<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.itskeptic.org"  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>The IT Skeptic - Comments for &quot;Gullibility&quot;</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/gullibility</link>
 <description>Comments for &quot;Gullibility&quot;</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Lots more I am sure</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/gullibility#comment-4499</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Yes as you can imagine a lot of thought was put in before taking this move and there are many more reasons including competitive ones also. The main reason for the download is to prove ease of use and give real insight to the value.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;From a vendor viewpoint:&lt;br /&gt;
1) When people play with a product without proper training they often cock it up, no matter how &quot;intuitive&quot; the interface&lt;br /&gt;
       I agree it&#039;s not a good idea to have a down load that is prone to people &quot;cock ups&quot;&lt;br /&gt;
2) experience shows they often miss key functionality or fail to see the significance&lt;br /&gt;
       People won’t use the full functionality without training but if they have a true need I would expect them to see the significance.&lt;br /&gt;
3) some products get right into the works - wrong implementation may break something&lt;br /&gt;
     Yes very true but it is important safety is designed into these products and that they are not just implemented into production without best practice being applied.&lt;br /&gt;
4) You set yourself up for internal opposition to kill you off before you even follow the lead&lt;br /&gt;
     We are finding the opposite, but I agree this is a risk and probably more for political reasons.&lt;br /&gt;
5) free trials brands you in the same league as free steak knives. people want more what they can&#039;t easily get&lt;br /&gt;
    Ours isn’t a free trail, it is a free version. The scale of use is limited so use above this point requires a license but the quality of the product is the same. There is always a risk people will not value something they get for free but if they want to scale the value, it will help with the business case to get the funding for a license.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;From a client viewpoint:&lt;br /&gt;
1) all products work. if they don&#039;t they&#039;ll soon be out of business. and if they don&#039;t it is rare but you&#039;ll find out soon enough&lt;br /&gt;
       Yes indeed we all expect products to work but getting some to work can be much harder than others, especially if they are a combo of products wrapped into an ITIL aligned solution. The main reason for the download is to prove ease of deployment.&lt;br /&gt;
2) if a product is simple enough to NOT screw up it may not be doing much&lt;br /&gt;
       Or if it takes forever to deploy and ends up on a shelf it won’t do much either.&lt;br /&gt;
3) A good business decision is not about features: it is about fit for purpose, ROI, vendor support, availability of local skills.&lt;br /&gt;
       Indeed and ROI being the key one these days&lt;br /&gt;
4) Letting the techs play is a distraction and a waste of resource&lt;br /&gt;
      Can be, but it can also reduce costly sales cycles and deployment projects if managed.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 12:07:57 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>M.McEvoy</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 4499 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>since you ask</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/gullibility#comment-4492</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Why not? For a number of reasons:&lt;br /&gt;
From a vendor viewpoint:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ol&gt;
&lt;li&gt;When people play with a product without proper training they often cock it up, no matter how &quot;intuitive&quot; the interface
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;experience shows they often miss key functionality or fail to see the significance
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;some products get right into the works - wrong implementation may break something
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;You set yourself up for internal opposition to kill you off before you even follow the lead
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;free trials brands you in the same league as free steak knives.   people want more what they can&#039;t easily get
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ol&gt;
&lt;p&gt;From a client viewpoint:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ol&gt;
&lt;li&gt;all products work.  if they don&#039;t they&#039;ll soon be out of business.  and if they don&#039;t it is rare but you&#039;ll find out soon enough
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;if a product is simple enough to NOT screw up it may not be doing much
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;A good business decision is not about features: it is about fit for purpose, ROI, vendor support, availability of local skills.
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Letting the techs play is a distraction and a waste of resource
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ol&gt;
&lt;p&gt;...I&#039;m sure there are more...&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;All open source products are free to download too, and you don&#039;t need to pay for them later&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 20:42:26 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 4492 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>When vendors talk about....</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/gullibility#comment-4487</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;... their upcoming product as if it actually exists. I think the best way for a vendor to prove their product works is to let a customer try for themselves. PowerPoint and demos help get a message across but prove nothing. This is why at Tideway we decided to published our product Foundation as a down load from the Tideway.com website. This allows the customer to install and play for themselves so not only is the product proven but also how easy it is to get working etc.&lt;br /&gt;
It has proven very effective for us. It will be interesting to see how others will follow and raise the question if not why not?&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:41:25 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>M.McEvoy</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 4487 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>kill the joy </title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/gullibility#comment-4486</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks for reminding us of such a powerful tool.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I&#039;d be happy to kill the joy of superstition, new-age anti-science, post-modernist wetness, ignorant panic-mongering, and nosey busybodying that passes for much of the discussion in the modern age.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;What this planet needs is a little mental discipline&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 11:21:15 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 4486 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Carl Sagan</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/gullibility#comment-4484</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Carl Sagan&#039;s Ballony Detection kit is always worth remembering.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Obtain independent confirmation of any &quot;facts&quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
Encourage debate from all points of view.&lt;br /&gt;
Give little weight to arguments from authority.&lt;br /&gt;
Consider multiple hypotheses.&lt;br /&gt;
Don&#039;t get attached to a hypothesis just because it&#039;s yours.&lt;br /&gt;
Quantify wherever possible.&lt;br /&gt;
If there&#039;s a chain of argument, every link in the chain must work.&lt;br /&gt;
Apply Occam&#039;s Razor.&lt;br /&gt;
Can the hypothesis be falsified?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Of course, when you have killed off everyone&#039;s pet conspiracy theory, set the company&#039;s home page to Snopes and educated the masses you can glorify in the soubriquet - Killjoy.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 10:39:09 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>mummymonkey</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 4484 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
