Text 11879, 209 rader
Skriven 2006-06-29 09:27:40 av Gary Britt (1:379/45)
Kommentar till text 11873 av Rich (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: Productize
======================
From: "Gary Britt" <glb@gencog.com>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0052_01C69B5E.449D52F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Yes and No. No they are not the same thing in the sense that one =
(commercialize) is acceptable and proper usage while productize is NOT. = Yes
they are the same thing in the sense that both refer to taking = something,
including an idea or concept, and turning it into something = that can be
exploited in commerce.
Gary
"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:44a3892e@w3.nls.net...
Commercializing and productizing are not the same. The English =
language has lots of words with similar or overlapping but distinct = meanings.
Rich
"Gary Britt" <glb@gencog.com> wrote in message =
news:44a308b4$1@w3.nls.net...
Commercializing would be the correct term and the term that has been =
in wide use for decades. For example, phrases such as the "right to =
commercialize derivative works" of a copyrighted product have existed = for
many decades. Productizing is non-standard usage that would seem to = me was
created by people who are less verbal than they needed to be. = Whether the
term was created at or is used at places other than = Microsoft is of no
concern. Anyone who uses the term anywhere is using = non-standard english
that a more verbal and more educated person would = certainly avoid. =20
Just because literate people might understand what a speaker means =
when they say "our product is 'more gooder' than the competition" = doesn't
make it proper usage. Therefore, I find your argument that the = meaning and
intent of a speaker who uses "productizing" is discernable = to the listener is
not a credible defense of its usage.
Gary
"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:44a2e7a9@w3.nls.net...
I have no spin. I can say that productizing as a verb is not =
double speak. It gets used all the time to describe taking a = technology,
prototype, internal tool, etc and making it or incorporating = it into a
product. To someone who speaks English you would think the = meaning would be
clear. I very much doubt it is a Microsoft term. I'm = sure it is widely
used.
Rich
"Adam" <""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"@the field.near the =
bridge"> wrote in message news:44a043f0$1@w3.nls.net...
Mike N. wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 13:41:53 -0400, "Rich Gauszka" =
<gauszka@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>=20
>> "With most of our effort now working towards productizing =
mature aspects of the=20
>> WinFS project into SQL and ADO.NET, we do not need to deliver =
a separate=20
>> WinFS offering."
>=20
> "productizing" - adv (English): Special word to introduce =
doublespeak and
> make it sound like you are saying something significant when =
you wish avoid
> the real subject because you are not comfortable talking about =
it.
I will be curious to see Rich S's spin on this.
Adam
------=_NextPart_000_0052_01C69B5E.449D52F0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2838" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>Yes and No. No they are not the same thing =
in the=20
sense that one (commercialize) is acceptable and proper usage while =
productize=20
is NOT. Yes they are the same thing in the sense that both refer = to
taking=20
something, including an idea or concept, and turning it into something = that
can=20
be exploited in commerce.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>Gary</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich" <@> wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:44a3892e@w3.nls.net">news:44a3892e@w3.nls.net</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> Commercializing and =
productizing are=20
not the same. The English language has lots of words with =
similar or=20
overlapping but distinct meanings.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Gary Britt" <<A =
href=3D"mailto:glb@gencog.com">glb@gencog.com</A>>=20
wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:44a308b4$1@w3.nls.net">news:44a308b4$1@w3.nls.net</A>...</DI=
V>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>Commercializing would be the correct term =
and the term=20
that has been in wide use for decades. For example, phrases =
such as=20
the "right to commercialize derivative works" of a copyrighted =
product have=20
existed for many decades. Productizing is non-standard =
usage that=20
would seem to me was created by people who are less verbal than they =
needed=20
to be. Whether the term was created at or is used at places =
other than=20
Microsoft is of no concern. Anyone who uses the term anywhere =
is using=20
non-standard english that a more verbal and more educated person =
would=20
certainly avoid. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>Just because literate people might =
understand what a=20
speaker means when they say "our product is 'more gooder' than the=20
competition" doesn't make it proper usage. Therefore, I find =
your=20
argument that the meaning and intent of a speaker who=20
uses "productizing" is discernable to the listener is =
not a=20
credible defense of its usage.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>Gary</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich" <@> wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:44a2e7a9@w3.nls.net">news:44a2e7a9@w3.nls.net</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> I have no =
spin. I can say=20
that productizing as a verb is not double speak. It gets =
used all=20
the time to describe taking a technology, prototype, internal =
tool, etc=20
and making it or incorporating it into a product. To someone =
who=20
speaks English you would think the meaning would be clear. I =
very=20
much doubt it is a Microsoft term. I'm sure it is widely=20
used.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Adam" <"<A=20
=
href=3D'mailto:"4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"@the'>"4thwormcastfromthemole=
hill\"@the</A>=20
field.near the bridge"> wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:44a043f0$1@w3.nls.net">news:44a043f0$1@w3.nls.net</A>...</DI=
V>Mike=20
N. wrote:<BR>> On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 13:41:53 -0400, "Rich =
Gauszka"=20
<<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@hotmail.com">gauszka@hotmail.com</A>><BR>>=20
wrote:<BR>> <BR>>> "With most of our effort now working =
towards=20
productizing mature aspects of the <BR>>> WinFS project =
into SQL=20
and ADO.NET, we do not need to deliver a separate <BR>>> =
WinFS=20
offering."<BR>> <BR>> "productizing" - adv =
(English):=20
Special word to introduce doublespeak and<BR>> make it sound =
like you=20
are saying something significant when you wish avoid<BR>> the =
real=20
subject because you are not comfortable talking about =
it.<BR><BR>I will=20
be curious to see Rich S's spin on=20
=
this.<BR><BR>Adam</BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BO=
DY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0052_01C69B5E.449D52F0--
--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
* Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)
|