On Apr 28, 2014, at 3:24 PM, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
So, what is better as a communication strategy: - to say that Pharo is "a Smalltalk with traits, modular compiler, slots and moldable debugger, ... (more to come in this list)", or - to say that Pharo "is a modern Smalltalk-inspired system?" ?
The first pitch totally sucks of course but for the sake of getting to your point, it depends on who the audience is, right? If youâre trying too hard to differentiate yourself from other Smalltalk dialects, then âmodern Smalltalk-inspired systemâ might have a chance. But what that chance might lead you to? Whatâs the best thing that can happen with that strategy? That you steal some market space for your preferred dialect in a zero-sum game of an already very small community? Okay, letâs talk about the opposite direction. A non-zero-sum game. What about trying to connect with a wider audience? Youâll need something that serves as foundation to build on top of. Something inspiring. Now letâs do the numbers.. A) Whatâs the size of the whole smalltalk community? what you can have from it? 2%? 10%? 20% conversion? letâs say you get 80% because youâre amazing beyond disbelief. B) Whatâs the size of the whole dynamic technology community? if you get 0.001% from it you multiplied the smalltalkers on the surface of this planet by x100 times So what strategy really deserves your effort? For me itâs pretty clear where the winner and looser communication strategy resides, I actually saw it in action and it wasnât even hard. I also assume weâre for a winner strategy but I actually have no idea on how Pharo is managing its branding and Smalltalk has still to prove to itself it can actually market itself properly