Gregory's Server@simon Yes, it's a matter of priorities. OSMF doesn't treat money as a daily neccessity apart from irregular donation drives. E.g. it doesn't build a picture of OSM as a vital service in big institutions. We all know it's important, but for higher-ups, it just works. It doesn't market itself with any corporations and doesn't ask for help. When you don't ask, people think it's all fine.
|
4 comments
 @simon "You" as a person, not as a company big enough to get millions in Google bills. That's the point: we market to individuals while we're most important to organizations and governments.  @zverik Any company spending millions on google is going to be spending millions if OSM is involved or not. We've always been marketing it as if it is a free lunch, but it isn't -particularly not for large users. @simon You know it's not about spending money — it's about control. Money is the same, level of control and vendor lock-in is very different. |
@zverik the problem is literally everybody knows that you can just use google if the worst comes to the worst (or Apple, Here, Tomtom not to mention a multitude of national and local entities that are competing in the same space) instead of OSM. Our USPs are fairly thin.