<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<br>
<blockquote
cite="middc42cb950708130152k6dc6e0n5cfa3092e83ab05c@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
I have a lot more examples of such problems using the "Pascal" and the
way it "sounds"...
And in the bottom line, it's all about marketing.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
It would probably help if it had a name other than "Free". It refers to
free as in OS, of course, but many people read it as "free" (as in
beer) and thus cheap and nasty. It wouldn't bother me if it gets a new
name or not, but I think that many people would view it in a better
light. It sure wouldn't hurt if FPC had a sexier name. It would
probably even help students get into it more as there is a definite
"cool" factor in using "Mono" or "C sharp" or "dot NET" or various
other names that have more style. Even poor old Lazarus was a leper.
What does that say to the casual observer? Software for outcasts?
Pascal already has a reputation for being a fringe technology. <br>
<br>
It doesn't have to be about business in order for a name to effect
support for a solution (such as FPC).<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="middc42cb950708130152k6dc6e0n5cfa3092e83ab05c@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">For business maybe.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Also for Open source projects (look for Linux as an example).
</pre>
</blockquote>
Agreed. Marketing is not restricted to commerce. IBM uses the term
"mindshare" to describe how much of people's thinking a product or
technology (such as FPC) occupies - a concept specifically divorced
from the concept of "marketshare". Do we (as the FPC community) really
want to reach the situation where noone is using the language? I guess
not. In which case we DO need "mindshare". Call it marketing, or call
it "relevance". However you want to cut it, we need it in order to be
meaningful. Not saying that we should change the name, necessarily, but
we shouldn't be one-eyed about the idea.<br>
<blockquote
cite="middc42cb950708130152k6dc6e0n5cfa3092e83ab05c@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap=""></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">People forget the bottom line; FPC and Lazarus are HOBBY projects
for the core developers. We do not want or need to make money with
them. Otherwise we would not have made it open source in the first
place.
If you do happen to make money on the side with it: congratulations.
But do not expect business arguments to have any influence whatsoever
on the core developers. That includes name changes, which are simply
not debatable.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
If that is the case, then FPC should not be used for industrial
applications. This idea suggests that FPC is a toy. I know it isn't,
but if the core team is sending the message that it is, then it doesn't
bode well for the future of the project. I am happy to use FPC
precisely because it isn't a toy, but a very solid, functional platform
which holds its own well, if not ideally against most other platforms.
Is that a mistake? I am not convinced it is, but if the core team is of
the opinion that the system is just a pastime, perhaps I have the wrong
idea entirely?<br>
<blockquote
cite="middc42cb950708130152k6dc6e0n5cfa3092e83ab05c@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">The project IMHO is far from only be a hobby, because it catch up
additional people, and there are commercial program using that hobby,
and if you want believe that is should only be something small,then
why do you support so much things, instead of just supporting your
own systems ?! it been a long time since it was only a hobby, now it's
a project with audience.
</pre>
</blockquote>
Agree.<br>
<br>
And, FPC is a great bit of gear. It's sad to see people selling it
short. The developers have done a excellent job with it (quite simply,
it is state of the art). FPC should step forward and stake the claim to
the credibility it has earned.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Mark.<br>
</body>
</html>