Re: Will ORM take off?

Murray Spork <m.spork_at_NOSPAM.qut.edu.au> wrote in message news:3D28FDAF.70304_at_NOSPAM.qut.edu.au...

> The IT world is littered with the carcasses of dead technology that was
> superior to the competing technologies of the time.

From the perspective of the user, is that a good or bad thing? It's obviously a good thing from the perspective of the vendor of the product or technology that managed to win out on the basis of something other than its merits, but since I'm not a software vendor, that's not my concern.

> Are you saying that marketing (or "evangelisation") can never win out over
> a superior product/ technology/ methodology?

No, I'm not: it's obvious that they can. I'm suggesting that choosing software
on the basis of the quality of its marketing might not be such a great idea, though.

It's perfectly obvious that the efforts Procter & Gamble has invested in "evangelizing" Dawn pays off for them: otherwise, they wouldn't continue to do it.

It's not clear that the efforts they've invested in marketing Dawn has delivered any real benefits to dish soap users, though.

> That's a little naive don't you think?

No, I don't. In fact, I think it's the exact opposite.

--