Pricing of QNX RTP and perceived value

QNX Newsgroups (Archives) qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy
1

I’ve said it before in this forum, but I think it’s a good time to say it
again:

QNX RTP should not be a free product

The lesson learned from the dotcom crash, and from the ongoing troubles of
some of the big name Linux vendors such as Mandrake, is that giving stuff
away doesn’t work. When you give software away, you create the perception
that it is worth nothing - even if it isn’t. In sales and marketing,
perceptions count.

Now is a better time than any for QNX RTP to try to establish itself as the
best “Linuxish” desktop operating system. There is much press at the moment
about how Linux is failing on the desktop because it is too technical and
too hard to manage and configure. QNX RTP isn’t too technical for end users
and its not too hard to configure.

It should be a money making proposition, at $80 - $100 per copy, and it
should be sold in partnership with someone like Yahoo, Excite or even
Google. Shake up the market. Inspire people with new thinking - QNX/Google
OS, QNX/Yahoo OS etc. Ask for some money, give the product a future. QNX
does not destroy it’s strategy of getting it cheaply into the hands of real
time developers by doing this. Organise a program to make it $10 for
developers.

QNX, as a free product, is worth nothing. The company that owns it says so
and the end users are going to pick up on that perception. The arrival of
Opera for QNX makes it a compelling time to rethink the strategy of giving
it away for nothing. Why not change the thinking from “giving it away” to
“making it available to as many people as possible”. “making it available
to as many people as possible” means teaming up with a company that does
huge vaolumes of pages, and cutting a deal in which QNX/Google OS is seen on
every page served by that company.

It is true that there are companies who have tried going “free”, but have
had more success selling their software for money because end users
associate a requirement for payment with “perceived value”.

Build the hype. Think different. Let the orld know that there is an
operating system which is a great “Linux-like desktop OS”. If only its
owners would value it higher than nothing.

Cheers

Andrew

2

This article is a classic example of where the Linux dekstop market is at:

http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2764208,00.html

3

QNX is not free, check out commercial prices. It is free for
evaluation/personal use which is about the only way these days to
convince people to try something. Note, Sun and other players do the
same thing. I would not hurry to spend $100 just to try some new OS,
because however beautiful it might be chances are it won’t support all
my hardware and won’t have all software I need so it is not gonna be my
primary OS on desktop.

Now speaking with knowledge about QNX, it is technically NOT ready for
prime desktop use, plain and simple. I don’t even think that is in plans
of QSSL - you just mistake spreading their technology to wider circle of
developers (which is what RTP is about) for attempt to win desktop
market. QNX was and still is an OS for vertical market applications and
attempts to go after horizontal market with sales to direct end-users
would be doomed. Even if they weren’t doomed, it would be bad idea
because QSSL as organisation is NOT ready to handle sales on horizontal
market. Keep in mind also that Opera coming to QNX has nothing to do
with desktop - notice the difference between failed 3Com Audrey and IBM
Netvista - Audrey was for end users, Netvista is marketed to corporate
customers.

Get real, Linux on desktop is failing not because it is too technical or
hard to configue - those problems could be easily fixed. It is failing
because major hardware and software vendors do not really like being
tied by GPL and don’t really believe into ‘bazaar’ as viable revenue
generation model.

I don’t think either Yahoo or Google is willing to tie themselves into
desktop OS war and thus position themselves into direct competition with
Microsoft. This is simply not what they need for their business. For QNX
itself being tied with Yahoo/Google would mean being vulnerable to their
very unstable market situation. And even if such a deal was possible, I
doubt very much that every housewife who visits those portals would be
inclined to download and install QNX especially if that reqiures $100…

  • Igor

Andrew wrote:

I’ve said it before in this forum, but I think it’s a good time to say it
again:

QNX RTP should not be a free product

The lesson learned from the dotcom crash, and from the ongoing troubles of
some of the big name Linux vendors such as Mandrake, is that giving stuff
away doesn’t work. When you give software away, you create the perception
that it is worth nothing - even if it isn’t. In sales and marketing,
perceptions count.

Now is a better time than any for QNX RTP to try to establish itself as the
best “Linuxish” desktop operating system. There is much press at the moment
about how Linux is failing on the desktop because it is too technical and
too hard to manage and configure. QNX RTP isn’t too technical for end users
and its not too hard to configure.

It should be a money making proposition, at $80 - $100 per copy, and it
should be sold in partnership with someone like Yahoo, Excite or even
Google. Shake up the market. Inspire people with new thinking - QNX/Google
OS, QNX/Yahoo OS etc. Ask for some money, give the product a future. QNX
does not destroy it’s strategy of getting it cheaply into the hands of real
time developers by doing this. Organise a program to make it $10 for
developers.

QNX, as a free product, is worth nothing. The company that owns it says so
and the end users are going to pick up on that perception. The arrival of
Opera for QNX makes it a compelling time to rethink the strategy of giving
it away for nothing. Why not change the thinking from “giving it away” to
“making it available to as many people as possible”. “making it available
to as many people as possible” means teaming up with a company that does
huge vaolumes of pages, and cutting a deal in which QNX/Google OS is seen on
every page served by that company.

It is true that there are companies who have tried going “free”, but have
had more success selling their software for money because end users
associate a requirement for payment with “perceived value”.

Build the hype. Think different. Let the orld know that there is an
operating system which is a great “Linux-like desktop OS”. If only its
owners would value it higher than nothing.

Cheers

Andrew

4

QNX6 / RtP is not free. It never has been. What makes you think it is
?

By making QNX6 a free download all QSSL is saying to potential customers
is “we realize that evaluating another O/S is an expensive proposition.
In light of this fact, QSSL is doing everything in their power to make
the process of evaluation of QNX6 as pain-free as possible”. There is
no difference in this regard than QNX4. The only problem was, that you
had to talk to QSSL sales, forms had to be signed, and all of this (in a
large corporation) raises the flags, and the management gears start
grinding, and everything slows down by a factor of 1000.

I know that if I am trying to evaluate a new approach for a product
(using a new O/S), not having to get a purchase order (even for $80)
saves me a tremendous amount of politicking/bureaucracy. I don’t want
to see this change.

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew [mailto:NOastuart@mira.netSPAM]
Posted At: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 1:27 PM
Posted To: advocacy
Conversation: Pricing of QNX RTP and perceived value
Subject: Pricing of QNX RTP and perceived value


I’ve said it before in this forum, but I think it’s a good time to say
it
again:

QNX RTP should not be a free product

The lesson learned from the dotcom crash, and from the ongoing troubles
of
some of the big name Linux vendors such as Mandrake, is that giving
stuff
away doesn’t work. When you give software away, you create the
perception
that it is worth nothing - even if it isn’t. In sales and marketing,
perceptions count.

Now is a better time than any for QNX RTP to try to establish itself as
the
best “Linuxish” desktop operating system. There is much press at the
moment
about how Linux is failing on the desktop because it is too technical
and
too hard to manage and configure. QNX RTP isn’t too technical for end
users
and its not too hard to configure.

It should be a money making proposition, at $80 - $100 per copy, and it
should be sold in partnership with someone like Yahoo, Excite or even
Google. Shake up the market. Inspire people with new thinking -
QNX/Google
OS, QNX/Yahoo OS etc. Ask for some money, give the product a future.
QNX
does not destroy it’s strategy of getting it cheaply into the hands of
real
time developers by doing this. Organise a program to make it $10 for
developers.

QNX, as a free product, is worth nothing. The company that owns it says
so
and the end users are going to pick up on that perception. The arrival
of
Opera for QNX makes it a compelling time to rethink the strategy of
giving
it away for nothing. Why not change the thinking from “giving it away”
to
“making it available to as many people as possible”. “making it
available
to as many people as possible” means teaming up with a company that does
huge vaolumes of pages, and cutting a deal in which QNX/Google OS is
seen on
every page served by that company.

It is true that there are companies who have tried going “free”, but
have
had more success selling their software for money because end users
associate a requirement for payment with “perceived value”.

Build the hype. Think different. Let the orld know that there is an
operating system which is a great “Linux-like desktop OS”. If only its
owners would value it higher than nothing.

Cheers

Andrew

5

Linux fails on the desktop because it doesn’t have Microsoft Office
which is exactly the reason that RTP won’t be replacing the ‘average’
users destop OS in the near future. QNX makes it’s money by selling
developer seats and runtime licenses as well as support and custom
engineering. Giving away RTP does not take away from those revenue
streams. You still need to buy a developer seat to make commercial
applications but a free RTP gives potential customers a quick and
easy way to get the ‘gee-whiz’ feeling when they see the shiny, pretty
desktop.

Kris

Igor Kovalenko <Igor.Kovalenko@motorola.com> wrote:

QNX is not free, check out commercial prices. It is free for
evaluation/personal use which is about the only way these days to
convince people to try something. Note, Sun and other players do the
same thing. I would not hurry to spend $100 just to try some new OS,
because however beautiful it might be chances are it won’t support all
my hardware and won’t have all software I need so it is not gonna be my
primary OS on desktop.

Now speaking with knowledge about QNX, it is technically NOT ready for
prime desktop use, plain and simple. I don’t even think that is in plans
of QSSL - you just mistake spreading their technology to wider circle of
developers (which is what RTP is about) for attempt to win desktop
market. QNX was and still is an OS for vertical market applications and
attempts to go after horizontal market with sales to direct end-users
would be doomed. Even if they weren’t doomed, it would be bad idea
because QSSL as organisation is NOT ready to handle sales on horizontal
market. Keep in mind also that Opera coming to QNX has nothing to do
with desktop - notice the difference between failed 3Com Audrey and IBM
Netvista - Audrey was for end users, Netvista is marketed to corporate
customers.

Get real, Linux on desktop is failing not because it is too technical or
hard to configue - those problems could be easily fixed. It is failing
because major hardware and software vendors do not really like being
tied by GPL and don’t really believe into ‘bazaar’ as viable revenue
generation model.

I don’t think either Yahoo or Google is willing to tie themselves into
desktop OS war and thus position themselves into direct competition with
Microsoft. This is simply not what they need for their business. For QNX
itself being tied with Yahoo/Google would mean being vulnerable to their
very unstable market situation. And even if such a deal was possible, I
doubt very much that every housewife who visits those portals would be
inclined to download and install QNX especially if that reqiures $100…

  • Igor

Andrew wrote:

I’ve said it before in this forum, but I think it’s a good time to say it
again:

QNX RTP should not be a free product

The lesson learned from the dotcom crash, and from the ongoing troubles of
some of the big name Linux vendors such as Mandrake, is that giving stuff
away doesn’t work. When you give software away, you create the perception
that it is worth nothing - even if it isn’t. In sales and marketing,
perceptions count.

Now is a better time than any for QNX RTP to try to establish itself as the
best “Linuxish” desktop operating system. There is much press at the moment
about how Linux is failing on the desktop because it is too technical and
too hard to manage and configure. QNX RTP isn’t too technical for end users
and its not too hard to configure.

It should be a money making proposition, at $80 - $100 per copy, and it
should be sold in partnership with someone like Yahoo, Excite or even
Google. Shake up the market. Inspire people with new thinking - QNX/Google
OS, QNX/Yahoo OS etc. Ask for some money, give the product a future. QNX
does not destroy it’s strategy of getting it cheaply into the hands of real
time developers by doing this. Organise a program to make it $10 for
developers.

QNX, as a free product, is worth nothing. The company that owns it says so
and the end users are going to pick up on that perception. The arrival of
Opera for QNX makes it a compelling time to rethink the strategy of giving
it away for nothing. Why not change the thinking from “giving it away” to
“making it available to as many people as possible”. “making it available
to as many people as possible” means teaming up with a company that does
huge vaolumes of pages, and cutting a deal in which QNX/Google OS is seen on
every page served by that company.

It is true that there are companies who have tried going “free”, but have
had more success selling their software for money because end users
associate a requirement for payment with “perceived value”.

Build the hype. Think different. Let the orld know that there is an
operating system which is a great “Linux-like desktop OS”. If only its
owners would value it higher than nothing.

Cheers

Andrew

–
Kris Warkentin
kewarken@qnx.com
(613)591-0836 x9368
“You’re bound to be unhappy if you optimize everything” - Donald Knuth

6

Rennie Allen wrote:

QNX6 / RtP is not free. It never has been. What makes you think it is
?

By making QNX6 a free download all QSSL is saying to potential customers
is “we realize that evaluating another O/S is an expensive proposition.
In light of this fact, QSSL is doing everything in their power to make
the process of evaluation of QNX6 as pain-free as possible”. There is
no difference in this regard than QNX4. The only problem was, that you
had to talk to QSSL sales, forms had to be signed, and all of this (in a
large corporation) raises the flags, and the management gears start
grinding, and everything slows down by a factor of 1000.

I know that if I am trying to evaluate a new approach for a product
(using a new O/S), not having to get a purchase order (even for $80)
saves me a tremendous amount of politicking/bureaucracy. I don’t want
to see this change.

What he said…

Just another comment…

We got involved with the QNX OS in school a long time ago because QNX
was easily available and affordable for research as part of their school
program. Now I work in the real world for a R&D company, and guess what
I push for? A number one product, at a reasonable price for evaluation
(i.e. free)… QSSL is doing -as my case and many others may show- the
right thing. …and at work -after a year of some technical give and
take- we are in the process of getting a development seat for our
company. :slight_smile:

Bests…

Miguel.

–

my opinions are mine, only mine, solely mine, and they are not related
in any possible way to the institution(s) in which I study and work.

Miguel Simon
Research Engineer
School of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering
University of Oklahoma
http://www.amerobotics.ou.edu/
http://www.saic.com

7

Andrew wrote:

This article is a classic example of where the Linux dekstop market is at:

http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2764208,00.html

I just downloaded/installed Red Hat 7.1, and the desktop is a joke. A
huge mishmash of cryptically named stuff of wildly varying usefuleness
and quality. I’ve encountered a lot of bugs so far in KDE. I wanted to
try to connect to my Windows shares, but got led into a cryptic and
seemingly bug infested KDE networking control panel.

Gnome even seems worse as far as quality and usefulness goes, though
I’ve only spent a couple of minutes with it.

At this point, Linux “workstation” vs. Windows 2000 would be trading a
“witch for a shrew”, as the saying goes.

It’s probably ok for us techy types to use and play with, but as a
consumer-oriented product, it is completely not on. Red Hat or someone
is going to have to get the quality and integration level up
significantly. And that only becomes a pre-condition of competing with
Windows – it will also have to offer other compelling reasons.


\

Brad Aisa <baisa@NOSPAMbrad-aisa.com>
http://www.brad-aisa.com/ – PGP public key available at:
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?search=Brad+Aisa&op=index

“Laissez faire.”