[2036] in comp.os.os2.announce archive
"Connect the World with Merlin" Review Report (long)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (TimB1557)
Sun Nov 3 23:18:33 1996
To: os2ann.DISCUSS@bloom-picayune.MIT.EDU
Date: 3 Nov 1996 20:51:17 GMT
From: timb1557@aol.com (TimB1557)
Reply-To: timb1557@aol.com (TimB1557)
Reply-to: timb1557@aol.com (TimB1557)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
OS/2 USERS MAKE HISTORY BY "CONNECTING THE WORLD"
PALM HARBOR, FL (November 1, 1996) - History was made on Saturday, October 26,
1996, when OS/2 users from around the world organized a global demonstration
of IBM's OS/2 Warp 4 (code-named "Merlin") over the Internet. This was the
first presentation of its kind conducted independently by customers on a
worldwide basis for a computer related product (perhaps for any product),
thereby demonstrating the power of OS/2 and the Internet. During the event,
the CtWwM Help Desk in Florida recorded OS/2 users from 28 countries,
including: Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Ecuador,
France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Hungary, India, Italy, Lithuania,
Mauritius, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, South
Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
OS/2 users registered their sites via our web site (which recorded over 5,000
accesses during the day), the InterCom Internet telephone (where we had as
many as 43 users concurrently at one time), and by e-mail.
A summary of the project (and graphics) can be found at:
http://www.tbos2cla.com/ctwwm/
PROJECT AUDIT
The following project audit was excerpted from the Editorial Page of the
December 1996 issue of the OS/2 CONNECT newsletter (scheduled for distribution
in mid-November). It was prepared by the Project Manager, Tim Bryce, Editor of
OS/2 CONNECT (http://warp.eecs.berkeley.edu/os2/connect/).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
HOW WE CONNECTED THE WORLD
During my 20 years in the business I have participated in a wide variety of
project audits, both for clients and internally within my own company. When
performing an audit it is important to stick to the facts and learn from your
successes and mistakes. I don't see any reason why the "Connect the World with
Merlin" (CtWwM) event should be treated any differently.
As you probably know, CtWwM was a demonstration of OS/2 Warp 4 orchestrated
independently by OS/2 customers on a worldwide basis. The event was held on
Saturday, October 26th at computer stores, universities, cyber cafes and other
institutions. On that day, OS/2 users conducted demonstrations of the
operating system as well as interface with other users over the Internet
(through a web site and Internet telephone). The intent of the project was to
convey a sign of customer confidence in the product. Such a worldwide
demonstration of customer support is unprecedented. I do not know of any other
instance where customers independently organized and conducted a worldwide
marketing program. From this perspective alone, the project was a resounding
success.
BY THE NUMBERS
Based on the updates to our world web map, the discussions with users at the
Help Desk in Florida (via Internet telephone) and e-mail messages received, we
know that:
* 165 sites from 28 countries participated in the event. This surpasses our
original estimate of 150 sites. We suspect there were many more sites
participating in the event but failed to contact project organizers for
some unknown reason. For example, we know there were 77 sites planned for
Germany alone, yet we only heard from a handful of them. We also didn't
hear from Israel who had planned three sites.
* Over 1,000 volunteers participated in the event. Based on the feedback we
received from the volunteers, we conservatively projected that OS/2 was
exposed to 15,000 consumers. This represents a 15:1 ratio of consumers to
volunteers (on the average, one volunteer connected with 15 consumers).
From a marketing perspective, 15K may seem to be an insignificant number.
However, when you consider this demonstration was performed with minimal
funding and with some credible customers, this becomes a rather significant
figure. There were several reports that volunteers helped to "sell-out"
OS/2 at various computer stores. A lady at the Fry's Electronics store in
Anaheim, California was so impressed, she purchased OS/2 Warp 4 and a new
Pentium/133mhz based computer after talking with the CtWwM volunteers.
* The overall reaction to OS/2 Warp 4 by the consumers was very good. Based
on the Project Review Forms returned by the Site Coordinators, the overall
reaction to the presentation was rated a 1.9 (based on a scale of
1-high/good to 5-low/bad).
* Our world web page was accessed over 5,000 times during the one day event,
representing another positive sign of interest in the project and the
product.
From a product perspective, the "hot buttons" for the consumers were (in
order of priority):
1. Speech Navigation/VoiceType Dictation - this was far and away the most
interesting feature to the general public.
2. Integrated Internet capabilities.
3. New graphical user interface with the WarpCenter.
4. Sample OS/2 applications demonstrated (such as ColorWorks, InterCom, and
the Application Sampler CD-ROM).
5. Multitasking (the stability of multitasking under OS/2 amazed even the
more ardent Windows users).
6. Java support (although many consumers were at a loss as to how Java would
directly benefit them).
There were many other highlights demonstrated, such as the Internet telephone,
but those listed above represent the most popular features of OS/2 Warp 4.
The biggest weakness of OS/2, as reported by many Site Coordinators on the
Project Review Forms, was lack of support for Win95/NT applications. Although
other weaknesses were reported, lack of Win95/NT support garnered the most
attention.
WHAT WE DID RIGHT
On the positive side, we did several things well...
* Good administration - early in the project I realized we needed a mechanism
to track the volunteers and demonstration sites. For this I used our OS/2
based Repository (the "PRIDE" Information Factory) and IBM Works. This
provided the means to sort and search for volunteers by various attributes,
produce volunteer logs and e-mail addresses, and print shipping labels. In
other words, we had adequate control over the resources.
* Good communications - notifying volunteers of project developments was very
important. To this end we issued bi-weekly updates via e-mail to
volunteers. Since this project was a voluntary effort, issuing a project
update every week would have been more time-consuming and may have
inundated volunteers with too much information. Bi-weekly updates seemed to
satisfy everyone. Beyond this, we did a couple of other things right in
terms of communications:
- The concept of Country/Regional Coordinators (where someone acted as a
"territorial manager") worked very well. These coordinators were
invaluable in terms of organizing events and solving local problems, as
well as communicating with Florida.
- The Site Coordinator concept (where an individual manages all activities
at a demonstration site) was also successful.
- Web pages were very helpful in generating interest in the project and
communicating with volunteers at the local level. National CtWwM web
pages were created in Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada,
Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Russia, Slovenia,
South Africa, and Sweden. Our private "Download Area" web page was also
helpful in terms of delivering last minute updates to volunteers.
- The OS/2 Help Desk, as implemented by the Tampa Bay OS/2 Users' Group
(TBOUG) using the InterCom Internet telephone was very successful in
terms of answering technical questions and as a public relations tool
for talking to people around the world. As an aside, IBM and other
vendors should consider using such a tool in Help Desk activities.
* The Script was good but could have been improved by adding more detailed
instructions for demonstrating every facet of the product. The script was
implemented as an INF file (for use with the OS/2 View utility). It was
suggested earlier in the project to implement it as a set of HTML files.
Although this was certainly possible, the INF format was efficient and easy
to implement (and no one objected to the format).
* Generosity - it was amazing how many people came forward to make
contributions to the project. The CtWwM logo, the store posters, the CtWwM
web site, the web client/server software, and the 3rd party software, etc.
were all provided on a gratis basis. As Project Manager I needed to only
broadcast a message that I needed something and the volunteers responded
immediately. Many thanks to all of the people for their generous support.
Needless to say, such generosity greatly reduced the cost of the project.
* All OS/2 show - our insistence to keep CtWwM an "all OS/2 show" is an
important one in that it demonstrated the power and availability of OS/2
programs (an area the press contends is a serious weakness of OS/2). By
using OS/2 apps throughout the project, we were not only able to
effectively demonstrate the availability of native 32-bit OS/2 programs,
but how they can greatly outperform their counterparts in the M$ world.
* Back-up - our web back-up site was provided by the Central Alberta OS/2
users' group (CAOS) in Edmonton, Alberta. Although it wasn't necessary to
use their services, it was a wise move to have a back-up sight.
WHAT WE DID WRONG
No project is without problems though and CtWwM was no different.
* Client software - the concept of the "client" software needed to
communicate with the CtWwM web server was a good one and our volunteers
invested considerable time developing it. Basically, the software provided
the means to update the world map and extend greetings to other OS/2 users.
Unfortunately, users reported problems executing the software, particularly
over the IBM Global Network. However, other users experienced no problems
whatsoever when using other ISP's. Needless to say, the software needs to
be made more "bullet-proof."
* Web server - the CtWwM web server went down inexplicably a handful of times
during the event. Fortunately, our WebMaster had a good re-start procedure
which brought the server back up within minutes. Regardless, whenever the
server went down, the OS/2 Help Desk was flooded with Internet telephone
calls. In hindsight, it would have been helpful to provide the Help Desk
with the means to directly monitor and control the Internet server.
* Internet access - IBM generously provided accounts to access the IBM Global
Network. Unfortunately, several users experienced difficulties logging on
with the accounts provided and opted to use a different ISP instead. These
Internet access problems were inexplicable.
* Shipping the demonstration kits - This was perhaps the biggest snafu in the
entire project. Although all of the demonstration materials were delivered
to the packer on time, the packer botched the shipments causing them to be
delivered very late (if at all). To make matters worse, the packers used
boxes that were much too large causing the contents to bounce around and
damage some of the CD's and diskettes inside. Tighter control over packing
and shipping (including shipment tracking) is required if this type of
project is to be implemented again.
* Contacting the press - key members of the press (particularly those in the
computer industry) were routinely apprised of project developments.
Further, we issued two press releases internationally and many others at
the local level. Unfortunately, we received very little interest from the
press at any level. It appears that the press was either not interested in
the story and/or did not like receiving the press releases via e-mail (most
wanted to see the press release in fax form). Personally, I find it rather
disturbing that technology reporters have an aversion to using simple
technology (such as e-mail) for collecting news. Even though we posted our
press releases in key areas on the Web and the USENET Newsgroups, accessing
news in this manner is evidently at a level of sophistication most
technology reporters cannot comprehend. If we were to do this type of
project again, it would be highly desirable to have a dedicated "press
secretary" to maintain a data base of media contacts and work with the
press.
* IBM support - ever since we approached IBM with the concept of this project
last February, interest from the vendor can best be described as lukewarm
at best. It took us a long time to get any interest from the powers that be
at IBM, almost to the point where we almost decided to conduct the project
separately from IBM without their acknowledgment. At times we felt IBM
regarded CtWwM as more of an annoying curiosity as opposed to an important
marketing event. This is not to suggest our project liaison, David Barnes,
didn't faithfully work with us. In fact, he did an excellent job with what
little resources he had at his disposal. However, IBM was very reluctant to
provide the volunteers with copies of OS/2 Warp 4 and promotional materials
(as I told various project volunteers, we had to beg for supplies from
IBM).
Bottom-line, we lacked polish in certain areas of the demonstration and
support from IBM was weak.
CONCLUSION
==========
Was CtWwM a huge success? No. But it was a good first start. In spite of all
of our problems, we still succeeded at getting the word out to 15,000 people;
not bad for a loose confederation of customers with little marketing
experience.
On the Project Review Form we asked the Site Coordinators, "Is this type of
event worth doing again?" Everyone responded with a resounding "YES".
However, a lot depends on IBM. Personally, I do not believe IBM has properly
exploited the energies of its OS/2 customer base, thereby missing an important
marketing opportunity. If we had better leadership and support from IBM, we
could go a lot further in the promotion of OS/2. An army of OS/2 advocates
have been mobilized, but does the vendor know how to lead them (or even want
to)? The IBM PC User Group Relations does a nice job of tracking user groups
but does little for stimulating marketing programs such as CtWwM. If the
proper incentives and support were implemented by IBM, there is no telling how
far OS/2 customers would go in terms of promoting the product in a
cost-effective manner.
Copyright (c) MBA 1996
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the writer and
CtWwM Project Manager:
Tim Bryce Editor, OS/2 CONNECT
M. Bryce & Associates, Inc. (MBA)
777 Alderman Road Palm Harbor, FL 34683 United States
Tel: 813/786-4567 Fax: 813/786-4765 BBS: 813/786-4864
E-Mail: TimB1557@aol.com CompuServe: 76235,2364
WWW: http://warp.eecs.berkeley.edu/os2/connect/
MBA: Developers of the "PRIDE" Information Factory(R) and Batch Manager
Since 1971: "Software for the finest computer - the Mind"
IBM and OS/2 are the registered trademarks of the International Business
Machines Corporation. All other trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to
their respective companies.
This document has not been reviewed or approved by IBM and the contents herein
are solely the responsibility of the volunteers in the "Connect the World with
Merlin" project.
=====================================================================
-- To submit to c.o.os2.announce: POST (or email os2_ann_req@bix.com)
-- For comments to the moderator: email lfirrantello@bix.com.
- for posting guidelines see: http://www.bix.com/pub/os2ann/pindex.htm
