Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open Technology Group, Inc. announces PostGIS UMN MapServer Training

2008-01-20 Thread Erik Uzureau
Having read through this thread, I think Dave's suggestion is spot on.
This Service Providers Directory (SPD) is an excellent resource, but
what it is missing is the ability to send updates or news...

It seems pretty clear that there are people here who are [at least
mildly] offended by seeing advertisements on this list. I would bet,
however, that there are also many people on this list who are [at
least mildly] interested in receiving this sort of update.

The idea to create a new list specifically for this sort of posting
cleanly solves this problem. It delivers pertinent information to
those who are interested and bothers not the rest.

--e

On 1/18/08, Dave Patton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Arnulf Christl wrote:

 [snip a bunch of really good stuff - thanks Arnulf]

  Does this mean that all businesses providing this kind of service should
  now spam this list with their latest announcements?

 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo
 OSGeo-Announce:
 OSGeo Announcements and News

 OSGeo-Discuss:
 OSGeo Discussions

 Therefore, how about adding something like
 OSGeo-SPD-News:
 Announcements, News, and Press Releases from
 members of the OSGeo Service Provider Directory

 Having such a list would then preclude sending
 those types of materials on OSGeo-Discuss.

 --
 Dave Patton

 System Developer
 National Forest Inventory
 Pacific Forestry Centre
 Natural Resources Canada

 Degree Confluence Project:
 Canadian Coordinator
 Technical Coordinator
 http://www.confluence.org/

 OSGeo FOSS4G2007 conference:
 Workshop Committee Chair
 Conference Committee member
 http://www.foss4g2007.org/

 Personal website:
 Maps, GPS, etc.
 http://members.shaw.ca/davepatton/
 ___
 Discuss mailing list
 Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open Technology Group, Inc. announces PostGIS UMN MapServer Training

2008-01-18 Thread Allan Doyle
+1 on no advertising or announcements on this list. I agree that  
it may sound churlish to stop good organizations from sending good  
information to good people; I also agree that allowing it would  
diminish the usefulness of this list. If the web page of offerings is  
not enough, then maybe set up a separate list for that kind of thing.


+1 on Arnulf's analysis of freely provided course materials. MIT  
started the Open Course Ware (OCW) movement a few years ago[1] and it  
certainly has not cut back on MIT's ability to attract customers,  
i.e. students. In fact, it has spawned a mini-industry of other  
universities putting their materials online[2].


Allan

[1] http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/web/home/home/index.htm
[2] 
http://www.ocwconsortium.org/index.php?option=com_contenttask=viewid=12Itemid=26


On Jan 18, 2008, at 7:58 AM, Arnulf Christl wrote:


Howard Butler wrote:

On Jan 17, 2008, at 1:34 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
If you were to lead the development of this material and put it  
into the Open Source (with your name attached) this would give you  
extra credibility and marketing reach.
Why?  Why must OTG put their hard earned training materials in the  
public domain and give them away for free for extra credibility?   
What would then be the incentive for someone to pay $$$ to go to an  
intensive training session?


Entrepreneurs, we have thoroughly analyzed this aspect over the past  
years and come to the conclusion that publishing course material  
openly is not detrimental to earning money. Quite the contrary it  
even helps us making more business. The added value is generated at  
several levels including both hard cash and marketing (find out  
details below). As active FOSSGIS software contributors we are happy  
to foster and promote the projects that we are involved with. In  
some cases (for example MapServer and PostGIS) this is the only way  
that we can give back our 2Ct contribution.
To better understand the involved factors we have studied uses cases  
in detail. First we have grouped our clients into three distinct  
categories who *use* our course material, these are: * Experts

* Students
* Professionals

Then we have identified three distinct groups who *profit* from  
having course material released under an open and free license.  
These are: * Clients (~users, as categorized  above) * Creators (for  
example the WhereGroup or Chandler OTG who produce Intellectual  
Property) * the FOSSGIS project and communities that are in the  
focus of the training material (here MapServer and PostGIS).


A multidimensional matrix would probably make this transparent but  
unfortunately I am too dumb to create it and will need to use words  
to explain the dependencies.
1. Real Experts (hackers, nerds, freaks). They would never pay for  
our courses because they are too damn smart. They wont offer courses  
themselves (which would be detrimental to our business) because it  
would bore them to death. But they still profit from having access  
to material because it will speed up understanding the corresponding  
FOSSGIS project. This will make them choose this project one over  
another one because good developers are also lazy. This is good for  
the FOSSGIS project and community because those people listen to  
what those real experts have to say, recommend, etc. Hard to measure  
- but unquestionably there.
2. Students. They will not be able to pay our rates anyway, so we do  
not loose anything if we give them the material for free. Quite the  
contrary, when those students leave school and come into a position  
where they have to decide where to go - who you'r gonna ask -  
Ghostbusters. This is a long term strategy that only market leaders  
can follow. Corporations Besides that students can potentially also  
enhance the course material, keep it up to date, etc. But only if it  
is available under a FOSS license, etc. This currently does not  
happen because universities and educational personnel are still in  
the late sixties wrt their knowledge about Open Source but so what.  
We have to be patient. Eventually the old farts who don't get it  
will be replaced by those that we have helped educate with our  
freely available course material and Bingo! If you lock your  
training material away and treat it as Intellectual Property you  
will be the only idiot who invests keeping it up to date. Why not  
exploit those who are prepared to give (FOSS4G 08, Keynote by Damian  
Conway)?


3. Professionals: Those are the ones that pay us money. They have a  
problem on their hand, a budget to solve it and limited time. These  
are the ones we love, we live off them. They would never bother to  
try and learn by themselves with freely available material because  
they have the resources to do it professionally and get somebody to  
explain it to them. They don't have the time to learn it by  
themselves. If they don't have the budget, they are not interesting  
to us 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open Technology Group, Inc. announces PostGIS UMN MapServer Training

2008-01-18 Thread Arnulf Christl

Howard Butler wrote:


On Jan 17, 2008, at 1:34 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
If you were to lead the development of this material and put it into 
the Open Source (with your name attached) this would give you extra 
credibility and marketing reach.


Why?  Why must OTG put their hard earned training materials in the 
public domain and give them away for free for extra credibility?  What 
would then be the incentive for someone to pay $$$ to go to an intensive 
training session?  


Entrepreneurs, 
we have thoroughly analyzed this aspect over the past years and come to the conclusion that publishing course material openly is not detrimental to earning money. Quite the contrary it even helps us making more business. The added value is generated at several levels including both hard cash and marketing (find out details below). As active FOSSGIS software contributors we are happy to foster and promote the projects that we are involved with. In some cases (for example MapServer and PostGIS) this is the only way that we can give back our 2Ct contribution. 

To better understand the involved factors we have studied uses cases in detail. First we have grouped our clients into three distinct categories who *use* our course material, these are: 
* Experts

* Students
* Professionals

Then we have identified three distinct groups who *profit* from having course material released under an open and free license. These are: 
* Clients (~users, as categorized  above) 
* Creators (for example the WhereGroup or Chandler OTG who produce Intellectual Property) 
* the FOSSGIS project and communities that are in the focus of the training material (here MapServer and PostGIS).


A multidimensional matrix would probably make this transparent but unfortunately I am too dumb to create it and will need to use words to explain the dependencies. 

1. Real Experts (hackers, nerds, freaks). They would never pay for our courses because they are too damn smart. They wont offer courses themselves (which would be detrimental to our business) because it would bore them to death. But they still profit from having access to material because it will speed up understanding the corresponding FOSSGIS project. This will make them choose this project one over another one because good developers are also lazy. This is good for the FOSSGIS project and community because those people listen to what those real experts have to say, recommend, etc. Hard to measure - but unquestionably there. 

2. Students. They will not be able to pay our rates anyway, so we do not loose anything if we give them the material for free. Quite the contrary, when those students leave school and come into a position where they have to decide where to go - who you'r gonna ask - Ghostbusters. This is a long term strategy that only market leaders can follow. Corporations 
Besides that students can potentially also enhance the course material, keep it up to date, etc. But only if it is available under a FOSS license, etc. This currently does not happen because universities and educational personnel are still in the late sixties wrt their knowledge about Open Source but so what. We have to be patient. Eventually the old farts who don't get it will be replaced by those that we have helped educate with our freely available course material and Bingo! 
If you lock your training material away and treat it as Intellectual Property you will be the only idiot who invests keeping it up to date. Why not exploit those who are prepared to give (FOSS4G 08, Keynote by Damian Conway)?


3. Professionals: Those are the ones that pay us money. They have a problem on their hand, a budget to solve it and limited time. These are the ones we love, we live off them. They would never bother to try and learn by themselves with freely available material because they have the resources to do it professionally and get somebody to explain it to them. They don't have the time to learn it by themselves. If they don't have the budget, they are not interesting to us anyway. 

All folks from these three groups will see who created the course material and will memorize them as the experts on the topic. The GNU FDL license has a clause where invariant sections can be defined, typically this could be the front page and back cover, there you can find the authors, company logo and web site links or the creators' individual address, contacts. Link to the repository where the document is maintained, mailing list or whatever you want to advertise as important for this publication. 

Therefore our competitors who offer the same training courses with our material (Outrageous! My Property) always advertise us as the real real experts. Who're you gonna ask if you really wanna know? 


Lastly - and so important that I cannot stress this enough - obviously the 
Software Project is going to profit. Because the largest open gash in FOSS' 
outward image is missing, rotten and wrong documentation and training 
materials. If you 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open Technology Group, Inc. announces PostGIS UMN MapServer Training

2008-01-18 Thread Frank Warmerdam

Allan Doyle wrote:
+1 on no advertising or announcements on this list. I agree that it 
may sound churlish to stop good organizations from sending good 
information to good people; I also agree that allowing it would diminish 
the usefulness of this list. If the web page of offerings is not enough, 
then maybe set up a separate list for that kind of thing.


+1 on Arnulf's analysis of freely provided course materials. MIT started 
the Open Course Ware (OCW) movement a few years ago[1] and it certainly 
has not cut back on MIT's ability to attract customers, i.e. students. 
In fact, it has spawned a mini-industry of other universities putting 
their materials online[2].


Folks,

I'd note I advised OTG to drop a message about their offering to the
discuss list, so they were acting in what they believed to be good faith.

I still think it is appropriate for folks to briefly introduce new
open source related training offerings here, but I shall avoid suggesting
this in the future since there are clearly different opinions.

The SPD does not give much granularity for describing things like training
courses.  Perhaps at some point we can have a wiki page pointing off to
various training options available for OSGeo related technologies.

Best regards,
--
---+--
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush| President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss