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 you�re trying too hard to differentiate yourself from other Smalltalk dialects, then �modern Smalltalk-inspired system� might have a chance.

But what that chance might lead you to? What�s 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, let�s talk about the opposite direction. A non-zero-sum game. What about trying to connect with a wider audience? You�ll need something that serves as foundation to build on top of. Something inspiring. 

Now let�s do the numbers..

A) What�s the size of the whole smalltalk community? what you can have from it? 2%? 10%? 20% conversion? let�s say you get 80% because you�re amazing beyond disbelief.

B) What�s 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 it�s pretty clear where the winner and looser communication strategy resides, I actually saw it in action and it wasn�t even hard. I also assume we�re 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