- Joined
- Jun 22, 2001
- Posts
- 4,111
- Likes
- 1,336
First, Jimmy, I want to appologies if I came off a bit hot under the collar this morning. I may have hidden it fairly well, but it did torque me a little. But I did ask for it, so, seriously, thanks for speaking your mind about MOT shenanigans. Believe me, it pisses me off too. Probably more than you, as I pay a real price for MOT parasitic behaviour.
Quote:
I think I disagree with the essense of what you're saying. You say no "real" information is happening here; I guarranty you that we are "really" working on the various products mentioned; that we would "really" listen to comments and react if we saw something we felt important; and that the views and belief I express are "really" what I think. Now, just because there is no concrete object you could buy today doesn't make those conversations any less "real"---"real" things can be both abstract and concrete; the future is real even though it doesn't exist now.
Now, do I believe that what I'm doing here is PR, oh yeah, sure it is. But am I manipulating the readers here by saying anything that pops into my head that might help us in the long run. No way. Rather, I feel I'm trying to communicate as accurately as I can the things that we're doing. There's a big difference between saying you make "the best" amp just to get people to buy it, and saying you make "the best" amp because you believe it. The difference is the genuineness of motive, but the words don't neccesarily come out any different. (Not that I'd ever regularly claim we made "the best" of anything. I don't believe there is a "best", and I really work hard to figure out how to write marketing copy that doesn't use words like "world's best"; I have, but I'm also very aware of it and work very hard to focus on the product values and benefits without comparitive wording.
I'll agree that I hadn't started any threads that contain too much opportunity for real input from members so far---though certainly I will be happy to take comments and make changs to the HA2 for example---but, geez, the forum is only a day old. I have corrected that because of your prompting, however, and started the "pie-in-the-sky" thread, and I've also started a wish list thread for the Desktop product line when it gets flipped in a few years. So, I think i may have address you comment about "real" opportunities to contribute, at least as initial examples.
Quote:
Certainly not many who can make serious comments about circuit topologies. But I think a large percentage, virtually everybody, has something valid to say about what they personally like and dislike. We obviously can't satisfy everybody, but we really wouldn't be able to run a long term product developement strategy without have accumulated numerous and representatively divergent desires from the target demographic.
One little analogy I like to make is this: let's say you have no idea how to play the cello, and you're listening to a cello player. You like the music, but feel like it's a little slow and murky sounding. Is that a valid critisism? Well yes and no. Yes, it's valid because the intention of the music and musician is to provide a rich experience for the listener, therefor it's success is measured by the degree to which the listener had a fulfilling experience. So the listener is judge and jury. But, no, it's not a valid criticism because the listener has no idea what, if any, technical difficulties the cellist has and how to correct them, nor does the listener likely have any idea what the composers intent was. So criticisms in areas of technical competence should be reserved for those qualitified to do so.
The moral is: yes, virtually everybody here has something worthwhile to give---their opinion. But, no, we're not going to build boxes by committee; the feature with the most "votes" doesn't neccesarily end up in the box.
Quote:
Well, yeah, we do that. SiBurning had the first iteration of the Micro Portable ... geez ... maybe almost a year ago now, and The Sloth had the latest rev of modules before they went into production. But still, why limit it to that?
Quote:
I agree with this whole-heartedly. At the moment we are not going to be using this forum area for direct customer support and technical support issues, but we fully intend to do so in the not-to-distant future. It is more likely, however, that these will be HeadRoom forums that we host at our website and not a Head-Fi forum. But in terms of broader dialog about how we might better serve people, this is a fine place for that. And I'd have to press the issue again by saying that dialog is about the future of HeadRoom because it's looking at how to change over time, and pretty much exactly what I've been trying to do here so far.
Maybe I've been smoking too many bananas, but what about the bit about this type (well, not this thread, but the others talking about our upcomming efforts) of dialog with MOTs being something fun to do? I've got to believe that people would like to hear these type of issues discussed even if we didn't use it as a feedback mechanism. Isn't talking about future gear fun? I kind of tweeks me to think that folks out there are reading this as purely "seeding the market, plain & simple." I'm not denying that that is a component of what I'm doing, but it's also not as simple as that. I think it's fun talking about what we're doing, and I just assumed people would think it's fun, too. Am I just wrong about this? Tell me guys, have you had a bit of fun reading the threads in our new forum area? Because, believe me, if it's not, I've got no interest in opening a forum here.
I have other ways to get info and feedback. I have plenty of folks who would listen to gear before it's introduced and be ready to post as soon as the product goes live. I thought, this type of MOT/Member interaction is just another avenue to explore for folks to find fun things to do in the hobby. I'd like to hear thoughts from all of you on that one.
Quote:
Well...I tend to think that would be a little sloppy and undisciplined of me to do that more than on just the rare occasion.
Quote:
Just so. And I'll reiterate that that's exactly what I asked for. So thanks, Jimmy, for your sincere comments.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by jpelg /img/forum/go_quote.gif What "real" information is being provided here? Let's not kid ourselves. These MOT-sponsored/controlled sub-fora are an advertising mechanism primarily, and potentially a support mechanism secondly (and far underused in this capacity, imo). The thing is that by using a well known site like Head-Fi, you can advertise without making it look like advertising. You're not just "providing information" (air-quotes intentional). This is seeding the market, plain & simple. |
I think I disagree with the essense of what you're saying. You say no "real" information is happening here; I guarranty you that we are "really" working on the various products mentioned; that we would "really" listen to comments and react if we saw something we felt important; and that the views and belief I express are "really" what I think. Now, just because there is no concrete object you could buy today doesn't make those conversations any less "real"---"real" things can be both abstract and concrete; the future is real even though it doesn't exist now.
Now, do I believe that what I'm doing here is PR, oh yeah, sure it is. But am I manipulating the readers here by saying anything that pops into my head that might help us in the long run. No way. Rather, I feel I'm trying to communicate as accurately as I can the things that we're doing. There's a big difference between saying you make "the best" amp just to get people to buy it, and saying you make "the best" amp because you believe it. The difference is the genuineness of motive, but the words don't neccesarily come out any different. (Not that I'd ever regularly claim we made "the best" of anything. I don't believe there is a "best", and I really work hard to figure out how to write marketing copy that doesn't use words like "world's best"; I have, but I'm also very aware of it and work very hard to focus on the product values and benefits without comparitive wording.
I'll agree that I hadn't started any threads that contain too much opportunity for real input from members so far---though certainly I will be happy to take comments and make changs to the HA2 for example---but, geez, the forum is only a day old. I have corrected that because of your prompting, however, and started the "pie-in-the-sky" thread, and I've also started a wish list thread for the Desktop product line when it gets flipped in a few years. So, I think i may have address you comment about "real" opportunities to contribute, at least as initial examples.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by jpelg what percentage of Head-Fi can actually give good, constructive input on product development outside of whatever is the current FOTM buzzword? A pretty small percentage, I'd guess. |
Certainly not many who can make serious comments about circuit topologies. But I think a large percentage, virtually everybody, has something valid to say about what they personally like and dislike. We obviously can't satisfy everybody, but we really wouldn't be able to run a long term product developement strategy without have accumulated numerous and representatively divergent desires from the target demographic.
One little analogy I like to make is this: let's say you have no idea how to play the cello, and you're listening to a cello player. You like the music, but feel like it's a little slow and murky sounding. Is that a valid critisism? Well yes and no. Yes, it's valid because the intention of the music and musician is to provide a rich experience for the listener, therefor it's success is measured by the degree to which the listener had a fulfilling experience. So the listener is judge and jury. But, no, it's not a valid criticism because the listener has no idea what, if any, technical difficulties the cellist has and how to correct them, nor does the listener likely have any idea what the composers intent was. So criticisms in areas of technical competence should be reserved for those qualitified to do so.
The moral is: yes, virtually everybody here has something worthwhile to give---their opinion. But, no, we're not going to build boxes by committee; the feature with the most "votes" doesn't neccesarily end up in the box.
Quote:
| If I wanted qualified input on something specific, and I thought that Head-Fi was a potential source, I'd probably ask Jude if I could approach some specific members that I prequalify from my assessment of their posts. If Jude agrees, and the selected members agree to participate, they also agree to non-disclosure during development. Products are only talked about publicly when they are locked in and rolling. Participating members are also indicated somewhere after the product rolls so that others know who was involved (and probably posting about it after). |
Well, yeah, we do that. SiBurning had the first iteration of the Micro Portable ... geez ... maybe almost a year ago now, and The Sloth had the latest rev of modules before they went into production. But still, why limit it to that?
Quote:
| The second purpose for which these sub-forums can serve is in a support capacity. |
I agree with this whole-heartedly. At the moment we are not going to be using this forum area for direct customer support and technical support issues, but we fully intend to do so in the not-to-distant future. It is more likely, however, that these will be HeadRoom forums that we host at our website and not a Head-Fi forum. But in terms of broader dialog about how we might better serve people, this is a fine place for that. And I'd have to press the issue again by saying that dialog is about the future of HeadRoom because it's looking at how to change over time, and pretty much exactly what I've been trying to do here so far.
Maybe I've been smoking too many bananas, but what about the bit about this type (well, not this thread, but the others talking about our upcomming efforts) of dialog with MOTs being something fun to do? I've got to believe that people would like to hear these type of issues discussed even if we didn't use it as a feedback mechanism. Isn't talking about future gear fun? I kind of tweeks me to think that folks out there are reading this as purely "seeding the market, plain & simple." I'm not denying that that is a component of what I'm doing, but it's also not as simple as that. I think it's fun talking about what we're doing, and I just assumed people would think it's fun, too. Am I just wrong about this? Tell me guys, have you had a bit of fun reading the threads in our new forum area? Because, believe me, if it's not, I've got no interest in opening a forum here.
I have other ways to get info and feedback. I have plenty of folks who would listen to gear before it's introduced and be ready to post as soon as the product goes live. I thought, this type of MOT/Member interaction is just another avenue to explore for folks to find fun things to do in the hobby. I'd like to hear thoughts from all of you on that one.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by recstar24 As consumers we just need to keep the perspective that any protos or plans you talk about may not go into production, and we shouldn't get mad or upset if that happens. |
Well...I tend to think that would be a little sloppy and undisciplined of me to do that more than on just the rare occasion.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by jpelg Fair enough. But since a forum is a two-way street, then members can also post their opinions also, as I did wrt the latest threads. |
Just so. And I'll reiterate that that's exactly what I asked for. So thanks, Jimmy, for your sincere comments.
