Re: [board-discuss] Some problems.
Hi Michael, Michael Weghorn wrote: > In my opinion (and from own experience at the City of Munich), > LibreOffice (and other FLOSS software) is often not suitable for many > large enterprises "as is", so a good way of managing the lifecycle and > getting issues addressed (i.e. professional support of some kind) is > required to make it work well and users happy. > Seconded. And it's one of the greatest advantages of FLOSS in the enterprise - people can absolutely tailor it to their _specific_ needs and requirements, by adding the features & fixes they need. That's particularly appealing to larger-scale deployments (where economies of scale offer good value-for-money on a per-user price). Would be great to market this better. > The problem is that if management was persuaded it was a good idea > to introduce LibreOffice just because it's "free as in free beer", > you won't have (and will have a hard time getting) the resources to > handle issues appropriately, so it's better to avoid wrong > expectations. > Quite. This situation is bad for the company, bad for the users, _and_ bad for us in the project. And it's sometimes ~impossible to change minds after the fact. So for LibreOffice, past mistakes of "overselling" to the enterprise (though I believe we inherited many of those wrong expectations from OOo) are coming back to haunt us now. Cheers, -- Thorsten signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [board-discuss] Some problems.
The 'free beer' argument starting to become annoying;-). I'm hearing lots of self-pitty. Nobody asks a company to contribute to the LibreOffice code (for free). Yes, it belongs to a model where you believe in. If you believe code be open source, while making profit, it's also your task to come up with a business model generating revenue. Not only with some vague outlines/sketches. Full blown business plan include marketing plan is needed. Say you're going the bank. And say he, I want to lend some money, say € 1.000.000 but € 2.00.000 would also be nice. I'm starting my own company selling support for LibreOffice. I'm professional engineer have a development team, and some experience in the business. I assume you have to a lot more to get those 1.000.000 euro/pound/dollar. The will scrutinize your plan; being harsh unfair etc The want a business case, business plan, marketing plan (for example targeted audience). A income prognosis etc. For what I have read here, there are only rudimentary sketches. I think it's possible, but it's not easy. Ubuntu isn't profit machine either. Even in the luxury position you don't have to go to a bank, it's still needed! Except if you want to opt for lots and lots of costly experiences. The world is hard and pretty unfair. Artists sold songs on CD with big labels.. Everything is on Youtube these day's. Revenue now is made by concerts etc. Papers still trying to find a proposition. Paywall/ ad-financed (ad blockers)/ being free (guardian). Wikipedia still screaming/begging/nagging for money. 2% of all users world wide donate! 2%!! The commercial company's have to handle piracy.. Else the product sold free, but still used freely. Telesto Op 15-7-2020 om 14:22 schreef Michael Weghorn: I fully agree that it's unfortunate if migrations to LO (and FLOSS in general) are/were done/encouraged only because it's "free as in free beer", "no cost at all", which certainly isn't key to success for either the enterprise nor the LibreOffice ecosystem. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Some problems.
Hi Thorsten, On 15/07/2020 15.12, Thorsten Behrens wrote: > Michael Weghorn wrote: >> In the former case, adding the relevant information (professional >> support available and encouraged for enterprises) more explicitly to the >> website or maybe using existing mechanisms to inform the user (like >> mentioning support in the donation/contribution infobars or add a "Tip >> of the Day" with that info) might be a good way of dealing with this, in >> my opinion. >> > Yes - the important aspect here being, that many users in a corporate > deployment would never see the download page. So indeed a way to bring > those facts in front of users' eyes is important. The Personal (or > rather more likely, given the discussion here, Community) tag would > deliver that. > > But clever ways to insert that into info bar or tips of the day would > be cool, too - it's just that a window title bar mention is visible > ~all the time, whereas info bars are used sparingly. > > I have no insight into the psychology here though, whether one or the > other approach would be more effective in nudging. Perhaps we can try > both? ;) In my opinion, the "Personal" tag is more nudging, which is actually why I like the other approach better. The upside (or downside, as you see it...) is that those who "know what they're doing" and for whom LibreOffice as provided by TDF may be an acceptable approach after all (s. some notes on potential scenarios in the previous email), can still decide to use it without being "forced" to use another product. This is why I mentioned this mostly helps for the "former case" (i.e. educate those people that actually don't know, not those who deliberately decide not to buy a "Professional Edition"). Best regards, Michael -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Some problems.
On 15/07/2020 15.11, Telesto wrote: > The 'free beer' argument starting to become annoying;-). I'm hearing > lots of self-pitty. > Nobody asks a company to contribute to the LibreOffice code (for free). > Yes, it belongs to a model where you believe in. > If you believe code be open source, while making profit, it's also your > task to come up with a business model generating revenue. > [...] > Op 15-7-2020 om 14:22 schreef Michael Weghorn: > >> I fully agree that it's unfortunate if migrations to LO (and FLOSS in >> general) are/were done/encouraged only because it's "free as in free >> beer", "no cost at all", which certainly isn't key to success for either >> the enterprise nor the LibreOffice ecosystem. Besides the ecosystem company (and sustainable LibreOffice development) point of view, my comment above was also meant for the "direct" customer view. In my opinion (and from own experience at the City of Munich), LibreOffice (and other FLOSS software) is often not suitable for many large enterprises "as is", so a good way of managing the lifecycle and getting issues addressed (i.e. professional support of some kind) is required to make it work well and users happy. The problem is that if management was persuaded it was a good idea to introduce LibreOffice just because it's "free as in free beer", you won't have (and will have a hard time getting) the resources to handle issues appropriately, so it's better to avoid wrong expectations. Michael -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Some problems.
Hi Michael, Michael Weghorn wrote: > In the former case, adding the relevant information (professional > support available and encouraged for enterprises) more explicitly to the > website or maybe using existing mechanisms to inform the user (like > mentioning support in the donation/contribution infobars or add a "Tip > of the Day" with that info) might be a good way of dealing with this, in > my opinion. > Yes - the important aspect here being, that many users in a corporate deployment would never see the download page. So indeed a way to bring those facts in front of users' eyes is important. The Personal (or rather more likely, given the discussion here, Community) tag would deliver that. But clever ways to insert that into info bar or tips of the day would be cool, too - it's just that a window title bar mention is visible ~all the time, whereas info bars are used sparingly. I have no insight into the psychology here though, whether one or the other approach would be more effective in nudging. Perhaps we can try both? ;) Cheers, -- Thorsten signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [board-discuss] Some problems.
Hi Michael, thanks for your reply. :-) On 13/07/2020 20.32, Michael Meeks wrote: > On 12/07/2020 02:11, Michael Weghorn wrote: >> Simplifying and exaggerating a bit, I'd try to sum up the described >> problem as "There's not enough revenue for ecosystem companies, but >> those are essential for LibreOffice." and the described solution as >> "Let's discourage enterprises/organizations from using LibreOffice from >> TDF, and hope they'll use paid versions from ecosystem companies instead." > > Right; it -could- be seen as a simple "developers for users" trade off. > I'm not sure it is a trade-off though: I think we'll win more users by > having happy enterprise users and more investment in feature / function > and a richer product myself. I fully agree with the latter part, let's describe it as: more contributors => richer product => more users My assumption is still that having more users will also result in more contribution: more users => more contributors => richer product The nice thing is that if you combine both of them, that results in: ... => more users => more contributors => richer product => more users => more contributors => richer product => ... (which could probably be better depicted by some nice graph showing a circle with continual growth, but I think the idea is clear...) The interesting question then is how/where to start. And my concern is that the "Personal Edition approach" will lead to fewer users and I'm not so sure this will ever be compensated either in the medium or the long run. > There is risk in any change, but also risks in stasis - particularly > when we know the status quo doesn't work well. The "Personal Edition approach" *might* work of course; it's not what I'd personally expect, though. >> From what I have heard, there's also a tendency in (particularly in >> large) organizations to only use products backed by some kind of SLA, so >> there is some contractor to contact (or blame) in case of problems. > > I've met a few organizations like this - but they seem to be extremely > rare. Can they even get an SLA for Firefox or Chrome ? Ilmari has answered the explicit question regarding Firefox support already. (I wouldn't have known myself.) In any case, the wording "only use products backed by some kind of SLA" probably was a bit too strong and there are other factors limiting what software that applies to. While browsers are certainly mission-critical these days, the facts that they are available for free (i.e. gratis) and the existence of web standards make it easier to have multiple browsers in parallel or switch between them (at least these days, was certainly different in the past), making that a somewhat less "critical" component in my eyes regarding professional support. In theory, document standards should allow switching between office suites or using them in parallel as well, but that is known to be much more difficult in practice, due to interoperability issues and additional components on top, like macros or all kinds of third-party software, so the office suite becomes some kind of "platform" that is mission-critical and not easily replaceable. I think organizations with such an approach (use software with SLA for mission-critical tasks, in slight variations of where this applies) are not too uncommon among larger organizations; maybe too few of them are using LibreOffice for various reasons (never heard of it, never heard there is professional support available, doesn't fit their needs,...). I fully agree that it's unfortunate if migrations to LO (and FLOSS in general) are/were done/encouraged only because it's "free as in free beer", "no cost at all", which certainly isn't key to success for either the enterprise nor the LibreOffice ecosystem. >>> So - lets turn this around - can anyone thing of more than >>> five enterprises that paid for support or instead (just as good) >>> contributed meaningfully to LibreOffice instead ? Munich, and ... >> >> At least those 3 quickly came to my mind > > Sure; there's a reason I picked five ;-) Adding the two from the follow-up email, those that came to my mind (without checking git log): * NISZ * SIL * TU Dresden * BaseAlt * BSI (German "Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik") And of course, there's RedHat, if all enterprises except those listed in the "Ecosystem partners" section on the website [1] count... ;-) >> Regarding paid support, I've at least heard from two or three >> organizations, but don't know what amounts of money were/are involved >> there; that's certainly something the involved ecosystem companies (so >> basically you and Thorsten) know better... > > So - I was talking of new contributors; how many can we think of that > are new since 2018 ? =) > Regarding all contributions, NISZ falls into that category; but I don't know details regarding paid support, those are presumably not publicly available. ;-) To be
Re: [board-discuss] Some problems.
Michael Meeks kirjoitti 13.7.2020 klo 21.32: On 12/07/2020 02:11, Michael Weghorn wrote: From what I have heard, there's also a tendency in (particularly in large) organizations to only use products backed by some kind of SLA, so there is some contractor to contact (or blame) in case of problems. I've met a few organizations like this - but they seem to be extremely rare. Can they even get an SLA for Firefox or Chrome ? They can for Firefox since last year, but only if they are in the U.S.: https://www.ghacks.net/2019/09/12/firefox-premium-for-enterprises-is-now-available/ "Firefox Premium Support is a new offer for Enterprises that provides organizations with improved support options. The plan provides access to an Enterprise customer portal, improved bug submission options and bug fixes, SLA management tools and more." https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/enterprise/#plans It seems if you visit the enterprise URL outside U.S., you won't see the offer for Premium. Ilmari -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Some problems.
Hi Am 13.07.20 um 16:58 schrieb Italo Vignoli: > we have a peculiar development process which is IMHO rather difficult > to steer according to the usual marketing process. To be honest: The part with "from which our product development" was a joke, knowing the facts as well. ;-) (btw. the product is that mature it seems rather difficult to me to find useful new features which affect more than a dozen people - except UI improvements maybe) But what's about "sound analysis of requirements of our market from which our market communication is coherently derived?" Let's say we have three sources of knowing user requirements: 1.) Bugzilla end user requests for new features 2.) Askbot questions on features mostly existing but not known (which for the user asking makes no difference to 1) 3.) Anticipation of upcoming market developments (i.e. increasing WFH) and requirements which may come out of this Getting these analyzed on more than a face-validity base may guide our communication to be more targeted on user requirements and therefore more interesting or compelling for them (i.e. how to set up a workflow with lots of off-premise users). Maybe even the ecosystem takes profit out of such an analysis - developing LOOL wasn't decided after the fifth beer in a bar, I presume. And a user requirement must not necessarily be a function of code. Is there a requirement for single seat support contract? Mike says no, but maybe this is also a hen/egg situation? Is there a need to have some expert talks on i.e. how to do product neutral call for bids? Which in return may get us some ecosystem partners? Or maybe we need no more better hairnets but a hairspray kind of idea? Meant just as examples. -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen Uwe Altmann -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Some problems.
Hi Michael, Thanks for engaging here ! =) you write a friendly and helpful summary. On 12/07/2020 02:11, Michael Weghorn wrote: > Simplifying and exaggerating a bit, I'd try to sum up the described > problem as "There's not enough revenue for ecosystem companies, but > those are essential for LibreOffice." and the described solution as > "Let's discourage enterprises/organizations from using LibreOffice from > TDF, and hope they'll use paid versions from ecosystem companies instead." Right; it -could- be seen as a simple "developers for users" trade off. I'm not sure it is a trade-off though: I think we'll win more users by having happy enterprise users and more investment in feature / function and a richer product myself. > To sum it up, one of my main concerns is that organizations not using > "LibreOffice Personal" doesn't necessarily mean they'll use "LibreOffice > Enterprise". I see a rather high risk in the "LibreOffice Personal > approach" decreasing the overall LibreOffice use/market share, rather > causing organizations to switch to other office suites (or choose them > from the beginning), not just short-term. This probably wouldn't help to > reach the desired goal in the end, but rather have a negative effect on > both, TDF-provided LibreOffice as well as "LibreOffice Enterprise" and > the ecosystem that provides it. There is risk in any change, but also risks in stasis - particularly when we know the status quo doesn't work well. >> https://people.gnome.org/~michael/data/vendor-neutral-marketing.html > > Thanks for all the information, that's really informative and helps to > better understand the motivation/background. My pleasure; it's eighteen months old, but of course almost nothing changes in that time. > From what I have heard, there's also a tendency in (particularly in > large) organizations to only use products backed by some kind of SLA, so > there is some contractor to contact (or blame) in case of problems. I've met a few organizations like this - but they seem to be extremely rare. Can they even get an SLA for Firefox or Chrome ? >> So - lets turn this around - can anyone thing of more than >> five enterprises that paid for support or instead (just as good) >> contributed meaningfully to LibreOffice instead ? Munich, and ... > > At least those 3 quickly came to my mind Sure; there's a reason I picked five ;-) > Regarding paid support, I've at least heard from two or three > organizations, but don't know what amounts of money were/are involved > there; that's certainly something the involved ecosystem companies (so > basically you and Thorsten) know better... So - I was talking of new contributors; how many can we think of that are new since 2018 ? =) >> => It is the norm to deploy LibreOffice from TDF in >> enterprises, and pay nothing for support & >> maintenance that can go into development. >> + its that good. > > Might one (main) problem be that LibreOffice (from TDF as well as its > enterprise derivatives) just is not widely used by companies whose IT > strategy involves paying for their office suites (yet)? We're really quite widely used; our 200+m users includes many large government and business deployments. > IMHO, it'd be ideal to try to get more organizations switch to > LibreOffice editions from whatever they're using now which I'd expect to > increase demand for professional support as well. I think this was one of the headings in my mail. With the current %age up-take of professional support we run out of world population before we get enough developers to make LibreOffice fly. > As written in my previous email [2], I agree that many larger > deployments involving "professional use" will probably want to use an > edition with some kind of professional support (e.g. due to Service > Level Agreements, long-term support, more stability, new features) and > the TDF-provided version won't fit their needs, regardless of whether it > has a "Personal" tag attached or not. > Therefore, also from the experiences that the City of Munich made, I > tend to expect that affected organizations will find this out Well - it took Munich a long time to find this out I think; furthermore our marketing tends not to make people effectively aware of the existence of, nevermind the benefits of, support / migration / training - even in the abstract. It also tends to make people believe the software is created by Volunteers + TDF at many points. I guess enterprises think that TDF is sustained by donations from end-users, and volunteers just train themselves & contribute - so ... no need to support the ecosystem ? =) You may notice the other discussions here arguing for a replacement of the explicit recommendation to get support & services from the download page (which we know doesn't work) with a suggestion. >> => The LibreOffice brand is
Re: [board-discuss] Some problems.
>Is this possible? Based on our development model, I do not think it is possible. We know that in Bugzilla there are end user requests for new features which have been sitting there for years, because either there was no request from the same feature by enterprises willing to pay for them, and there were no developers willing to work on them. I think this is important for network effects that haven't been realized by LibreOffice yet. If I have time this evening I will try to find the article; but when a company/organization builds software with personal users in mind you end up with happier Enterprise customers. Collecting personal user feedback and implementing I would argue should be the priority of TDF, while enterprises can focus on Enterprise contracts. Essentially the argument is if it looks good, and feels easy to use, people will want to use it at work as well. Word of mouth marketing is quite powerful for organizations with low budgets. I think moving towards the TDF fixing some of those user-requested bug fixes should be a priority for the TDF as you suggested the TDF could do Italo.
Re: [board-discuss] Some problems.
Hi Italo Am 13.07.20 um 13:26 schrieb Italo Vignoli: >> but you're not doing marketing in my sense. > Thanks for the appreciation as communications professional. By the way > during my career I have been..and I have a BA in Marketing Management at > ISTUD in Italy. > > Of course, I respect your opinion about my limited marketing skills, so > this is just for your info. Very interesting, didn't know in detail - but I've always known you're good in what you're doing :-) What I mean is more about effectiveness vs. efficiency: It's no question that your doing an excellent job in what you're doing - but are you doing the right things (which for sure wasn't alone your decision what to do)? Coming back to "doing marketing in my sense": So you can point me to a sound analysis of requirements of our market from which our product development as well as our market communication is coherently derived? Very interested in reading that. -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen Uwe Altmann -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Some problems.
Hi Uwe, On 13/07/2020 11:01, Uwe Altmann wrote: > TLTR?: Become a professional managed organization I imagine it's not just Italo that has concerns with that =) > Teach people that LibreOffice is not the gratis version of MS > Office but a real great idea which they can and shall support > in various ways. Totally behind that; marketing more of the project and less of a gratis product. > Till this field, then economic returns can be seeded and grow there; > and this is something TDF can do. Clearly we need to educate people. > Don't try to force the TDF to do what it cannot (by statutes > and/or by law) do Of course. > if it is a really important issue, create an independent > structure for it. The ecosystem though has a lot of competing independent structures, each with different strengths, and interest in bringing LibreOffice to different niches. Clearly having more players there would be good, though having a single hyper-privileged one would not. But possibly new structures are needed I suppose. ATB, Michael. -- michael.me...@collabora.com <><, GM Collabora Productivity Hangout: mejme...@gmail.com, Skype: mmeeks (M) +44 7795 666 147 - timezone usually UK / Europe -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Some problems.
On 7/13/20 12:01 PM, Uwe Altmann wrote: > Therefor look for advice from marketing experts (NOT of sales or PR or > communication or the like professionals who call themselves "marketing > expert"!) (sorry Italo, you are undoubtedly a highly qualified communications > professional, but you're not doing marketing in my sense). Thanks for the appreciation as communications professional. By the way during my career I have been Vice President Marketing for Honeywell IS, which at the time was second only to IBM in the computer business, then - as a consultant - Marketing Manager Europe for Adobe, in charge of all activities for PDF and Photoshop (both products were not doing so bad) from 1989 to 1999, when I was hired by Macromedia to launch the Internet product suite (Dreamweaver and all the associated products, but that was indeed a less successful experience), and then I moved - always as a consultant - to Dell in Italy until 2004. I have been in marketing roles from 1981 to 2004, or 23 years, although for quite some time I have had a different "formal" role as the company I was working for was not focused on marketing specific consultancy. I have attended a master training course about B2B Marketing at General Electric Management School in Crotonville (NY) when I was at Honeywell, and I have a BA in Marketing Management at ISTUD in Italy. Of course, I respect your opinion about my limited marketing skills, so this is just for your info. -- Italo Vignoli - LibreOffice Marketing & PR mobile/signal +39.348.5653829 - email it...@libreoffice.org hangout/jabber italo.vign...@gmail.com - skype italovignoli GPG Key ID - 0xAAB8D5C0 DB75 1534 3FD0 EA5F 56B5 FDA6 DE82 934C AAB8 D5C0 -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Some problems.
Hi sorry by being late on this. Am 07.07.20 um 22:13 schrieb Michael Meeks: > Nevertheless there are some big problems currently. Perhaps > you think you have a neat solution to one of them. I'd love to hear > about it - but solving or obsessing about just one is unlikely to do > the job: Ok, then some of my ideas to do by TDF TLTR?: Become a professional managed organization (or or at least create a sufficient professionalized organizational segment - "from professionals for professionals"). Which also means: Take the tight resources of the TDF not to solve every problem in a do-it-yourself mentality but to get them solved with/by professional help. Teach people that LibreOffice is not the gratis version of MS Office but a real great idea which they can and shall support in various ways. Till this field, then economic returns can be seeded and grow there; and this is something TDF can do. Don't try to force the TDF to do what it cannot (by statutes and/or by law) do; if it is a really important issue, create an independent structure for it. Full Text: 1. Pay a ~professional to deliver a migration white paper for small, medium an large enterprises respectively. With does clearly mention the advantages of a professional support contract. With professional layout and management summary and whatever else it takes to get it read by a lot of interested people. Base this on a sound analysis of requirements, not only on marketing labels (as written somewhere else). Therefor look for advice from marketing experts (NOT of sales or PR or communication or the like professionals who call themselves "marketing expert"!) (sorry Italo, you are undoubtedly a highly qualified communications professional, but you're not doing marketing in my sense). 1a. Even if they are true, avoid statements like "...and can significantly reduce the Total Cost of Ownership of enterprise PCs because it replaces the license cost with a substantially lower migration cost" in an official document (LibreOffice Migration Protocol, p. 1 in this case)! Anyhow, the migration protocol seems to be a good starting point. 2. Pay a full time LO developer to do mentoring workshops on a regular base, embedded by a communication campaign also led by a PR ~professional, advertising these workshops in local (modern social) media. I. e.: For Germany/DACH rent Linux hotel for one week and offer a hacking LO workshop there for (nearly) free - and advertise that widely in DACH media (not only IT centered ones), based on a ~sound media analysis of what is read by our targeted group. Both effects - educating/recruiting programmers and having a widespread LO image campaign - will be worth the money. Besides that we still suffer from the "OpenOffice - oops, I meant LibreOffice"-effect (OpenOffice meant a as class of software, not perceived as a distinct product vs. LibreOffice) and still have to establish the right name for the right product by an image campaign. Develop this an a "standard"-module (by documentation, standard teaching material, checklist, do's and don'ts...) to encourage local communities to copy that for their country (similar as the conference is a teamwork between la local community and a professional, experienced orga-team at TDF). Send them the developer in case of need. 3. Pay a ~professional organization to deliver a basic set of training materials under a CC license (i.e. attribution share-alike). Which may then been translated by the community - or enterprises using them. Lack of local training capabilities often seem to be the bottleneck of migration projects, so we should enforce them. 5. Set up a professional qualification structure (like lpi) with certificates and all this stuff. At least give the picture of doing so. "LibreOffice Certification is completely different from commercial certification... TDF is looking for LibreOffice Ambassadors, able to provide value-added professional services to grow the LibreOffice ecosystem."[1] is a nice try but will not foster commercial organizations to trust in - rather to get suspicious. 6. Stop trying to use TDF as a selling point. Won't work and even worse damage the project. It's ok to express concerns where TDF is standing in the way of business (or "ecosystem") interests and helping it stepping aside. But having the managers in charge of all of the tree "ecosystem partners" mentioned on our website [2] as members of the BoD leaves me pondering. Perhaps we should also put a definition of what is an "ecosystem partner" (and what to do to become one) on that page. btw: this page [2] should imho not be in "downloads" but in "Discover". 6. ...still thinking... [1] https://www.libreoffice.org/about-us/certification/ [2] https://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-in-business/ -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen Uwe Altmann -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems?
Re: [board-discuss] Some problems.
Hi Michael, all, to explicitly mention it: While insights I got by working for the City of Munich certainly played a role in shaping that opinion, whatever I am writing (and have written) on this topic is "with my volunteer hat on", i.e. my personal opinion, not necessarily my employer's. On 07/07/2020 22.13, Michael Meeks wrote: > This is a short summary of some of the problems that I see > with LibreOffice, and this is written with my personal / Collabora hat > on. People are welcome to question my motivations - but my mission is to > try to nurture a successful FLOSS project that creates excellent FLOSS > Office Productivity software and makes it freely available to all. Many > here will share that goal I hope. Your (and Collabora's) work for LibreOffice is really much appreciated and I fully share that goal, but have concerns regarding what I'll call the "Personal Edition approach". > Nevertheless there are some big problems currently. Perhaps > you think you have a neat solution to one of them. I'd love to hear > about it - but solving or obsessing about just one is unlikely to do > the job: I admit I don't have a solution to all problems and certainly not the experience and insight that others like you have there, in particular regarding the ecosystem company side. However, some personal comments/thoughts on some aspects below. Simplifying and exaggerating a bit, I'd try to sum up the described problem as "There's not enough revenue for ecosystem companies, but those are essential for LibreOffice." and the described solution as "Let's discourage enterprises/organizations from using LibreOffice from TDF, and hope they'll use paid versions from ecosystem companies instead." To sum it up, one of my main concerns is that organizations not using "LibreOffice Personal" doesn't necessarily mean they'll use "LibreOffice Enterprise". I see a rather high risk in the "LibreOffice Personal approach" decreasing the overall LibreOffice use/market share, rather causing organizations to switch to other office suites (or choose them from the beginning), not just short-term. This probably wouldn't help to reach the desired goal in the end, but rather have a negative effect on both, TDF-provided LibreOffice as well as "LibreOffice Enterprise" and the ecosystem that provides it. > * LibreOffice is at serious risk > > Frustration with how TDF markets and positions its 'product' > (LibreOffice) against the ecosystem that contributes the majority of > the coding work is at an all-time high. That ecosystem itself is under > long term stress. > > Despite years of patient work, writing up the problems here, > talks at conferences, personal pleas for change and improvement, and a > number of tweaks, nothing -effective- has happened. You can read about > the situation here: > > https://people.gnome.org/~michael/data/vendor-neutral-marketing.html Thanks for all the information, that's really informative and helps to better understand the motivation/background. > * Surely companies have to buy support & security updates ? > They always complain to me about the lack of support wrt. > avoiding using FLOSS ! > > Sadly no. Microsoft gives poor to non-existent support to the > majority of users so ~no-one expects to buy it, they expect to buy a > product. Enterprises tend to test a version & deploy it to their > desktops and leave it there - they can do that with LibreOffice from > TDF. From what I have heard, there's also a tendency in (particularly in large) organizations to only use products backed by some kind of SLA, so there is some contractor to contact (or blame) in case of problems. (Whether that helps in practice is another question, but from a management perspective it seems to be a prerequisite in various settings.) > So - lets turn this around - can anyone thing of more than > five enterprises that paid for support or instead (just as good) > contributed meaningfully to LibreOffice instead ? Munich, and ... At least those 3 quickly came to my mind that IMHO qualify regarding code contributions (which apparently depends on how you'd define "meaningfully", though...): * NISZ * SIL * TU Dresden [1] Regarding paid support, I've at least heard from two or three organizations, but don't know what amounts of money were/are involved there; that's certainly something the involved ecosystem companies (so basically you and Thorsten) know better... > Of course we maintain and promote lists of enterprises that > deployed for free with no support ? > > => It is the norm to deploy LibreOffice from TDF in > enterprises, and pay nothing for support & > maintenance that can go into development. > + its that good. Might one (main) problem be that LibreOffice (from TDF as well as its enterprise derivatives) just is not widely used by companies whose IT strategy involves paying for their office suites (yet)? IMHO, it'd be ideal to
Re: [board-discuss] Some problems.
On 07.07.20 22:13, Michael Meeks wrote: > ... > => so it makes no economic sense at all to invest in > -Desktop- Libreoffice you will never see a return. > > That is manageable - we are investing heavily in creating > Online and that is going well, and it funds our work on LibreOffice. I highly value expertise and would never object marketing. But this differentiation between Personal and Enterprise seems barely to be a solution. So just to put this option on the table: Remove Online from the LibreOffice zoo and make it a commercial product. Good thing on this Personal Edition kerfuffle is that people discuss the marketing strategy. I suggest to keep listening and postpone any modification for 7.1. We run out of time to revert the PE patch. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [board-discuss] Some problems.
Hi *, Michael Meeks wrote: > For my part - I'd like to try to work with others to > understand all of the motivations, and to somehow, together chart a > path towards a better way of marketing and positioning LibreOffice and > its ecosystem - as Italo has outlined. Many of the above issues are > significantly addressed in this proposal - and I think it forms a > great basis for discussion, hopefully its possible to map many of > these solutions back to the problems I outline now. > I'd like to second what Michael wrote (in its entirety, but specifically highlighting the quoted paragraph). Those of you knowing Michael and me for longer know that we tend to disagree on very many things - but his analysis of the status quo, and the risks of further de-monetising the ecosystem is spot-on. This is not an easy problem (and the opensource industry at large is struggling with it - the moment VC funding runs out, and money needs to be earned), and therefore I don't think there's an easy fix for it. LibreOffice wouldn't be what it is without the sometimes decade-long work from all of you, in this community. This is why we want (and need) your input and buy-in - we don't want to lose anyone over this debate. But if you look at the history of the project (both OOo and then LibreOffice), you'll have to realistically conclude that for staying competitive (better interop, new platforms, pivots like Online, compelling features) - a chunk of money is needed, that someone with a product management hat on can ~freely spend. So that's what the proposal in front of us is meant to provide. Let's pick it apart, let's constructively criticise it - but what I'd want as an outcome in the end, is a plan that stands a chance of working (and goes beyond keeping the - known-problematic - status quo). Thanks a lot for taking part in this discussion, thanks for all your work & passion - and here's to the continued success of LibreOffice! :) Cheers, -- Thorsten signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[board-discuss] Some problems.
Hi all, This is a short summary of some of the problems that I see with LibreOffice, and this is written with my personal / Collabora hat on. People are welcome to question my motivations - but my mission is to try to nurture a successful FLOSS project that creates excellent FLOSS Office Productivity software and makes it freely available to all. Many here will share that goal I hope. Nevertheless there are some big problems currently. Perhaps you think you have a neat solution to one of them. I'd love to hear about it - but solving or obsessing about just one is unlikely to do the job: * LibreOffice is at serious risk Frustration with how TDF markets and positions its 'product' (LibreOffice) against the ecosystem that contributes the majority of the coding work is at an all-time high. That ecosystem itself is under long term stress. Despite years of patient work, writing up the problems here, talks at conferences, personal pleas for change and improvement, and a number of tweaks, nothing -effective- has happened. You can read about the situation here: https://people.gnome.org/~michael/data/vendor-neutral-marketing.html * That's too long (despite the pictures); what are the problems ? Read the Ecosystem / Sustainability minutes from our board call. https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/BoD_Meetings#Minutes_2020-05-22 I've helpfully appended it to this mail. It has the history of the ecosystem to today presented by myself & Thorsten as bullets. Then we have some of the ecosystem problems: + how to differentiate from LibreOffice: + support - but why buy that ? it's great. + how to differentiate inside the ecosystem ? + proprietary bits suck badly, obviously. + how to get the message out that it even exists ? + for less than the cost of the software. + how to get the message out that it is more authentic and genuine to get LibreOffice from those doing the majority of the code contribution, than the free version from TDF ? + how to build a brand that stands for quality and support vs. the Goliath brand: LibreOffice ? + how to make LibreOffice not mean "everything for free, please don't pay anything" to most users ? Anyhow - more details and some FAQ below: * Surely companies have to buy support & security updates ? They always complain to me about the lack of support wrt. avoiding using FLOSS ! Sadly no. Microsoft gives poor to non-existent support to the majority of users so ~no-one expects to buy it, they expect to buy a product. Enterprises tend to test a version & deploy it to their desktops and leave it there - they can do that with LibreOffice from TDF. It is routinely the case that I meet organizations that have deployed free LibreOffice without long term support, with no security updates etc. Try the Cabinet Office in the UK (at the center of UK Government), or a large European Gov't Department I recently visited - 15,000 seats - with some great FLOSS enthusiasm, but simply no conceptual frame that deploying un-supported FLOSS in the enterprise hurts the software that they then rely on. Or a giant Pharma company in the news right now; companies do it left & right. This became a familiar problem when after the OpenSSL / heartbleed debacle it was discovered that just a couple of people were part-time maintaining something vital to the whole world's internet. This is an extraordinarily common pattern, people come to tell me how many free seats they've installed in large enterprises - and while this is a triumph; they tragedy is that they stop at this point. Far too often the whole thrust of the selling was "zero cost" - which is a terrible way to market FLOSS. They are now used to downloading Chrome or Firefox and deploying these advertising supported products for free everywhere. Building our USP as zero-cost is a horrible way to market LibreOffice to enterprises. So - lets turn this around - can anyone thing of more than five enterprises that paid for support or instead (just as good) contributed meaningfully to LibreOffice instead ? Munich, and ... Of course we maintain and promote lists of enterprises that deployed for free with no support ? => It is the norm to deploy LibreOffice from TDF in enterprises, and pay nothing for support & maintenance that can go into development. + its that good. * You're too expensive: I can get cheaper support from LXYZ instead ? Another pathology is that there are companies who ship LibreOffice, often claiming support, but then file all their tickets up-stream and hope they are fixed for free. Naturally they are cheaper in government tenders, they use our brand, they leave the customer with hundreds of un-fixed bugs, and all of the
