Runtime Revolution Ships Revolution Media

[Richard Gaskin]

Dan wrote:
> I agree with your basic point. It seems clear to me that RR has a branding
> issue. I think they think they have solved it now. But there's a lot of
> consternation about changing the name of the language to be the same as the
> product and I keep waffling on that one.
> 
> IT will be nice when we can go two full years without a product name change
> for sure!

Judy's point is important, as concerns about RunRev not having a plan 
and sticking with it seem far more pervasive and serious than the small 
perceived benefit of attempting to get some micro-branding value from an 
unnecessary change.

Consider this: the only real risk with branding is the case in which 
Transcript is being discussed in a context in which Revolution is never 
mentioned.   Anyone ever actually see that?

Rather than jump on the gotta-be-like-RealBASIC bandwagon,  I'd sooner 
hitch my horse to the many more, larger, and more successful companies 
whose market research evidently found no value to such a move (Lingo, 
ActionScript, HyperTalk, AppleScript, OpenScript, etc. etc.).  For every 
language named for its IDE there are at least four that aren't.

Given the nature of the question, it isn't possible to have truly firm 
data one way or another (that sort of qualitative research is more an 
art than a science, prone to researcher subjectivity and with a 
singularity like a product it's not possible to have experimental 
controls).  So at best it's a guess, and one which merely covers for the 
narrow possibility of a scenario in which Transcript would be discussed 
without mentioning Revolution.

But what is known is the cost to the company and third parties to update 
all references to Transcript, the risk to the Open Directory and 
Wikipedia entries (both have Transcript listings and both have policies 
against entries for proprietary products), and the continued confusion 
to the market since so many references exist in so many venues that it 
won't be possible to update them all.

Why introduce confusion and exacerbate a perception of flightiness only 
to assist a branding effort which accounts for a scenario that never 
happened?

It may be the case that Adobe, Macromedia, Netscape, Apple, Asymetrix, 
and other companies with strong market research departments are not 
entirely wrong on this.

I hope RunRev will reconsider in light of more important priorities 
before committing to this recommendation from a contractor.

A reputation for being flighty seems a far more serious branding issue 
than merely following an established trend among many major successful 
companies.

--
  Richard Gaskin
  Managing Editor, revJournal
  _______________________________________________________
  Rev tips, tutorials and more: http://www.revJournal.com