22 Jan
2005
22 Jan
'05
8:27 a.m.
--- Thorsten Wilms <t_w_(a)freenet.de> wrote:
On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 02:26:23AM +0100, Peter
Brinkmann wrote:
deeper than that.
Marketing
I think it's awesome that big guys have decided to use
Linux in their products. It's a great testament for
the usability of Linux Audio.
Their implementation of Linux includes proprietary
solutions. I see no problem with that. Korg gets a big
thank you from me for using Linux and for all the
incredible promotional value that they are giving us.
Korg has built a linux based keyboard. This rocks my
world. If we knock down a few more of the big guys
then Linux Audio is a "player". It's interesting to be
a dog turd on the bottom of a shoe but to know you're
about to force people into buying hip boots is simply
priceless.
Thank you Korg,
ron
On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 08:03:58PM -0500, Lee
Revell wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-01-22 at 01:25 +0100, Peter
Brinkmann wrote:
> > That said, I did find this line about
"newly-developed proprietary software"
> > slightly objectionable because they
seem to
imply that proprietary software
> > is a mark of quality, or else they
wouldn't
have mentioned this in a
>
marketing document.
All marketing types think proprietary==good.
At the risk of splitting hairs, I'd say it's types like proprietary stuff because they think
that proprietary==$$$, but
they wouldn't write this in a marketing
document
unless they thought that
potential users will think that
proprietary==quality. Is it true that
Joe Q User will have more faith in a piece of
software if it's
proprietary? Chances are that the word has been
focus group tested;
it would be interesting to know how the general
public perceives this
term.
Peter
To me proprietary in such press releases translates
to:
- no one else but we have this to offer
- it might be based on specialized and not freely
availabe knowledge/research ---
Thorsten Wilms
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250