[Asterisk-biz] Asterisk for small businesses.

[Sergey Kuznetsov]

Jim,

I don't know how you suppose to confuse yourself, but your explanation 
of a product
impressed me.

PS: I would like to talk about it in person. Is this possible? You know 
my cell phone number,
but I don't know yours. ;)


Jim Van Meggelen wrote:

>asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com wrote:
>  
>
>>OK, I see we agree completely :)
>>    
>>
>
>LOL! I'm glad you said that, because to be honest, I was starting to
>confuse myself!
>
>Jim.
>
>
>--
>Jim Van Meggelen
>jim at vanmeggelen.ca
>
>
>  
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com
>>[mailto:asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of
>>Jim Van Meggelen
>>Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 9:35 PM
>>To: 'Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion'
>>Subject: RE: [Asterisk-biz] Asterisk for small businesses.
>>
>>asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Jim Van Meggelen
>>>      
>>>
>>>>asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com wrote:
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>Jim,
>>>>>
>>>>>Is "tool kit" a product? Is "raw material" a product? I think so,
>>>>>and they all need to look for a place in market to fit, this is
>>>>>called market positioning, this is a process of productization, and
>>>>>that is my point.
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>I understand your point, I just don't think Asterisk itself is a
>>>>product. You can use it to build products, but in and of itself, it
>>>>just doesn't fit that model. 
>>>>
>>>>If it is a product, it is in the same way that any other software
>>>>toolkit is. Microsoft Visual Studio is a product, because you have
>>>>to pay for it. Perl, C++ and such are also used by developers, but
>>>>they are not sold. Can't see how they are products.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>So if someone starts charging for Asterisk, then it magically turns
>>>into a product?
>>>      
>>>
>>Not much magic to it. If you download and compile the source
>>code, I, myself, personally, my opionion only, wouldn't see
>>that as a product. Depending on your point of view, and the
>>dictionary you use, it is also arguable that it *is* a product.
>>
>>I'm finding that Asterisk solutions share a lot with website
>>development. It's my opinion only, but I say the "product" is
>>the website, not the HTML editor the designer used to code
>>it, nor the CGI language used to present it. The website is
>>what was produced.
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Perl, C++ aren't products? GCC is a
>>>product. The C++ specification is a product. Emacs is a product.
>>>
>>>MS sends me MSDN Universal for free. Does that mean it's not a
>>>product?
>>>      
>>>
>>Myself, I would think of those as tools, since they are not
>>sold to the customer, but rather used to create solutions.
>>I'm not telling you you're wrong, merely that in a business
>>context I don't see the term "product" applying to those things.
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Money doesn't have anything to do with the definition of products.
>>>      
>>>
>>I agree. I'd say it all depends on the context in which the
>>term is used. I think at this point it's more a matter of semantics.
>>
>>Let me run this one by you:
>>
>>If a business sells, say tires, I should say they consider
>>tires to be their product. If they hand out a brochure at a
>>car show, I doubt they would consider the brochure to be a
>>product. If you were to start a debate with them on the
>>topic, I suspect thay would be adamant that that brochure was
>>not a product.
>>
>>Now *is* that brochure a product? Well, how about we ask the
>>company that printed it? They'll tell you quite proudly that
>>"of course it's a product". "What about the ink or the
>>paper?" "Naw, those are just raw materials".
>>
>>OK, so you ask the paper supplier - they'll tell you "Sure,
>>paper is a product - it's our business!".
>>
>>Is a tree a product? It's usually not considered that until
>>you cut it down and make something with it.
>>
>>OK, so back to Asterisk. The impression I've been getting is
>>that people who look at Asterisk as a product tend to find it
>>very limited, complicated and expensive. People who look at
>>it as a toolkit are in heaven. I don't know if this is an
>>absolute fact, but those are the conclusions I have drawn
>>from the evidence I've seen.
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Now, if you mean to say Asterisk isn't a boxed retail SKU type of
>>>product that a business manager might grab while at Walmart to
>>>install at his office on Monday, I think everyone would agree with
>>>you. 
>>>      
>>>
>>In the context of this thread, that's exactly what I felt was
>>being meant by the use of the term product. The term
>>"productization" was specifially used, which, while not yet a
>>dictionary term (at least not on m-w) is generally considered
>>to mean the process of taking a technology, invention, idea
>>or whatever, and turning it into an item that can be sold.
>>
>>As for the Wal-Mart thing, somebody will build such a thing
>>with Asterisk in short order, I've no doubt.
>>    
>>
>
>  
>


-- 
All the Best!
Sergey.
=========================
Sergey Kuznetsov
President/CEO
         High Intellectual Technologies, Inc.

           Web: http://www.hitcalls.com
        E-mail: sergey.kuznetsov at highintellect.com
Business phone: (416) 548-9700
  Mobile phone: (647) 287-8448

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-biz/attachments/20050219/2d01603e/attachment.htm