On 7/25/09, jonathon <jonathon.bl...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 20:25, Karl Kleinpaste wrote: > >> because (for no good reason I can fathom) eSword has managed to convince >> *ALL* > > a) You may not realize it, but over 50% of the user created resources > that are distributed for e-Sword, are being distributed in violation > of copyright, EULAs, and other Intellectual Property Rights; > > b) Since roughly 2003, e-Sword and/or Pocket e-Sword tend to come > at the top of the list, in terms of popularity of gratis Bible Study > Software. > > For the Commercial Bible Study Software companies, _The Sword > Project_, as a whole doesn't register. If any specific front end > registers on their radar, it is only as blip out there, doing nothing > in their market. > > e-Sword, OTOH, is perceived as a marketing threat. One of the > oddities is that despite the different niches that the commercial > Bible Study Software programs occupy, their fear is that e-Sword will > add components/tools that are "almost good enough", and as such, > remove their "low end" clients", leaving them chasing a market > further and further up the product chain. > > IOW, with _The Sword Project_, there is no digital tipping point. > With e-Sword, the digital tipping point is too close for comfort. > (This is as true, if not more true for Logos, than it is for any > other Bible Study Software program. That Logos has far more components > than e-Sword will have, is utterly irrelevant.) > >> the publishers of interest to publish in that format. > > If any organization has "publishers of interest" locked up, it is > Libronox Digital Library Systems. Truth is, Bob has hired people with > an extensive array of contacts in the publishing world, and has also > made Logos the premium Windows Bible Study Program. That combination > looks very attractive to publishers. When their Mac offering is > better than Accordance, they will be even more attractive to > publishers. > >> Why can't we in this project get that kind of publisher respect? > > Obviously my perspective is biased. > > The biggest factors I see are: > * How the different organizations handle money; > * Closed source versus Open Source; > * Demographics; > * Downloaded copies, and percieved market penetration; > >> What is it about the possibility of Sword module production that so >> repulses publishers? > > a) Open Source Software scares content owners. Their understanding > is that open source means that their content will be distributed to > all and sundry, with _no_ financial, or other benefit to the original > content owner; > > b) The publishing world is based very much on who knows you. If you > don't have an extensive network in that industry, you won't get > anywhere. If you do have an extensive network, you might get > somewhere; > > jonathon > > _______________________________________________ > sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org > http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel > Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
-- Sent from my mobile device Warmest regards, Immanuel Jeyaraj +91 94457 69518 _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
