"Big picture" design one release cycle ahead?

[Inge Wallin]

I was starting to write a point-by-point answer but then realized that we 
agree on nearly everything. You clarified a couple of points that I agree with 
but didn't elaborate on in my last post.

Just one thing (see below):

On Sunday, October 28, 2012 14:10:10 Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> On Sunday, October 28, 2012 12:22:39 Inge Wallin wrote:
> > So who are the intended users?
> 
> what i do want to avoid is a system that is really good for the 3 groups
> you listed (or whatever specific market segment(s)) and not great for the
> rest of humanity. there are many reasons for that, but without going into
> the "why", the general tablet using public remains a use case target for
> me, if not an initial target market.
> 
> there is a distinction to be made between "who is the software designed to
> be usable by" and "which demographics / target markets do we approach as
> early adopters."
> 
> i'd also add 4: office use
> 
> * we have good productivity and groupware apps, the two key items
> * activities fit naturally into many typical office workflows
> * we do not require 100k apps in an app store to service this market
> * there is very little direct targeting of this market by current systems
> 
> > 3. Educational organizations. Here I think of both public ones and
> > in-house
> 
> ...
> 
> > So... I bet that these groups have very different needs and priorities.
> > My personal interest lies with category 3, but I also think that this
> > group needs the most mature system. And I know that Aaron likes to say
> > that "we can't play the number-of-apps game" but I think that the lack
> > of apps for will be seen as a big problem for this group even though
> > it's not strictly a problem for their intended use in itself.
> 
> ah, but we don't need to play the number-of-apps game for these people.
> it's perfectly fine if we don't have 100,000 apps covering every city
> transit system, every sports league, etc, etc. we just a need a set of
> good-to-great quality applications with educational focus. if we had 40-50
> (or, dreaming, 100 :) such apps, we'd be able to compete quite effectively
> based on functionality provided that is relevant to this audience.

I agree that a much smaller number of apps is sufficient. But what is the 
reality or actual need is not always reflected in purchasing decisions. A 
purchase is done for many different reasons and I suspect that having few apps 
will be a liability when the decision is made, no matter if it should or not. 

> > It's interesting though to see that the suggested focus for PA4 is books
> > and reading. I have the feeling that this suggestion was made before any
> > analysis was done about the intended users.
> 
> one very common use of tablets is to read books, periodicals and web
> content.
> 
> it is also something we have quite a bit of functionality for already. in
> terms of creating strengths so that we have outstanding features (versus
> larger numbers of mediocre ones) it makes sense to spend some time
> improving this further.
> 
> i don't think it should be *the* focus for PA4, however.
> 
> > This means that we should try to get group 2 on board as soon as
> > possible. And for the long term I don't think we should dismiss
> > compatibility with Android out of hand.
> 
> no one is dismissing it, but someone needs to do the actual work (and then
> maintain it)