python a bust?

[Ben Finney]

Re: python a bust?

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 06:28:24 -0600, A.M. Kuchling wrote:[color=blue]
> There's a finite number of dollars being spent on general Python books[/color]

Your calculations imply that increasing the number of books available on
a topic does not increase the amount of money spent on books on that
topic.

What evidence do you have for this?

How do you account for contrary evidence, such as the evident thought
processes of many (not least the OP of this thread) that "more books on
X => more interest in X => I should buy books on X"?

--
\ "Why was I with her? She reminds me of you. In fact, she |
`\ reminds me more of you than you do!" -- Groucho Marx |
_o__) |
Ben Finney <http://bignose.squidly .org/>

[John J. Lee]

Re: python a bust?

pythonguy@Hotpo p.com (Anand Pillai) writes:
[...][color=blue]
> There might have been thousands of books published in C/C++
> language and they have all helped to popularize it in one
> or the other way. Contrast, in the python world we have one
> Alex Martelli, one Wesley Chun, one David Mertz, really
> countable by hand.[/color]

And thank heavens for that. Most books on C++ (and the same goes for
all kinds of other technical subjects) actually do nothing other to
make it harder to find the decent books. Ironically, the good books
often seem to get published first, followed afterwards by a glut of
awful ones jumping on the bandwagon. So much for competition...

[color=blue]
> There is a limit to how much a single person can evangelize
> a language. Questions similar to what the O.P posted arise
> from the listeners.
>
> I would prefer to see more books on Python though they all might
> be useless from a pure techie point of view. Let us have
> a book on Software Projects in python for example. It might not
> have the technical superiority of a Martelli book, but more
> attempts like that will save the language and help the
> eyeball factor, which is so important in practical marketing.[/color]
[...]

.... but I can see where you're coming from.


John

[smarter_than_you]

Re: python a bust?

"Brandon J. Van Every" <try_vanevery_a t_mycompanyname @yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<bp2bc0$1j 68et$1@ID-207230.news.uni-berlin.de>...
[color=blue]
> Chinese philosophies, at least as received by Westerners looking for
> alternatives to their high stress culture, often have the flaw of being too
> Yin. The Tao is balance, not passivity.[/color]

Sun Tzu ("The Art of War") was Chinese.

[Michele Simionato]

Re: python a bust?

"Brandon J. Van Every" <try_vanevery_a t_mycompanyname @yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<bp2bc0$1j 68et$1@ID-207230.news.uni-berlin.de>...[color=blue]
>
> True... but in most cases we're making an Existential choice about our
> willingness to control. We are not in fact helpless. Such is the case with
> Python. If you want to actually do something about marketing Python "like
> the big boys do," I encourage you to join the marketing-python forum.
> http://pythonology.org/mailman/listi...rketing-python[/color]

Unfortunately, I am not a kinda of marketing person ...

Anyway, I must congratulate you for the Python logo: it is ways better
than any other Python logo I have seen (so far) and it looks really
professional. The font is so and so, but the stylized snake is perfect,
and very original.
[color=blue][color=green]
> > We can only wait and see (as in that old chinese said ...)[/color]
>
> Chinese philosophies, at least as received by Westerners looking for
> alternatives to their high stress culture, often have the flaw of being too
> Yin. The Tao is balance, not passivity.[/color]

Yes, but the idea I had in mind was something like "relax, we are not
in war against Java or C# or anything else, let us wait for a bit before
complaining about Python dead". OTOH, if people think that Python is an
endangered species and want to start a promotional campaign to save it,
I am certainly not opposed. Anyway, one must be realistic and do not
expect that Python will replace Java any soon, just because the way
the world is. So, I do promote Python, but the pacific way ;)

Michele

P.S. in Italian "pacific" means "peaceful" but also, referred to a person,
somebody with a slow pace, and/or somebody who doesn't worry too much
(like me ;) not sure if the English word has the same connotation, but
anyway I meant that there is no hurry, as I don't see any sign of
Python disappearing soon, I see just the opposite actually ;)

[Maxim Khesin]

Re: python a bust?

Or perhaps Pythonistas are smarter than other people :) and buy their
books online.

[Christopher Mahan]

Re: python a bust?

"Thomas Guettler" <guettli@thom as-guettler.de> wrote in message[color=blue]
> Me, too. I like python very much. But most people
> who use computers since 1996 use either java, perl, C or bash.
>
> They know their language and don't want to change.
>
> One reason could be: python is too simple. If you write
> code that nobody understands (perl) you are a guru.[/color]
[color=blue]
> thomas[/color]

I think also that when people get paid per hour, the longer the
project, the more they make.

Subconsiously I think, people don't necessarily want computer
languages that are written fast.

Now, if you're a consultant and bill "for the job" then in fact it is
in your best interest to use a language that can be written quickly to
do a particular set of tasks.

Chris Mahan

[Emile van Sebille]

Re: python a bust?

Christopher Mahan:[color=blue]
>
> Now, if you're a consultant and bill "for the job" then in fact it[/color]
is[color=blue]
> in your best interest to use a language that can be written quickly[/color]
to[color=blue]
> do a particular set of tasks.
>[/color]

Fifteen years ago I had a job where I lifted county court seals and
clerk signatures from originals and prepared gifs from them. It
involved a fair amount of effort to clean things up and eventually I
got it down to about 2 hours per image. When I switched from billing
by the hour to simply 'billing by the job' and they saw what they were
paying per image, they brought the job in house.

Sometimes-it-works-and-sometimes-it-don't-ly y'rs,

--

Emile van Sebille
emile@fenx.com

[Steve Lamb]

Re: python a bust?

On 2003-11-14, Ben Finney <bignose-hates-spam@and-benfinney-does-too.id.au>
wrote:[color=blue]
> What evidence do you have for this?[/color]

What evidence do you have to the contrary?
[color=blue]
> How do you account for contrary evidence, such as the evident thought
> processes of many (not least the OP of this thread) that "more books on X =>
> more interest in X => I should buy books on X"?[/color]

Let me counter then. I recently got a new job which, if I were to perform
to the expectations of the people who hired me, required me to learn two new
technologies I have been looking at for a while but have not yet touched. PHP
and MySQL. I spent 2 hours in the local Borders and B&N looking at PHP,
MySQL, PHP+MySQL books. After looking at about a little over a dozen books
total guess how many I bought?

2. _Core PHP Programming_ and _Core MySQL_. From what I could tell in
just a quick riffle through the pages those offered the best format for me to
learn from as well as use as a reference book.

I also will not be buying any more books on PHP or MySQL for a while.
Why? Because those, along with Sill's QMail book, topped $120 US Dollars.
Those books certainly did compete for my dollars and ~12 of them lost out.

For the record Barnes & Noble had about 6 Python book on their shelves and
Borders about a dozen. I didn't pick up any of them even though the only
Python book in my posession right now is Beazley's _Python Essential
Reference_ which I bought several years ago. Why? Because I know v2.3 is
just coming out and didn't want to get a book on v2.2 when the v1.5.2 book has
held me in good stead thusfar.

Now that we've presented anecdotal evidence both both sides care to share
why you think that your way of thinking is the predominant one; IE more books
on the shelf means you're going to buy more books on that topic?

--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------

[Brandon J. Van Every]

Re: python a bust?

Maxim Khesin wrote:[color=blue]
> Or perhaps Pythonistas are smarter than other people :) and buy their
> books online.[/color]

That wouldn't make me smarter. I live 5 blocks away from Barnes & Noble
downtown. Lotsa other people are similarly well situatated according to
where they work.

--
Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA

Brandon's Law (after Godwin's Law):
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of
a person being called a troll approaches one RAPIDLY."

[Brandon J. Van Every]

Re: python a bust?

A.M. Kuchling wrote:[color=blue]
>
> There's a finite number of dollars being spent on general Python
> books; no point in having 15 titles chasing after the same market.
> The recent run of topic-specific books is very heartening, however.[/color]

Of course, one could work on *growing* the Python market, so that there's a
perceived need for more books. There are clearly more basic Java books
available than basic Python books, and I doubt their authors are starving.
Also, in high tech one can compete by having "the most current" book for
whatever langauge / API. Sure this book is regarded as a good book... if it
was printed 3 years ago and someone else printed something 1 year ago, I'm
going to go with the latter.

--
Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA

Brandon's Law (after Godwin's Law):
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of
a person being called a troll approaches one RAPIDLY."

[Ben Finney]

Re: python a bust?

On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 00:34:47 -0000, Steve Lamb wrote:[color=blue]
> On 2003-11-14, Ben Finney wrote:[color=green]
> > On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 06:28:24 -0600, A.M. Kuchling wrote:[color=darkred]
> > > There's a finite number of dollars being spent on general Python
> > > books[/color]
> > What evidence do you have for this?[/color]
>
> What evidence do you have to the contrary?[/color]

The one who presents the theorem is the one on whom the burden of proof
falls. Messrs Kuchling presented something as fact, without supporting
evidence nor accounting of contrary evidence.
[color=blue]
> why you think that your way of thinking is the predominant one; IE
> more books on the shelf means you're going to buy more books on that
> topic?[/color]

Thanks, I don't need any straw men. I never said this way of thinking
was mine, nor that it was predominant.

--
\ "To me, boxing is like a ballet, except there's no music, no |
`\ choreography, and the dancers hit each other." -- Jack Handey |
_o__) |
Ben Finney <http://bignose.squidly .org/>

[Brandon J. Van Every]

Re: python a bust?

Steve Lamb wrote:[color=blue]
>
> Now that we've presented anecdotal evidence both both sides care
> to share why you think that your way of thinking is the predominant
> one; IE more books on the shelf means you're going to buy more books
> on that topic?[/color]

Steve, an important question is what programmer demographic you represent,
vs. how many demographics can be sold to. I, for instance, will never buy a
big-picture big-print tech manual, I don't care what subject it's on. In
fact, as years have progressed I'm unlikely to buy any books at all. When I
did so in the past, my tastes tended towards the exceedingly dense, dry, and
academic. I'm fully aware, however, that "Learn C++ in 21 days" and "C++
for Dummies" do sell copies to somebody. Somebody with different needs and
a different brain than my own.

As for total volume of books, I seriously doubt that you can sell more
Python books simply by having more of such books available. You have to
look at the strategic realities: according to one survey I saw recently,
Java is being used by 53% of people on projects, C# is 25%, Python is 8%.
All surveys I've ever seen about language use have roughly the same orders
of magnitude, and most are much less generous to Python than 8%.
Truthfully, people will not buy more Python books until Python is used more
prevailantly.

That's where real marketing efforts "like the big boys" come in. The Python
community can either grow the market for the language, or it can atrophize
and be regarded as a has-been 5 years from now.

--
Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA

Brandon's Law (after Godwin's Law):
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of
a person being called a troll approaches one RAPIDLY."

[Brandon J. Van Every]

Re: python a bust?

John J. Lee wrote:[color=blue]
> pythonguy@Hotpo p.com (Anand Pillai) writes:
> [...][color=green]
>> There might have been thousands of books published in C/C++
>> language and they have all helped to popularize it in one
>> or the other way. Contrast, in the python world we have one
>> Alex Martelli, one Wesley Chun, one David Mertz, really
>> countable by hand.[/color]
>
> And thank heavens for that. Most books on C++ (and the same goes for
> all kinds of other technical subjects) actually do nothing other to
> make it harder to find the decent books. Ironically, the good books
> often seem to get published first, followed afterwards by a glut of
> awful ones jumping on the bandwagon. So much for competition...[/color]

But the questions are:
1) do the "crappy" books sell briskly to someone?
2) is a plethora of books a healthy sign for a language?

--
Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA

Brandon's Law (after Godwin's Law):
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of
a person being called a troll approaches one RAPIDLY."

[Brandon J. Van Every]

Re: python a bust?

Michele Simionato wrote:[color=blue]
> "Brandon J. Van Every" <try_vanevery_a t_mycompanyname @yahoo.com>
> wrote in message
> news:<bp2bc0$1j 68et$1@ID-207230.news.uni-berlin.de>...[color=green]
>>
>> True... but in most cases we're making an Existential choice about
>> our
>> willingness to control. We are not in fact helpless. Such is the
>> case with Python.
>>
>> If you want to actually do something about marketing Python "like
>> the big boys do," I encourage you to join the marketing-python forum.
>> http://pythonology.org/mailman/listi...rketing-python[/color]
>
> Unfortunately, I am not a kinda of marketing person ...[/color]

Well, this is less a matter of having some official qualification (I
certainly don't) than having a head for it, and for getting things done. I
think in my case, the pressure of running my own business and being
responsible for all of my own missteps has made me better able to see when
some avenues of discussion are a complete waste of time.
[color=blue]
> Anyway, I must congratulate you for the Python logo:[/color]

I'll take that as collective congratulation for the py-design-forum, and a
specific accolade for Tim Parkin, the designer. I could not possibly take
the congratulation specifically! My main role has been to light a match
under other people's toes and force people to make decisions instead of
hemming and hawing endlessly. I tried my hand at "graphic designer wannabe"
and offered a couple of shaky concepts of my own. By doing so, I forced
others with more skill to put up or shut up. Once real graphic designers
started putting up, we got some results. Now, if only we can get PSF to see
the wisdom of progress... we haven't secured their buy-in for this logo yet.
[color=blue]
> it is ways better
> than any other Python logo I have seen (so far) and it looks really
> professional. The font is so and so, but the stylized snake is
> perfect, and very original.[/color]

I think we have consensus that the font needs improvement, even from the
designer. He didn't want to spend lotsa time angsting about the font if we
didn't even have PSF's buy-in about the logo itself yet. A wise move on his
part: PSF has a lot of trouble cutting the chase and shipping things in the
art dept. The web redesign process, for instance, has been interminable.
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>> We can only wait and see (as in that old chinese said ...)[/color]
>>
>> Chinese philosophies, at least as received by Westerners looking for
>> alternatives to their high stress culture, often have the flaw of
>> being too Yin. The Tao is balance, not passivity.[/color]
>
> Yes, but the idea I had in mind was something like "relax, we are not
> in war against Java or C# or anything else, let us wait for a bit
> before complaining about Python dead".[/color]

I have seen the DEC Alpha CPU torn out from under me. As far as I'm
concerned, any hardware / language / API / OS has enemies, and those that do
not market themselves properly are endangered. Considering that Python was
available before Java, it is not the success story that it could or should
be. The ugly truth of high is it's 1/3 technology and 2/3 marketing. If
you believe otherwise, then you haven't had Intel or Microsoft hand you your
ass yet.

--
Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA

Brandon's Law (after Godwin's Law):
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of
a person being called a troll approaches one RAPIDLY."

[Brandon J. Van Every]

Re: python a bust?

Christopher Mahan wrote:[color=blue]
>
> I think also that when people get paid per hour, the longer the
> project, the more they make.
>
> Subconsiously I think, people don't necessarily want computer
> languages that are written fast.
>
> Now, if you're a consultant and bill "for the job" then in fact it is
> in your best interest to use a language that can be written quickly to
> do a particular set of tasks.[/color]

Or a business owner. I want more productivity because when I write my
games, it's *my* money I'm losing. Also as a consultant I think better
tools is a way to manage project risk. You've got so many other ways for a
client to waste your time, to put you behind schedule, you'd like to have
your tools not be an additional way for the project to blow up in your face.

--
Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA

Brandon's Law (after Godwin's Law):
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of
a person being called a troll approaches one RAPIDLY."