[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: revised user types
I like Roger's list though I'd add portables back in, and possibly merge
the Specialized/Technical user categories. Emphatic on the first,
mildly interested in second. Both arguments below. Strongly opposed to
breaking out academic users for a seperate survey.
Pete St. Onge wrote:
>
> I'd like to slightly amend Roger's really well thought out list. Before
> I do, though, perhaps the whole issue of the laptop platform should be
> re-examined.
> I'm not so sure that we want to put laptop user as a specific type
> of user, mostly because they want to do pretty much everything everyone
> else wants to, more or less. That said, perhaps the distinction should
> be made between the WAY in which these users use their machines -
I suggested breaking out all portables (not just laptops) even though
use is going to fall into one of the other categories, because there are
additional technical considerations common to all portable devices, but
not generally applicable to other categories: weight, battery life,
ports, PCMCIA support, network/internet connectivity, file replication,
etc. These are specialized, actionable items which could
drive/direct/refine Linux application development for specific
solutions.
> Roger Dingledine wrote:
> >
> > Ok, I've removed server admin because I think he can merge with
> > another one, and I've removed laptop user because I don't care
> > about him. I've also pulled out Specialty User from SOHO/Other.
I'll ask that portable be added back in. See reasons above. I think
there are enough peculiarities in this class to make separation
worthwhile, though from a survey implementation perspective, what we'd
probably consider is tacking a "portables" mini-survey onto the existing
primary category.
> > - General (Home) user
> > Gamer, Internet browser/email, wordprocessing, schoolwork,
> > personal accounting, other light tasks. Possible (but unlikely?)
> > local network.
> >
> > - SOHO -- Small/Home Office
> > Business applications (wordprocessing, spreadsheet, presentations,
> > database), fax, email, web, small local network likely, possibly
> > specialty software. Not likely to have dedicated individual
> > administrator.
> >
> > - Specialty User
> > Graphic artists, musicians, and other artistic types here, as
> > well as some scientists, ham (packet) radio users, etc.
> > Characterized by custom hardware or software and very limited and
> > nonstandard range of activities.
> >
> > - Development/Technical Workstation
> > Heavy duty technical use, programming, hacking, applications
> > development, etc. Local network likely. Very technical user.
> > Specialized software.
I guess the distinction between Specialty and Developer/Technical is
that we would assume a greater knowledge of hardware. Excepting this,
I'd argue mildly for possibly combining the two categories -- we're
talking about groups with specialized needs, customized setups, and
significant expertise in an area. Also probably interested in raw
performance of the machine, whether for graphics rendering, whatever is
done with music, compiling, simulations, data processing. What I
suggest is that we develop questions for the two groups independently,
then review to see how much overlap there is, combine if significant.
> > - Business User -- Mid/Large office
> > Like SOHO, but more so. Significant networking -- file, print,
> > application serving. Probable use (but not admin of) servers,
> > firewalls, etc. Personal business applications (wp/spreadsheet/
> > presentation/database). Enterprise applications. Ease of use,
> > GUI are issues.
> >
> > - Business User Systems Admin -- Mid/Large office
> > Use categories as above, but this is aimed at the folks who
> > administer the stuff. More emphasis on capability:cost ratio,
> > ease of admin.
Emphasize that BUSA is likely much more strongly involved in purchase
decisions than the users themselves.
<snip>
> What I'd like to add here - Educational users - would involve folks at
> the college / university level.
No.
Place these in equivalent personal/SOHO/specialty/technical/business
user categories. Again, I'm working on the basis of how purchase
decisions are made, not specific area of use. Why distinguish between a
computer programmer and a C.S. major, a lawyer and a pre-law student, an
author and an English major, a professor and a private-sector
researcher? (If you can convince me, I'll yield).
While budget could be significant, especially for students, I'd prefer
to see this handled as part of the demographics -- say a "profession"
category, which would include one or more student categories
(elementary, secondary (high school), undergraduate college (AA/BA),
graduate college, academic). This provides the same information with
far less overhead. I suspect the substantive questions would be highly
repetative between academic and non-academic users.
We might apply a similar solution to the technical/specialized user
division above.
<snip>
> Pete
<snip>
> Pete St. Onge - McGill U. Limnology - Fun with Ropes & Buckets
> pete_st_onge@iname.com http://wwp.mirabilis.com/4322052
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> SEUL Expert Group - Linux for All! http://www.seul.org
> Programming For Science Page http://www.trentu.ca/~erpds
--
Karsten M. Self (kmself@ix.netcom.com)
What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?
Welchen Teil von "gestalt" verstehen Sie nicht?
web: http://www.netcom.com/~kmself
SAS/Linux: http://www.netcom.com/~kmself/SAS/SAS4Linux.html
10:21am up 30 days, 7:50, 5 users, load average: 1.22, 1.09, 0.96