[OpenID] Purpose of OpenID Foundation and the Elections

[Eran Hammer-Lahav]

Yes. I consider brand to be a subset of product, but there is no need to get philosophical. We are in agreement on how an "OpenID Brand" or "OpenID Product" should be executed terms of creating a well recognized "promise". We are talking about the same thing. I'm happy to adjust my terms if it makes it easier to understand.

EHL

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pat Cappelaere [mailto:pat at cappelaere.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 8:57 AM
> To: Eran Hammer-Lahav
> Cc: Jack Cleaver; general at openid.net >> OpenID General
> Subject: Re: [OpenID] Purpose of OpenID Foundation and the Elections
>
> Eran,
>
> We may want more MBA's in the discussion but a product is not a
> Brand.  OpenID can be branded without any implementation products
> behind it the same way VISA does.  So Johannes' promise is really what
> the concept of the brand is.  This is what the users need to recognize
> immediately.
>
> You are right that we can promote OpenID as a technology or as a
> brand.  Problem is that promoting a generic technology does not work
> (which is what we have found out the hard way). We can successfully
> promote either a product from a particular company or a brand.
>
> Since we are not going to endorse a particular product, we are left to
> promote the brand.
>
> The debate at this point is regarding the User Interface.  Is this a
> product related issue to be managed by the respective companies? or is
> it a brand issue that we need to control as a foundation?
>
> For example, VISA is very defensive about its logo and appearance.
> This is how they get recognized by their users and how they guarantee
> the promise.  Same with McDonald by the the way,  Franchisees are
> independent producers but the promise to get some cheap & consistent
> fast food is enforced by the Brand.
>
> It seems that this is what you are trying to push for.
>
> Pat.
>
> On Dec 12, 2008, at 11:30 AM, Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:
>
> > My use of the word product comes from the way OpenID is handled. A
> > product needs a market and it needs to be marketed to that audience.
> > Even if it is modeled after VISA and the likes, where VISA does not
> > offer any products directly, most people think about their cards in
> > terms of the major brand, not the issuing bank. So VISA is still a
> > product that has a more unique distribution mechanism.
> >
> > The main difference between OpenID as a protocol (technology) and
> > OpenID as a brand (product) is going to be how we as a community and
> > foundation go about promoting it. A protocol will benefit from more
> > standardization and discussions with engineers, while a brand will
> > need a marketing campaign targeting both the end users and the
> > distributors. In both cases we need to research what the market
> > needs but the audience we will contact to determine this will be
> > different significantly based on the direction we take.
> >
> > What makes OpenID a much more difficult sale than credit cards is
> > the user interface. With a card, you pull a standard size plastic
> > out of your wallet and show it. Most people don't really pay
> > attention to the "We accept" signs anymore. If the card is accepted
> > or not, a person on the other side lets you know. But with OpenID,
> > there isn't (yet) such an experience where you "show you OpenID" and
> > the site tells you if it is accepted. In addition, most sites will
> > not even understand what it is you are showing them, but people in a
> > store that does not accept AMEX still know what it is and why you
> > pulled it out of your wallet (and they are prepared to say, "no, but
> > we accept MC").
> >
> > In addition, if every store had a different way of accepting credit
> > cards (each using a different complex workflow or machines), people
> > will get tired of it and use cash (which has a very consistent user
> > interface). For OpenID to be a successful brand, the user experience
> > must be simple and consistent, which is the most urgent issue facing
> > adoption. I am not saying anything new here.
> >
> > So far the foundation has placed the burden of solving the usability
> > issue on the community and individual companies. It has not been a
> > huge success. Even the research is pretty insignificant (incomplete
> > sample from a handful of providers and individuals). If we want to
> > showcase the OpenID brand (and not hide it like HTTP, SMTP, etc.),
> > we need to invest resources (namely money) in significant research
> > and development. If elected to the board, this will be my first
> > priority to push forward. If rejected by the board or the attempt is
> > unsuccessful, I will push for focusing all our energy on the
> > technology and leave the brand alone.
> >
> > EHL
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: general-bounces at openid.net [mailto:general-
> >> bounces at openid.net] On
> >> Behalf Of Jack Cleaver
> >> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 7:30 AM
> >> To: general at openid.net >> OpenID General
> >> Subject: Re: [OpenID] Purpose of OpenID Foundation and the Elections
> >>
> >> Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:
> >>> I'm not sure I understand you question. Care to elaborate?
> >>
> >> My question was not as facetious as I made it appear.
> >>
> >> A number of voters/candidates (including you) have referred to
> OpenID
> >> as
> >> a "product", or have implicitly concurred in such a reference. I
> find
> >> such references bewildering. I think these references are usually
> >> metaphorical, but this isn't always obvious from the context.
> >>
> >> I suspect that what is really meant may be that in addition to a
> >> brand
> >> and a set of specifications, OpenID can be seen as [the set of all
> >> OpenID providers and all OpenID Relying Parties]. Viewed as such, it
> >> can
> >> then be treated as the subject of a marketing effort, for example,
> as
> >> if
> >> it were a product. Potential users and deployers can be treated as
> if
> >> they were potential customers, and salesman-like questions can be
> >> asked
> >> about the "product", such as what are the TCO and the ROI.
> >>
> >> Is this roughly the sense in which you were using the term
> "product"?
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jack.
> >>>
> >>> EHL
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: general-bounces at openid.net [mailto:general-
> >>>> bounces at openid.net]
> >> On
> >>>> Behalf Of Jack Cleaver
> >>>> Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 11:29 PM
> >>>> To: OpenID General
> >>>> Subject: Re: [OpenID] Purpose of OpenID Foundation and the
> >>>> Elections
> >>>>
> >>>> Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> To sum my position: the main role of the OpenID foundation in the
> >>>>> coming year is to help OpenID become a well understood brand and
> >>>>> successful product that has the features desired by the market.
> >>>> Which particular implementation of the protocol is "the product"
> >> that
> >>>> you think should be receiving the foundation's attention?
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Jack.
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> general mailing list
> >>>> general at openid.net
> >>>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> general mailing list
> >> general at openid.net
> >> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
> > _______________________________________________
> > general mailing list
> > general at openid.net
> > http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general