|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
if you've noticed, mb's gone right after the instutitional market, something
that has alluded omega for quite some time. in fact, it wouldn't suprise
me if mark makes the i-guys as his niche market, since it's very lucrative
and less marketing intensive. an additional advantage would be fewer whiners,
cuz the i-guys pretty much take what is given to them, and you wouldn't
have to deal with the individual users, only the is guys.
if i where mark, i'd abandon small trader market completely, since it really
doesn't make much sense from a monetary or mass marketing strategy. he sure
ain't doing this for the good of us all!!! ;))
TJ
At Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:19:02 -0800 (PST), Howard Jackson <hrjf4@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>It would certainly be great to have an alternative to
>omega, but all of that of david vs. goliath seems very
>nice in paper, but it rarely (if ever) works.
>
>> 1) an open programming platform with non-proprietary
>> coding
>It requires almost a genius to be at the right place,
>at the right time, with the right contacts to develope
>a good enough product-marketting-alliances-etc that
>will not leave you with a big '-' in your bank account
>and a few people with free software... I'll explain as
>I go. That is why there has been one Sun, one Red Hat,
>and little (if any) others out there that have done
>anything significant out of thousands of companies in
>the market.
>
>> 2) good technical support that caters to both
>> amateur and professional -
>There is good support because its one person
>supporting ten guys that are using the product. You
>almost have to wish (as a user) for the product to not
>be successful in order to maintain the level of
>support. As soon as you need more people to support
>more users, quality of support suffers. But if the
>product does not sell and it does not become popular,
>it probably means that there is some problem with it.
>This is the first catch 22
>
>> 3) continuous, reliable and timely upgrades....not
>> ones that make you
>Similar to point 2, if the popularity of the product
>grows, more problems(bugs) and suggestions (wish
>lists) will come up, and upgrade frequency and
>timeliness will be hit.
>Also, it is all very manageble when dealing with start
>up numbers, but a 'david' will probably not have a
>good quality assurance staff (if it will have qa at
>all) and beta testers get hit with all the big bugs in
>the first beta, the medium bugs in the second beta,
>and small bugs in the third. Thus ending in delaying
>significantly the release of anything new. That is
>what apparently is hapenning now with MB.
>THis is catch 22 #2.
>
>
>In general, every aspect of the software business will
>present that problem of "its good because its small,
>but if it IS good it will not be small for long, and
>it will turn bad when its not small anymore"...
>
>These are my 2 pennies, anyways...
|