At the Western U.S. Manifold User Conference

January 18th, 2008 · 19 Comments · Manifold

I’m sitting down right now at the Manifold User Conference. I’m under a NDA so I can’t really report much on the future of Manifold, but I’ll let you know some examples of what people are doing with Manifold.

Tags:

19 responses so far ↓

1 Gary // Jan 18, 2008 at 9:33 am

A conference that requires an NDA? How exciting!
2 Mike // Jan 18, 2008 at 9:51 am

I’m curious how big (or small) of a conference it is?
3 AA // Jan 18, 2008 at 10:02 am

It’s so top secret that there is no mention of it on the Manifold site.

Maybe it’s happening in James’s living room.
4 KJ // Jan 18, 2008 at 11:25 am

RE the manifold NDA stuff everyone’s crying about - um you know its the same at the ESRI BP conf right?
5 p // Jan 18, 2008 at 12:02 pm

User Conference… Business Partner Conference… that’s a big difference isn’t it?
6 J Wallis // Jan 18, 2008 at 12:04 pm

I’m at the Manifold conference too. I’m the one in the purple initiate robe and hood. Why do initiates have to wear purple? Why can’t I wear white or blue? Oh and it’s hot under this thing.
7 Gary // Jan 18, 2008 at 12:05 pm

Who’s crying?—You assume I’m emotionally invested

It says user conference—unless you have to be a BP to be a Manifold user…
8 Ralphie // Jan 18, 2008 at 12:23 pm

I probably shouldn’t feet the trolls but…

This has already been covered in a prior thread.

The conference doesn’t require an NDA. Only one presentation required an NDA: “Overview of Manifold’s Internal Planning Process and Roadmap.”

I think that’s entirely reasonable. If an attendee didn’t want to sign an NDA, the attendee was free not to attend that particular talk.
9 KJ // Jan 18, 2008 at 1:36 pm

well Mfold does not have a separate user conference and BP conference because they do not have BPs like ESRI does, and they are smaller.

I am not trying to start a fight or anything, I am just simply pointing out that if you want the “inside scoop” on product direction at the mfold conf, then you need NDA - similar to how BPs of ESRI are bound to the confidentiality parts of their BP contracts when they go the BP conf to get the “inside scoop” on strategic product direction.

You can go to manifold conf and not get the strategic vision and not need the NDA, but still get the other stuff, in the same way you can skip the ESRI BP conf. and just attend the user conf.

You might look at it like Manifold is actually more open than ESRI, since you cannot go to ESRI BP conf unless you pay to be a BP, and ESRI thinks enough of you to keep you in the BP program (yes, you can get culled).

I think its silly to split hairs over semantics of calling it a “user” conf or not - not everyone has to have two conferences like ESRI does after all, and its not like ESRI wrote the dictionary on what the meaning of the word “user” is - bottom line you can get it both from Manifold, and you can get it both from ESRI, and both have confidentiality reqs to get it all, and actually you have to pay and jump though hoops (become a BP) to get the strategic stuff from ESRI.

I just say “crying” to be funny, and also because I have heard people gripe about it in other forums. Sorry, I understand how it sounded like I was talkin fighting words, but really I did not mean it like that. And even though I tried to be funny, I realize I am not really a very funny guy, so again sorry about that.
10 eandelin // Jan 19, 2008 at 9:35 am

All you have to do to get into the meeting is pet the manifold cat on the way in.
11 GR // Jan 19, 2008 at 10:27 am

things from the NDA

- Manifold will upgrade the UI to a modern interface. The current Windows 3.1 UI style is a bit legacy.

- The documentation will be updated to actually include useful programming information, rather than rants on why some file formats are a bad thing.

- Manifold is actually going to open up a support department and provide on-line examples, knowledge base articles, and things that every other modern software company provides for high end products.
12 manifold_guy // Jan 19, 2008 at 11:36 am

GR:

if they did those things you mentioned, then they would also sell the product for $10,000; break out the IMS and sell it for $12,000; and then roll them together and sell it for $20,000 and call it ManifoldServer - LOL!
13 GR // Jan 19, 2008 at 11:59 am

manifold_guy - Yeah, I understand. I actually dropped Manifold and ArcIMS this past year. Both for vastly different reasons. http://www.osgeo.org/
14 manifold_guy // Jan 19, 2008 at 12:04 pm

GR:

Interesting. I see you are pointing to osgeo. What aspect of osgeo did you pick up? Was it GRASS, Quantum, PostGIS, something else?

Also, what have you thought of those products? Have they met the needs ESRI and Manifold couldn’t meet?
15 Mel Longley // Jan 19, 2008 at 5:47 pm

@ maniguy

…ESRI and Manifold couldn’t meet?

Are you comparing ESRI to Manifold? LOL
16 manifold_guy // Jan 19, 2008 at 6:22 pm

Mel,

I am interested in what GR has learned about the OS products and if they have met his needs. Stop being a troll….
17 peepee // Jan 20, 2008 at 6:51 am

James said he was going to get back to us. We haven’t heard from him in days. Is it possible that he got converted, shaved his head, and now lives on the Manifold Davidian farm?

Or, with MLK day coming tomorrow, perhaps he’s waiting until Monday to announce he’ll ditch ESRI for Manifold and say “free at last, free at last”.

James, if you are out there, if you can hear us, and if you can untie yourself please get to the nearest computer can tell us what happened.
18 Ralphie // Jan 20, 2008 at 7:24 am

I’m concerned that he might have drunk the Kool-Aid.
19 Dimitri // Jan 21, 2008 at 1:14 pm

GR is entitled to his or her opinion, but GR’s suggestion that manifold does not provide tech support in his “Manifold is actually going to open up a support department” comment as written is disinformation, not opinion.

See the support page at http://www.manifold.net/tech/support.shtml for a quick overview of manifold tech support, including use of the various technical support service products offered by manifold.

To summarize that link, Manifold support is paid. Support is very inexpensive, but it is not “free” - a small fee is charged for every question. This has proven to be a fair way to ensure that users who don’t need tech support are not forced to pay higher license fees to subsidize other users who do.

This policy has enjoyed overwhelming support by licensees, with over 98% satisfaction rate from people who have purchased developer level support service products.

I can understand why most users support the policy, since those users who take the time to educate themselves in GIS, to read the (rather comprehensive) documentation for Manifold, to gain skill in related toolsets such as Visual Studio, IIS or DBMS products like SQL Server, to participate in user forums to learn from more experienced users, etc., are usually quite strongly opposed to having pay more for a product in order to pay for support services consumed by other people. They also like the idea that a support group which is not diluted by trivial inquiries (requiring a small fee completely eliminates those) can focus on providing higher quality service when users choose to use tech support for non-trivial questions.

If GR wants to flame tech support, my guess is that he or she hasn’t truly used a tech support service product but instead is unhappy that tech support service products are sold for a small fee. If that is the case, I would invite GR to be man enough to drop the misleading comments and to rant honestly that it is not a lack of tech support that bothers him, it is having to pay a fee for the services rendered.