Thread: business perspective
Since Great Bridge is no longer, there is a need for a strong online presence for companies and individuals to learn about postgresql. This gap is a detriment to the project from a marketing perspective, where GB helped the most. I visit postgresql.org a few time a week and find it to be very useful (especially the documentation search!). From a design and information architecture perspective it can be extended to communicate (through design) the sense of confidence and clarity of the better websites for companies and projects in this industry. Having a spectacular website probably isn't going to persuade fortune 500 companies to make a switch - it is definitely an integral part of communication that helps to shape the way people perceive postgresql, especially first impressions. Here are a few sites that I am basing my comparison on: sendmail.com sun.com redhat.com ibm.com There are a handful of design decisions that have been employed by these companies that effectively communicate their brand and products. Implementing these methods and techniques to postgresql.org is within the scope of our capabilities. Deciding on a direction, boiling that down to something concise and ultimately creating something that the community can approve of and feel great about is a larger task. I believe that it is worthwhile, and am willing to devote time towards this end. Please post your comments, so we may see if there is a desire to move forward in this direction as well as who else may be interested in this project. Although I only occasionally chime in, I read the general and hackers lists daily (er, hourly ;) ) and have a deep respect for the individuals who participate on these lists. Looking forward to your feedback, Ryan Mahoney BTW, I have been involved in the design (and development) of a few successful and highly trafficked websites. Including Nerve.com, Flower.com, and Viasource.net. I am based in NY and collaborate with a number of other small design shops (kolumn.com, frameweld.com). I agree with Jakob Nielson's design and usability concepts and read useit.com regularly. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.251 / Virus Database: 124 - Release Date: 4/26/01
The website is currently undergoing a rewrite. Vince. On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, Ryan Mahoney wrote: > Since Great Bridge is no longer, there is a need for a strong online > presence for companies and individuals to learn about postgresql. This gap > is a detriment to the project from a marketing perspective, where GB helped > the most. > > I visit postgresql.org a few time a week and find it to be very useful > (especially the documentation search!). From a design and information > architecture perspective it can be extended to communicate (through design) > the sense of confidence and clarity of the better websites for companies > and projects in this industry. Having a spectacular website probably isn't > going to persuade fortune 500 companies to make a switch - it is definitely > an integral part of communication that helps to shape the way people > perceive postgresql, especially first impressions. > > Here are a few sites that I am basing my comparison on: > sendmail.com > sun.com > redhat.com > ibm.com > > There are a handful of design decisions that have been employed by these > companies that effectively communicate their brand and > products. Implementing these methods and techniques to postgresql.org is > within the scope of our capabilities. Deciding on a direction, boiling > that down to something concise and ultimately creating something that the > community can approve of and feel great about is a larger task. I believe > that it is worthwhile, and am willing to devote time towards this > end. Please post your comments, so we may see if there is a desire to move > forward in this direction as well as who else may be interested in this > project. Although I only occasionally chime in, I read the general and > hackers lists daily (er, hourly ;) ) and have a deep respect for the > individuals who participate on these lists. > > Looking forward to your feedback, > > Ryan Mahoney > > BTW, I have been involved in the design (and development) of a few > successful and highly trafficked websites. Including Nerve.com, > Flower.com, and Viasource.net. I am based in NY and collaborate with a > number of other small design shops (kolumn.com, frameweld.com). I agree > with Jakob Nielson's design and usability concepts and read useit.com regularly. -- ========================================================================== Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev@michvhf.com http://www.pop4.net 56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com ==========================================================================
>The website is currently undergoing a rewrite. > >Vince. Are there architectural designs, use cases, mock-ups, color schemes, requirements, etc. that we can view online so we can understand the direction things are moving in and offer our input and talents? If this project is worked on by a handful of people behind the scenes that the same problems may not be resolved and numerous implementations may occur. -r --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.251 / Virus Database: 124 - Release Date: 4/26/01
Ryan Mahoney writes: > Here are a few sites that I am basing my comparison on: > sendmail.com > sun.com > redhat.com > ibm.com I find none of these web sites particularly well-done from a usability point of view. On the contrary, I visited the latter three of them in recent weeks to find actual information and found them completely overloaded. I visted the first one last night, and my first thoughts were "when you thought it couldn't get worse...". Some web sites I find rather well-done are kde.org, mysql.com, xemacs.org, and freebsd.org, for a variety of reasons, but it occurred to me that they mostly match postgresql.org in organization. -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net http://funkturm.homeip.net/~peter
> > Here are a few sites that I am basing my comparison on: > > sendmail.com > > sun.com > > redhat.com > > ibm.com > >I find none of these web sites particularly well-done from a usability >point of view. On the contrary, I visited the latter three of them in >recent weeks to find actual information and found them completely >overloaded. I visted the first one last night, and my first thoughts were >"when you thought it couldn't get worse...". > >Some web sites I find rather well-done are kde.org, mysql.com, xemacs.org, >and freebsd.org, for a variety of reasons, but it occurred to me that they >mostly match postgresql.org in organization. I agree on what you say about usability. I think the sites I referred to are good at marketing communication but suffer from several bad usability decisions (as do many sites). Design should promote both usability as well as influence the overall "feeling" that visitors get when visiting a web site. My hope in referencing those sites is not to suggest that we copy what they are doing, but rather to collect some input regarding which aspects of which sites are good and why and how we can use that data to influence the way businesses feel about postgresql. This is a difficult subject because so much of it appears to be subjective and people sometimes have an personal attachment to one design or idea over another. I do believe that through informal usability testing and market research the postgresql website could shine as both a highly usable informational resource and successfully market postgresql. I think it is lacking mostly in the latter area at the moment, although I hadn't felt it as much when the Great Bridge site was still up. In the past, when I needed to find information about postgresql, I went to postgresql.org. When I wanted a potential client to understand postgresql and feel comfortable about it, I sent them to greatbridge.com. Perhaps it isn't and shouldn't be one of the roles of postgresql.org. Perhaps it should. What is your opinion? Why? Maybe a second - completely marketing - postgresql site should be developed. It is a difficult decision, and I wouldn't want the usability of postgresql.org to suffer because marketing messages where included, although this would necessarily happen. Perhaps postgresql.com could be developed as more of a marketing tool? Perhaps no one in the community is concerned about marketing or they feel that the current site says exactly what they want. Completely valid thoughts. My needs are not necessarily the needs of the rest of the community - although before I come to that conclusion I would like to understand what the rest of the community thinks. -r --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.251 / Virus Database: 124 - Release Date: 4/26/01
Correction, would should read wouldn't >Maybe a second - completely marketing - postgresql site should be >developed. It is a difficult decision, and I wouldn't want the usability >of postgresql.org to suffer because marketing messages where included, >although this ***would*** necessarily happen. Perhaps postgresql.com >could be developed as more of a marketing tool? Perhaps no one in the >community is concerned about marketing or they feel that the current site >says exactly what they want. Completely valid thoughts. My needs are not >necessarily the needs of the rest of the community - although before I >come to that conclusion I would like to understand what the rest of the >community thinks. Sorry -r --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.251 / Virus Database: 124 - Release Date: 4/26/01
I like the idea of keeping postgresql.org focused on users and developers, and
maintaining a related postgresql.com site for marketing to managers, clients,
journalists, and so forth. Perhaps it would help avoid seeing misinformation
about Postgresql getting into print. There should probably be a nice way to get
from one to the other as well.
I'd also like to avoid doing a radical redesign of the current site to the point
that I have to start over from scratch to figure out where everything went,
unless there's a really compelling reason for it of course.
Just my two cents.
Wes Sheldahl
Ryan Mahoney <ryan%paymentalliance.net@interlock.lexmark.com> on 09/13/2001
12:51:22 PM
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e%gmx.net@interlock.lexmark.com>, PostgreSQL
general list <pgsql-general%postgresql.org@interlock.lexmark.com>
cc: (bcc: Wesley Sheldahl/Lex/Lexmark)
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] business perspective
> > Here are a few sites that I am basing my comparison on:
> > sendmail.com
> > sun.com
> > redhat.com
> > ibm.com
>
>I find none of these web sites particularly well-done from a usability
>point of view. On the contrary, I visited the latter three of them in
>recent weeks to find actual information and found them completely
>overloaded. I visted the first one last night, and my first thoughts were
>"when you thought it couldn't get worse...".
>
>Some web sites I find rather well-done are kde.org, mysql.com, xemacs.org,
>and freebsd.org, for a variety of reasons, but it occurred to me that they
>mostly match postgresql.org in organization.
I agree on what you say about usability. I think the sites I referred to
are good at marketing communication but suffer from several bad usability
decisions (as do many sites). Design should promote both usability as well
as influence the overall "feeling" that visitors get when visiting a web
site. My hope in referencing those sites is not to suggest that we copy
what they are doing, but rather to collect some input regarding which
aspects of which sites are good and why and how we can use that data to
influence the way businesses feel about postgresql.
This is a difficult subject because so much of it appears to be subjective
and people sometimes have an personal attachment to one design or idea over
another. I do believe that through informal usability testing and market
research the postgresql website could shine as both a highly usable
informational resource and successfully market postgresql. I think it is
lacking mostly in the latter area at the moment, although I hadn't felt it
as much when the Great Bridge site was still up. In the past, when I
needed to find information about postgresql, I went to
postgresql.org. When I wanted a potential client to understand postgresql
and feel comfortable about it, I sent them to greatbridge.com. Perhaps it
isn't and shouldn't be one of the roles of postgresql.org. Perhaps it
should. What is your opinion? Why?
Maybe a second - completely marketing - postgresql site should be
developed. It is a difficult decision, and I wouldn't want the usability
of postgresql.org to suffer because marketing messages where included,
although this would necessarily happen. Perhaps postgresql.com could be
developed as more of a marketing tool? Perhaps no one in the community is
concerned about marketing or they feel that the current site says exactly
what they want. Completely valid thoughts. My needs are not necessarily
the needs of the rest of the community - although before I come to that
conclusion I would like to understand what the rest of the community thinks.
-r
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.251 / Virus Database: 124 - Release Date: 4/26/01
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)
* Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote: | | Ryan Mahoney writes: | | > Here are a few sites that I am basing my comparison on: | > sendmail.com | > sun.com | > redhat.com | > ibm.com | | I find none of these web sites particularly well-done from a usability | point of view. On the contrary, I visited the latter three of them in I've always liked sendmail.com, but I agree that the latter three are not well done. -- Gunnar Rønning - gunnar@polygnosis.com Senior Consultant, Polygnosis AS, http://www.polygnosis.com/
I find corporate Support sites to generally be a good indication of usability : support.novell.com (one of the best). techdocs.postgresql.org (ok, I couldn't help myself ;-> ). Regards and best wishes, Justin Clift Gunnar Rønning wrote: > > * Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote: > | > | Ryan Mahoney writes: > | > | > Here are a few sites that I am basing my comparison on: > | > sendmail.com > | > sun.com > | > redhat.com > | > ibm.com > | > | I find none of these web sites particularly well-done from a usability > | point of view. On the contrary, I visited the latter three of them in > > I've always liked sendmail.com, but I agree that the latter three are > not well done. > > -- > Gunnar Rønning - gunnar@polygnosis.com > Senior Consultant, Polygnosis AS, http://www.polygnosis.com/ > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? > > http://archives.postgresql.org -- "My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the first group; there was less competition there." - Indira Gandhi
>| > Here are a few sites that I am basing my comparison on:
>| > sendmail.com
>| > sun.com
>| > redhat.com
>| > ibm.com
>|
>| I find none of these web sites particularly well-done from a usability
>| point of view. On the contrary, I visited the latter three of them in
>
>I've always liked sendmail.com, but I agree that the latter three are
>not well done.
I don't think it is constructive to say that one site is entirely good or
not. Most every design has aspects that work and aspects that don't. For
example: (standard subjectivity disclaimer here...)
Sendmail.com (home page):
Good
- use of dramatic and striking imagery
- clear, readable, professional logo
- calming color palate with exciting highlights (yellow, light blue, dark
blue, pink, red, black)
- prominent promotion of core competencies ("Rock Solid" internet messaging)
- corporate look and terminology
Poor:
- vague tagline (architects of internet messaging.... shall I call them
if I need a message architect?)
- difficult to read some type (blue on blue, light colors type on light
color background)
- difficult to read buttons (if you want to see the site in German you
need to read size 6 type to adjust button)
- too many navigational options
Overall:
- There is a lot of information to take in, although it is clear they are
targeting "enterprise" type customers and it is not difficult to buy
product or obtain customer support from their site. It is clear to see
that large corporations (IBM) have put their faith in this product and that
the product is actively developed. It seems as if they have made their
navigational options smaller to enable more options, it is hard to read and
unpleasant to look at (the navigation that is).
- - -
postgresql.org (home page)
Good:
- easy to use navigation
- up-to-date information
- interactive navigation (rollover effect)
Poor:
- muted monochromatic color scheme (blue, blue, gray)
- informational glut (about 4 vertical scrolling pages of text)
- no segregation of information; releases, general announcements,
description all together
- inefficient utilization of space (roughly 35% of first screen covered
by large blue and white bars)
- vague section names, "users lounge, developers corner" - I use the
postgresql although I am a developer... where is the documentation again?
Overall:
- If you are familiar with postgresql.org you can quickly go straight to
where you want to go. If you aren't familiar with postgresql.org or
postgresql it may not be clear what it is, although there is plenty of text
to read if you've got some time to kill. It seems to be directed toward
developers. It is unclear who uses postgresql and if it is successful at
what it does. The advertisement for some unrelated products (hotels?
jewelry?) that are displayed on the intermediate "mirrors" are
unprofessional and make it seem like the project is hosted at geocities.
- - -
I hope I don't appear ungrateful to those who have worked hard on
postgreql.org. Obviosly a lot of hard work has gone into it and I
appreciate everything that has been done - I sure have used the site
enough! Design criticism is a part of the design process - if used
constructively it can lead to a dialogue where we can understand better why
a designer made the decisions they have and possibly how a design can be
more effective. It may seem unfair to compare a site which a handful of
people did in their free time to sites developed by firms that worked
solely on a single product with ample compensation. I think the postgresql
community is intelligent and capable enough to be competitive with the
market leaders in more areas than software development.
<- end rant here
-r
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.251 / Virus Database: 124 - Release Date: 4/26/01
On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 04:25:21AM -0400, Ryan Mahoney wrote:
> Good
> - corporate look and terminology
>
> Poor:
> - vague tagline (architects of internet messaging.... shall I call them
> if I need a message architect?)
It appars to me that the "poor" item above is actually an instance of
the "good" item ("corporate terminology"). Corporate-speak any more
is often a mixture of empty blowhard phrases like the second example.
Rather than using "corporate" terminology, it seems to me that
offering straight, to the point descriptions and clear technical
documents is the sort of thing that postgresql.org ought to do; and,
_does_ do, admirably (though not always perfectly). If the idea is
to make corporations feel better by adopting a corporate mindset, we
might achieve at best a pyhrric victory. We could easily end up with
a big stinking pile of crfty code that is supposed to do everything
(a large corporate RDBMS and a well-known small RDBMS-ish interface
to the filesystem strike me as two examples of this) rather than the
fast, elegant system that we now have.
I'm not saying the suggestions you've offered are bad ones, nor that
market share is unimportant; I just think that, in the same way that
not adopting primarily corporate attitudes to software has resulted
in good software, not adopting corporate attitudes to marketing might
result in good marketing. The actual use of Postgres by corporations
is proof that good, solid software will win in at least some
situations. And PostgreSQL is never going to satisfy those who feel
they'd like to have a company to sue if something went wrong; for if
you are foolish enough to think that you could extract damages from
an Oracle, an IBM, or a Microsoft then you are either insusceptible
to rationality, or sufficiently rich you could throw programmers at a
flaw in Postgres as quickly as your vendor could to fix its software.
A
--
----
Andrew Sullivan 87 Mowat Avenue
Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew@libertyrms.com> M6K 3E3
+1 416 646 3304 x110