* Martin Schlander <martin.schlander@gmail.com> [2010-08-10 13:39]:
Tirsdag den 10. august 2010 09:32:56 skrev Andreas Jaeger:
Today we continue with public discussions about strategy proposals, this time with the "Status quo" strategy proposal:
There's a lot to like about it - if you don't think so, what are you doing here? ;-)
I do, too. It lists the reasons why I use it and maintain it on other peoples' boxes.
But I have a couple of gripes with it.
It's not easy to sum up with one or two sentences or a couple of keywords to answer the question "Why openSUSE?" which I consider a requirement for the strategy - like e.g. Debian (stable, old, server), Fedora (innovation, bleeding edge, open source), Ubuntu (newbie, bad python code, more newbie).
It doesn't clearly identify an audience to (mainly) focus on.
Actually I think it does mention openSUSE's competitve advantages if you read it carefully: * a reasonable compromise between stability and up-to-dateness (distinguishing it from Fedora, Ubuntu, and Debian) * several desktop environments of high quality (unlike Ubuntu, Fedora) * a broad range of packaged software for desktop, server usage, development etc. (unlike e.g. Mandriva) * configuration management through YaST * easy collaboration and low hurdles for contributing through OBS IMO an unique combination which should naturally appeal to a broad range of consumers, including non-technical users, sysadmins, developers, or generally anyone focused on being productive. Usage on production servers seems less attractive due to the recently shortened support cycles. IMHO one of openSUSE's major weaknesses is its marketing failing to communicate its competitve advantages adequately. -- Guido Berhoerster -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org