Obsessed? WTF?

bridged with qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy
Guest

Re: Obsessed? WTF?

Post by Guest » Thu May 09, 2002 9:21 pm

Mario Charest <goto@nothingness.com> wrote:
We see a campaign that immediately seems offbase, and we are concerned.

Please Martin, don't use the word we. English isnt' my strength but it seems
to me "we" could/would include me as well.

Of course feel free to correct me if I miss perceived who we is, hihi!
Actually it is the "royal we", ie. we is meant to represent the developer /
user community in general.

phearbear

Re: Obsessed? WTF?

Post by phearbear » Thu May 09, 2002 10:24 pm

Mario Charest wrote:
"Kevin Stallard" <kevin@ffflyingrobots.com> wrote in message
news:abeb5h$p54$1@inn.qnx.com...

Bill,

I don't see how QSSL has abandoned the software development community.
Yeah, they may be slow in getting things out, but it doesn't mean they've
abandoned us. Multiple hardware platforms is welcome in my view and it is
hard work. Face it there are processors out there that will crunch stuff
much faster than x86. I like x86 for reliability myself, but other people
have different needs.

QSSL has only got so many resources and I think they are doing a good job.
Yeah, there are things missing from QNX 6, and somethings are running
slower, but they'll get it, maybe not today, but eventually.


I agree, in the mean time it's a rough ride for some of us but now in
retrospec
I think patience is the key.


There are somethings about QNX 6 that I really like. Networking for
example. QNX 4 it was a pain. Now it is so much eaiser to get QNET up.
Albiet, I'm seeing some slower performance, but they'll make it faster.
These things take time.


The Eclipse product looks really good.

And I installed QNX 6 on a QNX 4 partition some time ago. Haven't done it
recently, but at one point I remember it being a .tgz file that had a qnx

4

install script.

cdm mentioned yesterday that a new dedicated systems report is coming that
is going to show a popular RTOS to be slower performer compared to QNX.

I just don't think things are as bad as you last posting seems to make

them.

I agree,


Things are frustrating now, there is no doubt. People to not recognize

QNX

as the best solution.


Technicaly wise they are probably the best solution, it's the rest that is a
problem.


I've had many of these discussions with people who
look down upon it and me as stupid for knowing on to it. It almost seems

a

liability to me now. But I think it is going to change as long as they
(QSSL) play the game right. They may make mistakes, but at least they

seem

more focused to me.


Every body/company are making mistake, it's how you react to them that
counts!


This latest ad campaign has me concerned as well. I think they could have
done better. They need ads that will cause people to pause, kind of like
WindRivers storm ads (a storm is coming thing).


Think about it, a "storm is coming" doesn't sound that good either....

Marketing is about playing with your mind while carring as little
information
as possible about real fact. (Coke won't ever tell you that it can disolved
a tooth in 24 hours ;-)))
Now,even since i knew this before, it never stopped me from drinking
coke, but i was doing so when reading your post.. it hurt. and i was
thirsty! dammit!
If beer company can sell stuff by showing hot women
and Coke can sell by showing kids playing maybe QSSL can sell
by showing nerdy like, obsessed people. I don't know, I was never
able to understand this, it totally escapes me ;-)

So I look at the obsessed campain like I'm looking at beer commercial:
I couldn't care less ;-) I'll drink the beer that tastes the best...

Incidentaly beer with lots of hot women in their commercial seems
to taste the worst ;-)





Robert Krten

Re: Obsessed? WTF?

Post by Robert Krten » Thu May 09, 2002 10:24 pm

camz@passageway.com wrote:
Mario Charest <goto@nothingness.com> wrote:
We see a campaign that immediately seems offbase, and we are concerned.

Please Martin, don't use the word we. English isnt' my strength but it seems
to me "we" could/would include me as well.

Of course feel free to correct me if I miss perceived who we is, hihi!

Actually it is the "royal we", ie. we is meant to represent the developer /
user community in general.
The "royal we" is meant to represent one person, using "we", like the Queen,
when she sez "we are not impressed" :-) Not "we the British Empire", but
more like "we the Queen".

So, I've fallen for more bait and corrected the correction :-)

Cheers,
-RK
--
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Books, Video-based and Instructor-led
Training and Consulting at www.parse.com.
Email my initials at parse dot com.

Bill Caroselli (Q-TPS)

Re: Obsessed? WTF?

Post by Bill Caroselli (Q-TPS) » Thu May 09, 2002 11:10 pm

"Robert Krten" <nospam88@parse.com> wrote in message
news:abenfa$4e9$1@inn.qnx.com...
Maybe it's just a scam to have a vote so that they can bring back
QSSL-Classic! :-)

SIGN ME UP!

Kevin Stallard

Re: Obsessed?

Post by Kevin Stallard » Fri May 10, 2002 12:16 am

Bill,

What features? I haven't done a major project with qnx 6, neither have I
ported an app from QNX 4 to QNX 6. What's missing? Is there a post
somewhere where you or someone else has listed some of these missing items?

Kevin

"Bill Caroselli (Q-TPS)" <QTPS@EarthLink.net> wrote in message
news:abe8c6$nad$1@inn.qnx.com...
Hi Alec

First, you promised us months ago that QSSL would not insist on all the
personal information every time someone goes to the download page.
Promise
broken - no surprise there.

Personally I'm not afraid of the "nerd" image. I'm a nerd and damn proud
of
it. I want me kids to grow up to be nerds.

But who is this ad campaign aimed at? Not at the nerds! We want to know
the facts. But let's face it, the facts aren't on your side lately. Your
ad campaign is aimed at the corporate CEOs that (you think) think of all
of
us that can put a coherent thought together as nerds. Well fine. I
understand that. QSSL needs to advertise to the corporate CEOs. Because
us
nerds are only too aware lately that QSSL has abandoned the software
development community.

If you want to sell product, you have to get us nerds to go to our CEOs
and
say, "We have to get this QNX thing. It works!"

Want to know what I'm telling my customers about QSSL? I tell them, "QNX4
was a fantastic product. It is extremely reliable an lightning fast.
Besides you can get old QNX4 licenses all over the place for a song. Yes,
it is true. QNX4 is sealed in stone and they'll never write so much as a
new device driver for next years latest and greatest hardware. But if you
can find the hardware that runs QNX4 it's the bomb. QNX6 is still missing
too many features. But worse than that, it is across the board slower in
every measurable way AND QSSL doesn't seem to care. Instead they come
back
and say 'yes, we know it is slower but it can run on all these different
hardware platforms'." Well, guess what. Most developers are only
developing for one platform. I have still only successfully installed
QNX6
on systems where I could install in on a Windows partition first. I can't
even get straight answers on how to install QNX6 onto a system that only
has
a QNX4 partition.

"Alec Saunders" <alecs@qnx.com> wrote in message
news:abe6rc$llk$1@nntp.qnx.com...

Thanks for the pat on the back Kevin.

Let me explain a little bit about the obsessed campaign, guys. First,
good
advertising generates comments, so I take your immediate comments as a
bit
of a compliment :)

Second, you should know we didn't do this in a vacuum. We asked our ad
agency to give us something that was edgy, and that would draw people
in.
They had 5 concepts, including the obsessed concept. We focus group
tested
the concepts, and then chose from the two most popular, of which the
obsessed concept was the winner. Dan loved it, too. Then we went around
QSSL's offices with a professional photographer and shot pictures of our
own
staff. You should see the one of me :) The person in question is one
of
our developers, and he's definitely not nerdy. Obsessed with building
great
products for our customers... sure. And that was the concept we were
trying
to push.

Anyway, it's going to run for a while yet, and we'll be monitoring how
effective it is pretty closely. And you know, if it doesn't achieve vs
the
objective metrics we set for it, then we'll do something else. That's
the
beauty of advertising -- you can measure it, figure out what the ROI is,
and
decide if it's the right thing to be doing based on hard facts.

Cheers!

Alec.

-----
Alec Saunders
VP Marketing, QNX Software




Chris McKillop

Re: Obsessed? WTF?

Post by Chris McKillop » Fri May 10, 2002 5:36 am

Want to know what I'm telling my customers about QSSL? I tell them, "QNX4
was a fantastic product. It is extremely reliable an lightning fast.
Besides you can get old QNX4 licenses all over the place for a song. Yes,
it is true. QNX4 is sealed in stone and they'll never write so much as a
new device driver for next years latest and greatest hardware. But if you
can find the hardware that runs QNX4 it's the bomb. QNX6 is still missing
too many features. But worse than that, it is across the board slower in
every measurable way AND QSSL doesn't seem to care. Instead they come back
and say 'yes, we know it is slower but it can run on all these different
hardware platforms'." Well, guess what. Most developers are only
developing for one platform. I have still only successfully installed QNX6
on systems where I could install in on a Windows partition first. I can't
even get straight answers on how to install QNX6 onto a system that only has
a QNX4 partition.
To install QNX on any system besides a FAT32 based Windows system you boot the
CDROM and install QNX into it's own partition. The default for QNX6 is
t79 so it co-exists with a side-by-side QNX4 install. It is possible to
fake out a QNX6-in-a-QNX4 install using the same methods that are used in the
Windows install but that is far from an idea manner to run a "real" install.
Simply put the .ifs of choice (qnxbasedma.ifs) in /.altboot and make sure you
have the qnxbase.qfs and qnxroot.qfs (pinch them over the network from a windows
based install) and put them in /boot/fs on your QNX4 disk. One issue you will
hit is the need to build your own qnxbasedma.ifs that is small enough to
boot with the old QNX4 partition loader, just take out the devb's you don't
need. Once you have this working you can easily burn a CD with a script to
do it all, and in the "old days" this was how you installed Neutrino.


As for "Across The Board slower in any measurable way", would you care to post
your test code, test hardware and results under QNX4 and QNX6? The numbers
I have seen show a small increase in the context swtich time on an idle system
but a far more consistent time under load. The only other place I know enough
numbers wise to comment on is networking speed, and QNX6 is faster then
QNX4. There is no reason for things to be slower and I (along with most of
R&D) would be happy to have explict test cases that are slower (idependant of
hardware) so that we can identify the bottlenecks and remove them.

thanks,
chris

--
Chris McKillop <cdm@qnx.com> "The faster I go, the behinder I get."
Software Engineer, QSSL -- Lewis Carroll --
http://qnx.wox.org/

Armin Steinhoff

Re: Obsessed? WTF?

Post by Armin Steinhoff » Fri May 10, 2002 8:00 am

camz@passageway.com wrote:
Mario Charest <goto@nothingness.com> wrote:
We see a campaign that immediately seems offbase, and we are concerned.

Please Martin, don't use the word we. English isnt' my strength but it seems
to me "we" could/would include me as well.

Of course feel free to correct me if I miss perceived who we is, hihi!

Actually it is the "royal we", ie. we is meant to represent the developer /
user community in general.
... and why do you believe that your "royal opinion" represent the
opinions of
all developers ??

IMHO ... the 'obsessed' campain is the first marketing campain I ever
saw from QSSL :) Low interrupt latency doesn't sell and doesn't produce
attention in the OS market.

Armin

Mario Charest

Re: Obsessed? WTF?

Post by Mario Charest » Fri May 10, 2002 11:19 am

"Armin Steinhoff" <a-steinhoff@web_.de> wrote in message
news:3CDB7E39.9639A9BB@web_.de...

camz@passageway.com wrote:

Mario Charest <goto@nothingness.com> wrote:
We see a campaign that immediately seems offbase, and we are
concerned.

Please Martin, don't use the word we. English isnt' my strength but it
seems
to me "we" could/would include me as well.

Of course feel free to correct me if I miss perceived who we is, hihi!

Actually it is the "royal we", ie. we is meant to represent the
developer /
user community in general.

... and why do you believe that your "royal opinion" represent the
opinions of
all developers ??

IMHO ... the 'obsessed' campain is the first marketing campain I ever
saw from QSSL :) Low interrupt latency doesn't sell and doesn't produce
attention in the OS market.
Although this perticular ad doesn't draw my attention or create any kind of
emotionnal response I agree with Armin. Not all brains work the same ;-)

Hence I'll trust the VP team know what they are doing, since I'm in no
position nor have the knowledge to understand it all ;)

Good luck VP Team ;-)

Armin

Guest

Re: Obsessed? WTF?

Post by Guest » Fri May 10, 2002 12:11 pm

Anyway, it's going to run for a while yet, and we'll be monitoring how
My problem was that you can navigate through http://www.qnxobsessed.com
only by fancy super-duper web browsers that nerds (or management YMMV) use.

(Ask for raw access.log; my outdated browser trace should be obvious)
--
kabe

Jutta Steinhoff

Re: Obsessed? WTF?

Post by Jutta Steinhoff » Fri May 10, 2002 4:16 pm

Mario Charest wrote:
"Armin Steinhoff" <a-steinhoff@web_.de> wrote in message
news:3CDB7E39.9639A9BB@web_.de...

camz@passageway.com wrote:

Mario Charest <goto@nothingness.com> wrote:
We see a campaign that immediately seems offbase, and we are
and we are concerned.

Please Martin, don't use the word we. English isnt' my strength
but it seems to me "we" could/would include me as well.

Of course feel free to correct me if I miss perceived who we is, hihi!

Actually it is the "royal we", ie. we is meant to represent the
developer / user community in general.

... and why do you believe that your "royal opinion" represent the
opinions of all developers ??

IMHO ... the 'obsessed' campain is the first marketing campain I ever
ever saw from QSSL :) Low interrupt latency doesn't sell and doesn't
produce attention in the OS market.

Although this perticular ad doesn't draw my attention or create any kind of
emotionnal response I agree with Armin. Not all brains work the same ;-)
Mario, have in mind that there is no reason to attrack insiders like
you ... you are going on using QNX whatever adds they have, isn't it ?

Let's see what will be the reaction from pot. customers and you can
ask your new customers what they think about. May be it's even
the add which attracked their attention for QNX?? ... in 2 monthes
we should talk about again ;-)

Jutta

P.S. if everyone cares about the new adds as you do, so it's a great
marketing campaign ... perhaps they can top it when telling in the
next campaign who had what in his hand... ;-))

Kris Warkentin

Re: Obsessed? WTF?

Post by Kris Warkentin » Fri May 10, 2002 5:49 pm

I'm inclined to agree with Igor. My only concern with the site was that
people would not want to fill out personal information to download a
datasheet - I thought it would be politer to ASK for the information rather
than demand it.

As far as the ad campaign goes, I think that the brochures and such look
very slick and much like many of the other types of ads we see from
companies like Microsoft. I've noticed a certain arrogance about software
developers where everyone else is perceived as stupid or incompetent. "My
manager is so dumb he doesn't know a debugger from a compiler hyuk hyuk...."
A lot of us seem to think that we know better than everyone else about
everything. I for one, don't know any more about marketing than they do
about debugging but I do know that the people we've hired are just as expert
in their field as we are in ours. QNX don't hire no dummies and regardless
of what any of us gear-heads think of the campaign, I'm willing to bet that
they know better than we do and will get good results.

So I would say to all you would be marketers out there, 'Don't teach your
grandmother to suck eggs', and sit back and watch while they get results.
You might just learn something. ;-)

cheers,

Kris

"Igor Kovalenko" <Igor.Kovalenko@motorola.com> wrote in message
news:abemfi$3rd$1@inn.qnx.com...
"Mario Charest" <goto@nothingness.com> wrote in message
news:abed74$qjp$1@inn.qnx.com...
<snip>
For once, I think QNX marketing did a good job. I will agree however that
I
don't feel like filling goddamned forms just to read some report,
especially
since usefulness of report can only be determined upon reading. And yes,
GET
@#$$^&&%(% DATABASE!

-- igor


Mario Charest

Re: Obsessed? WTF?

Post by Mario Charest » Fri May 10, 2002 11:37 pm

I've noticed a certain arrogance about software
developers where everyone else is perceived as stupid or incompetent. "My
manager is so dumb he doesn't know a debugger from a compiler hyuk
hyuk...."
A lot of us seem to think that we know better than everyone else about
everything. I for one, don't know any more about marketing than they do
about debugging but I do know that the people we've hired are just as
expert
in their field as we are in ours. QNX don't hire no dummies and
regardless
of what any of us gear-heads think of the campaign, I'm willing to bet
that
they know better than we do and will get good results.
Very well said !!!

Rennie Allen

Re: Obsessed? WTF?

Post by Rennie Allen » Mon May 13, 2002 8:40 am

Robert Krten wrote:
The "royal we" is meant to represent one person, using "we", like the Queen,
when she sez "we are not impressed" :-) Not "we the British Empire", but
more like "we the Queen".
Completely off topic, but I have a tangential interest in this subject.

I had always thought the "royal we" was a reference to the Queen as both
a person and a position (i.e. "We are not amused" meant that the Queen
was neither personally, nor professionally, amused). Does any one know
if this is actually the case, or is the Queen simply batty ?
So, I've fallen for more bait and corrected the correction :-)
Hmmm, where does that put me (wanting an expanded explanation of the
correction of a correction :-)

Rennie

Mitchell Schoenbrun

Re: Obsessed? WTF?

Post by Mitchell Schoenbrun » Mon May 13, 2002 4:33 pm

Previously, Rennie Allen wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:
I had always thought the "royal we" was a reference to the Queen as both
a person and a position (i.e. "We are not amused" meant that the Queen
was neither personally, nor professionally, amused). Does any one know
if this is actually the case, or is the Queen simply batty ?
Hmmm. I'd be interested too, after hearing about the "royal we" for so
long. It brings into possibility all sorts of new interesting uses.
For example, the CEO of "Enron" could now responsibly say "We are f*#$%'d".




Mitchell Schoenbrun --------- maschoen@pobox.com

Guest

Re: Obsessed? WTF?

Post by Guest » Mon May 13, 2002 8:12 pm

Rennie Allen <rallen@csical.com> wrote:
Hmmm, where does that put me (wanting an expanded explanation of the
correction of a correction :-)
We don't know.

Post Reply

Return to “qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy”