One of the most compelling arguments for those managers is the financial
one... ease of support for multiple languages. If you look at the cost of
the multiple binary releases of a product like Win95 and compare it to the
single EXE model, the issue is clear... and Unicode is the way to achieve
that sort of thing. They will not understand the deep down technical reasons
for this, but they can understand cheaper to implement.
They do not think purely in terms of "% of people using". But the OTHER
argument is for a standard that allows interoperability with other
standards. Which Unicode also provides.... if you can "support most
nativevly" and "support the rest through conversion" then why would they
care which is which unless it costs more?
MichKa
Michael Kaplan
Trigeminal Software, Inc.
http://www.trigeminal.com/
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tex Texin" <texin@progress.com>
To: "Unicode List" <unicode@unicode.org>
Cc: "Unicode List" <unicode@unicode.org>
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 9:01 AM
Subject: Re: Unicode market acceptance
> Guys,
> I know the list of who's who using Unicode. Me too is not a
> compelling business argument. None of these put Unicode as
> the sole character set to use, so its simply another way to go.
> (OK, I know Java and XML please don't push back on these. Fundamentally,
> although they use Unicode I can also support other code pages using
> these technologies.)
>
> Poison is a possibility and I am looking into hiring some postal
> employees as consultants (hired guns!).
>
> Silliness aside, arguments that work for technical managers are
> not the same as work for execs. The success of Unicode is obvious
> to us (techies) is not clear to them. Hence the need for an
> argument such as n% of web pages will be unicode based, or
> n% of XML documents will be unicode based by the year xxx...
> We have estimates for (human) language usages on the web, its too
> bad there isn't an estimate for when Unicode will dominate.
>
> Anyway, if no one is aware of any data such as I am looking for
> we can let this thread die. thanks for the comments to-date though.
> tex
>
>
> Marco Cimarosti wrote:
> >
> > Pierpaolo BERNARDI wrote:
> > > "It's what Microsoft uses" should work, methinks.
> >
> > Tex Texin wrote:
> > > Not really. For one, many companies use platforms other than Windows.
> >
> > Then add "And it's also used in *Java*, *HTML*, *SQL Server*, and
*Oracle*.
> > Oh, by the way, and *IBM* has a *free* library to support it".
> >
> > The fantasy of any manager should be struck by at least one of the
buzzwords
> > in underscores. If not, they have probably been impressed simply by the
> > *number* of acronyms. Otherwise your managers are a desperate case,
consider
> > poison in their coffee.
> >
> > _ Marco
>
> --
> According to Murphy, nothing goes according to Hoyle.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Tex Texin Director, International Business
> mailto:Texin@Progress.com +1-781-280-4271 Fax:+1-781-280-4655
> Progress Software Corp. 14 Oak Park, Bedford, MA 01730
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sign up now for PROGRESS Worldwide Exchange June 3-7, 2001, Washington
> DC.
> http://www.progress.com/exchange
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:20 EDT