[gameprogrammer] Re: Carmack on Java phone games
- From: Bob Pendleton <bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Gameprogrammer Mailing List <gameprogrammer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:34:45 -0600
On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 11:05 +1200, Jake Briggs wrote:
> >And that is exactly my point. :-) The Java marketeers said "write once,
> >run anywhere". And, they came out with examples that included running
> >Java on an embedded processor built into a gold (tone) ring. And
> >everybody who knows what "everywhere" really means got up and left the
> >table.
> >
> >Too bad Sun didn't come out and say "Write once, run on any major JVM on
> >any OS as long as it is Windows or UNIX compatible and the hardware has
> >at least 64 MB of RAM and a 100 MHz processor". But, that just isn't as
> >good a marketing slogan as "Write once, run anywhere". To bad. I really
> >like Java, but that one marketing error has hurt the language more than
> >anything else I can think of.
> >
> > Bob Pendleton
> >
> >
> >
> I think the slogan "Write once, run anywhere reasonable. Ask someone
> competent what conditions are considered 'reasonable'" would fit the
> bill :)
Expecting programmers to be reasonable about a matter of semantics is
asking a bit too much. I was talking to a lawyer recently who got upset
because I was being so picky about some wording. :-) She said something
like "Damn, I thought lawyers were picky, we're nothing compared to you
software guys!". I pointed out that lawyers language only had to be
understood by other lawyers. Software has to be executed by a device
with no judgment.
I guess what I was trying to say is that this doesn't have anything to
do with being reasonable. It is all about the emotional reaction.
>
> This is less offtopic and more of a complete derailment, but marketing
> always hurts the product or service (in my eyes). 90 % of marketing is
> lying, or dishonest. I consider a pure emotive argument dishonest,
> especially when the product can be compared to its peers in an objective
> manner. Which most products and services, if not all, can. I consider
> exploiting peoples emotional weaknesses to manipulate them into
> purchasing dishonest. I cant stand reading the corporate front that
> companys call websites, with their meaningless slogans, and feel good
> pictures. I dont like being pandered too or treated like someone who
> just needs XYZ to make their life better. As you can probably guess, I
> hate advertising as represented by the current examples in all media. I
> have little pity for those who allow the dishonest media to effect them,
> to produce the desired results, but I understand that its hard work
> trying to ignore the barrage.
>
> </rant>
I agree with you completely. OTOH, I have worked with a few marketing
people and studied some on the subject of how people make decisions.
Turns out that 80 to 90 percent of people make their decisions based
entirely on emotion. You can categorize those folks by the kind of
emotional driver that will sway them. The the marketeers have names for
all those groups. I don't remember the names, I just remember that they
are mostly pretty insulting. The other group, the group that isn't
swayed by appeals to emotion has a name too. They are called "People
With Values". The marketeers hate them. They hate them because that
small percentage of the population who are not affected by appeals to
emotion also happen to have the majority of the expendable wealth in the
US. Yeah, 10 to 20 percent of the population controls 80 to 90 percent
of the wealth. And the marketeers can't touch them. :-)
Sounds like you might be one of those people with values.
Bob Pendleton
>
> Jake
>
---------------------
To unsubscribe go to http://gameprogrammer.com/mailinglist.html
Other related posts:
