foundation nor my employer)

I recognize the wording CodeEnvy or rather the Eclipse Che project is bold
and for some maybe even directly threatining - but I do not believe the
foundation as such should restrict a specific projects ability to market it
self as long as it is not directly deceiving nor outright lying.

And Che stating it is a next generation Eclipse IDE is not false, neither
was it when the similar wording was used by the press when Eclipse Orion
was starting off.

If we (the desktop Eclipse IDE community) want desktop Eclipse IDE to
survive and grow we should not be scared about words stated by other
communities inside or outside Eclipse.

We should be encouraged to show show the desktop Eclipse IDE also can grow
and not stay stagnated as it have done for a while now.

This really is nothing new and sure we can "blame" IBM and other companies
for retracting its original people investement into desktop Eclipse IDE -
but that are those companies choice, not the Foundation. We'll either need
to replace those people or change how we do things. I've helped where I can
from my role in Red Hat but just like IBM couldn't pull it of forever
alone, neither can Red Hat.

This is why I've done what I can and will continue to do in future on the
desktop Eclipse platform features, and I encourage everyone to do what you
can too. Talk to your companies, talk to your contributors and encourage
collaboration and more contributions to grow the desktop Eclipse IDE.

And in that, we cannot ignore there are other markets where a cloud IDE
like Eclipse Che has its major advantages over desktop Eclipse - just like
desktop Eclipse IDE has advantages over cloud IDE's.

We are entering a world where there no longer will be a "single" IDE, the
community both inside and outside Eclipse foundation have spoken stating
that one IDE does not fit all. Some don't even want a full IDE, just a
fancy editor.

As a long time contributor to desktop Eclipse IDE and other tools out
there, I understand that there are limited number of people who will
actually be able to contribute to a single platform. Thus the "multi-IDE"
world do scare me, mainly since it means more work for me and my team ;/

Backing the language service protocol is my way to try and build the
technical bridges between these multiple IDE's - if it works, all will
grow. If not, one will grow stronger faster and win.

This is how opensource works. This is how (almost) anything works and
evolves.

I encourage you and everyone else to help grow the world of Eclipse IDE's
to be a player in the  world of next gen IDE's - it is together we win. No
individual person or single company will carry this.

Thank you,
/max



On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 6:11 PM, Konstantin Komissarchik <
konstantin.komissarc...@oracle.com> wrote:

> I was just reading the latest Microsoft/RedHat/Codenvy press release and
> came across the problematic wording that we’ve seen before.
>
>
>
> *Microsoft Visual Studio Code and Eclipse Che, the next-generation Eclipse
> IDE, have added support for the protocol.*
>
>
>
>
> https://www.redhat.com/en/about/press-releases/red-hat-codenvy-and-microsoft-collaborate-language-server-protocol
>
>
>
> I think it’s great that Eclipse Foundation is getting more technologically
> diverse, but I find it very concerning that Eclipse Foundation is allowing
> Codenvy/Che to continue to use wording like this. Current Eclipse users
> will read this statement as an official statement of the roadmap for the
> desktop Eclipse IDE or whatever the hell we are supposed to call it now
> that Eclipse IDE doesn’t mean anything, apparently.
>
>
>
> I understand why Codenvy would use wording like this as it helps them to
> promote Che. What I don’t understand is why Eclipse Foundation, through
> inaction, is allowing this to continue.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> - Konstantin
>
> ___
> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
> from this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
>



-- 
/max
https://about.me/maxandersen
___
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev