[clue-talk] Sales presentations at meetings

[Crawford Rainwater]

Folks:

Comments below.

----- "David L. Willson" <DLWillson at TheGeek.NU> wrote: -----

<...snipped..>

> Mike says he knows one portion of the product-line really well, and
> the rest not much at all. This is where a technical sales-person,
> responsible for being able to represent the whole product line, would
> be useful in a well-rounded presentation, I think. This is because I
> think that purely technical people are usually like Mike, very
> well-versed in a few things, but perhaps not so much about the rest of
> the line.
>

Personally I have not issue with Mike presenting on VMware ESX/ESXi (aka vSphere IIRC with the new(er) names).  The paid versions versus the free or no cost versions are welcomed again in my perspective.  As long as it is a technical presentation.
 
My grievances come from again running CLUE-North and one particular company who will remain nameless had a sales lacky trying to drive and steer the whole presentation.  Quite a few attendees approached me after the meeting with complaints of this.  Since then, I have asked any company group doing presentations to have the sales lackies introduce him/herself at the beginning of the presentation and announce where they can be available if there are any interests in services/products later.  Most include a slide or two at the end to help as well.  The response from such was much better perceived.

> The Linux community's well-earned reputation for rabid
> anti-commercialism, seems well-earned. It's ironic that we reject
> commercialism, AND we reject RSM-style balls-to-the-wall libre'ism,
> too. Is it that we just want stuff gratis (no charge)? We do care
> about the ideals behind free software like Linux, right?
> 
.
<...snipped...>
.
> I'm really down with the Linus-style, live and let live approach. I'm
> even OK with the RSM-style, I don't care if it's gratis, as long as
> it's libre, approach. I don't get at all the approach that it's OK as
> long as nobody's making any money, approach.
>

Then comes the question of "how do I earn a paycheck".  While things might appear to be "free", people need to "pay the bills".  I personally do not mind using Open Source based software that has commercial backing for support (e.g., NX, Zimbra, Zmanda, Hyperic) since there is also the "community" editions which are available with most of the commercial features (note: not all features) and have paid support if and when such is needed.  I am against poor support groups behind commercial Open Source based software since it is a waste of finances if you do not get what you pay for in the end and just promotes poor quality of software as a whole (I have two groups in mind with this remark from personal and professional experiences).
 
> So, since we're on the -talk list, can I ask for a few reasoned,
> non-rabid, defenses of the position that a good infomercial isn't a
> good CLUE talk? I'll go way, way back into the past, and recall the
> Ecrix VXA-1 talk. Definitely an infomercial, but I thought it was a
> good talk. If you thought it was too commercial, why? Is there a line,
> a principle here, or are we just against selling, even if the selling
> is based in a relatively technical presentation of features we find
> interesting?
> 

See above remarks.  If it is a technical presentation related to Linux and/or Open Source, I do not have an issue with it personally nor as a CLUE Admin.  If it is a presentation that is nothing but a "used car salesman pitch" though, I think I will release the hounds in the crowd. ;-)

> My most heart-felt principle is that technical people should be know
> Linux, so that users will enjoy increased freedom-of-choice, and
> increased benefits from competition. The user's "freedom of choice"
> should be protected and expanded. So, you can see how VMware products
> fit right into that.
> 

On that last note, there are other virtualization technologies that can also be used.  They may not be as "popular" as VMware's product line or have a different learning curve.  It can be used to learn Linux in a situation where making a virtual machine or two without destroying a host system in which the end user (or "student") is more comfortable with.  However yes, there can be a financial cost involved for VMware in some cases (e.g., Workstation or ESX).  That is the choice of the end user or "student" learning in this case and I would not suggest a newbie using ESX right off.  I will leave out the GUI vs. CLI aspects as well, but again a consideration in learning as well.

>From a personal and company perspective (Linux ETC here) we use KVM on Ubuntu and Gentoo server platforms and are quite happy with it.  Took ~2 weeks to get a good feel and to test out a few "evolutionary steps" in getting down things a proper way, but in the end it works great.  I even loved testing it trying to make the host systems crash from various resource overloads as a side note to see what can we do here.  In the end though, it is a workable and stable virtualization platform where we can test and push out systems for our clients at a lower cost compared to individual "bare metal" systems.  Would I recommend KVM for the novice of Linux or those newbies wanting to learn Linux?  Certainly not.  But it is another way for those wanting to have an alternative.

Just food for thought.  My usual disclaimer that I receive this list in Digest format noted of course.

--- Crawford


The Linux ETC Company
10121 Yates Court
Westminster, CO 80031 USA
voice:  +1.303.604.2550
web:    http://www.linux-etc.com