Book sales

Book sales

[Jon Harrop]

Tim O'Reilly recently published an article about book sales and, in 
particular, gave a breakdown of units sold per programming language:

  http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2007/05/state_of_the_co_10.html

As the author and publisher of a book on OCaml, this naturally caught my eye. 
So I spent some time dissecting the results and the conclusions were quite 
interesting:

  http://ocamlnews.blogspot.com/2007/05/ocaml-revolution.html

Most notably, we are outselling APress in terms of units sold. Also, the OCaml 
community is desperately short of cheap introductory books.

I should also note that the publication of Practical OCaml, rather than 
reducing our sales due to competition, actually increased our sales 
substantially. This indicates to me that the OCaml market is sufficiently 
small that there is no risk of competition and anything done to promote the 
language improves the situation for others in the community.

Consequently, I would like to encourage any budding authors to write books on 
OCaml and help to promote the language.

-- 
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
The F#.NET Journal
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/fsharp_journal/?e

Re: [Caml-list] Book sales

[Oliver Bandel]

On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 12:54:11AM +0100, Jon Harrop wrote:
> 
> Tim O'Reilly recently published an article about book sales and, in 
> particular, gave a breakdown of units sold per programming language:
> 
>   http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2007/05/state_of_the_co_10.html
> 
> As the author and publisher of a book on OCaml, this naturally caught my eye. 
> So I spent some time dissecting the results and the conclusions were quite 
> interesting:
> 
>   http://ocamlnews.blogspot.com/2007/05/ocaml-revolution.html
> 
> Most notably, we are outselling APress in terms of units sold. Also, the OCaml 
> community is desperately short of cheap introductory books.
> 
> I should also note that the publication of Practical OCaml, rather than 
> reducing our sales due to competition, actually increased our sales 
> substantially. This indicates to me that the OCaml market is sufficiently 
> small that there is no risk of competition and anything done to promote the 
> language improves the situation for others in the community.
> 
> Consequently, I would like to encourage any budding authors to write books on 
> OCaml and help to promote the language.
[...]

So your mail is not altruism ;-)


For my taste you too often mention your book here in this list....
it's ok, if you tell it once or twice, but this is not your personal
advertising channel.

Why don't you pay the television for sending advertising spots on your book?!

Ciao,
   Oliver

Re: [Caml-list] Book sales

[Paul Snively]

Since we seem to be airing our opinions here, I'd like to take the  
opportunity to add mine.

I purchased Jon Harrop's book, am glad that I did, and have never  
minded his occasional reminders to the list that it exists. I'd also  
like to note that he has made chapters and some code freely available  
so that people can judge the likely merits of the book before  
purchase and can gain some understanding of the kind of material that  
will be covered. There's no question in my mind that this fills a  
void; it's important to a language that it not be perceived as a  
"toy," and demonstrating O'Caml's applicability to scientific  
computing, as opposed to its more obviously natural habitats such as  
compiler-writing and theorem proving, seems like a good thing.

By contrast, Dr. Harrop's critics seem to take issue with the notion  
that Dr. Harrop might actually make a profit, either directly or  
indirectly, from this. While I appreciate that the list is primarily  
a mutual information-sharing resource, I have difficulty seeing  
anything wrong with periodically informing people that there is at  
least one commercial resource available for those such as myself who  
desire it. In any case, for those who feel that way, it would seem  
that the simple solution of filtering Dr. Harrop's messages would be  
sufficient recourse.

Best regards,
Paul Snively

On May 22, 2007, at 5:20 PM, Oliver Bandel wrote:

> On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 12:54:11AM +0100, Jon Harrop wrote:
>>
>> Tim O'Reilly recently published an article about book sales and, in
>> particular, gave a breakdown of units sold per programming language:
>>
>>   http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2007/05/state_of_the_co_10.html
>>
>> As the author and publisher of a book on OCaml, this naturally  
>> caught my eye.
>> So I spent some time dissecting the results and the conclusions  
>> were quite
>> interesting:
>>
>>   http://ocamlnews.blogspot.com/2007/05/ocaml-revolution.html
>>
>> Most notably, we are outselling APress in terms of units sold.  
>> Also, the OCaml
>> community is desperately short of cheap introductory books.
>>
>> I should also note that the publication of Practical OCaml, rather  
>> than
>> reducing our sales due to competition, actually increased our sales
>> substantially. This indicates to me that the OCaml market is  
>> sufficiently
>> small that there is no risk of competition and anything done to  
>> promote the
>> language improves the situation for others in the community.
>>
>> Consequently, I would like to encourage any budding authors to  
>> write books on
>> OCaml and help to promote the language.
> [...]
>
> So your mail is not altruism ;-)
>
>
> For my taste you too often mention your book here in this list....
> it's ok, if you tell it once or twice, but this is not your personal
> advertising channel.
>
> Why don't you pay the television for sending advertising spots on  
> your book?!
>
> Ciao,
>    Oliver
>
> _______________________________________________
> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
> http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
> Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs

Re: [Caml-list] Book sales

[Oliver Bandel]

On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 09:47:06PM -0700, Paul Snively wrote:
> Since we seem to be airing our opinions here, I'd like to take the  
> opportunity to add mine.
> 
> I purchased Jon Harrop's book, am glad that I did,

I didn't say the book is a bad one.
It was to expensive for me, so I asked a local university library to buy it.
So I could read it. Yes, I like the book also.
And it's ok to mention it. But if it's mentioned in nearly every mail,
then it's obssessive and might annoy the reader, who is here to read about
OCaml. Reading about OCaml in commercial applications is interesting for me,
but thies IMHO does not include books (as commercial products) about the language.

[...]
> By contrast, Dr. Harrop's critics seem to take issue with the notion  
> that Dr. Harrop might actually make a profit, either directly or  
> indirectly, from this.

Nonsense.

> While I appreciate that the list is primarily  
> a mutual information-sharing resource, I have difficulty seeing  
> anything wrong with periodically informing people that there is at  
> least one commercial resource available for those such as myself who  
> desire it.
[...]

It can be put on webpages with links to OCaml-references, and I think
it already is.

When I google with "books on OCaml" it's on the first result page and
one of the first links also.

So, it would be fine if these mail-based advertising pop-ups
could be abandoned. They are unnecessary and also annoying.


> In any case, for those who feel that way, it would seem  
> that the simple solution of filtering Dr. Harrop's messages would be  
> sufficient recourse.

This is no option, because Jon's answers often are also well informing.
But the advertising is nevertheless annoying.


Ciao,
   Oliver

Re: [Caml-list] Book sales

[lloyd]

I also purchased Jon's book and I have to say that I am surprised that
not many other people are championing his efforts. I simply do not
understand why people seem offended that somebody would mention their
own work.

As an avid reader of this list, I have noted, just for the record, that
Dr Jon Harrop's (he earned the title so let's use it) contributions are
wholly positive and indeed extremely helpful.

He is obviously a very talented, open minded developer with an ambition
to succeed both intellectually and financially, but I would conclude
that the former ambition is more prevalent in his writings on this, and
on other lists that I have seen.

At the same time, I appreciate that people do have their own opinions and
while this is true, they should refrain from petty snipes at  
somebody who has invested a LOT of time and effort to produce something
that will help other developers achieve a broader playing field of
computer instruction.

Come on guys, if it is jealousy, or a desire for a world of ultra
altruism, Only those guilty know, but please lets evaluate our own
reasons to contribute to this fantastic mailing list and keep it
positive. You've only got one life (although my last point hasn't been
proven :-) )

Lloyd Moore
http://www.topbooks.com/nothing_here_really


On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 09:47:06PM -0700, Paul Snively wrote:
> Since we seem to be airing our opinions here, I'd like to take the  
> opportunity to add mine.
> 
> I purchased Jon Harrop's book, am glad that I did, and have never  
> minded his occasional reminders to the list that it exists. I'd also  
> like to note that he has made chapters and some code freely available  
> so that people can judge the likely merits of the book before  
> purchase and can gain some understanding of the kind of material that  
> will be covered. There's no question in my mind that this fills a  
> void; it's important to a language that it not be perceived as a  
> "toy," and demonstrating O'Caml's applicability to scientific  
> computing, as opposed to its more obviously natural habitats such as  
> compiler-writing and theorem proving, seems like a good thing.
> 
> By contrast, Dr. Harrop's critics seem to take issue with the notion  
> that Dr. Harrop might actually make a profit, either directly or  
> indirectly, from this. While I appreciate that the list is primarily  
> a mutual information-sharing resource, I have difficulty seeing  
> anything wrong with periodically informing people that there is at  
> least one commercial resource available for those such as myself who  
> desire it. In any case, for those who feel that way, it would seem  
> that the simple solution of filtering Dr. Harrop's messages would be  
> sufficient recourse.
> 
> Best regards,
> Paul Snively
> 
> On May 22, 2007, at 5:20 PM, Oliver Bandel wrote:
> 
> >On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 12:54:11AM +0100, Jon Harrop wrote:
> >>
> >>Tim O'Reilly recently published an article about book sales and, in
> >>particular, gave a breakdown of units sold per programming language:
> >>
> >>  http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2007/05/state_of_the_co_10.html
> >>
> >>As the author and publisher of a book on OCaml, this naturally  
> >>caught my eye.
> >>So I spent some time dissecting the results and the conclusions  
> >>were quite
> >>interesting:
> >>
> >>  http://ocamlnews.blogspot.com/2007/05/ocaml-revolution.html
> >>
> >>Most notably, we are outselling APress in terms of units sold.  
> >>Also, the OCaml
> >>community is desperately short of cheap introductory books.
> >>
> >>I should also note that the publication of Practical OCaml, rather  
> >>than
> >>reducing our sales due to competition, actually increased our sales
> >>substantially. This indicates to me that the OCaml market is  
> >>sufficiently
> >>small that there is no risk of competition and anything done to  
> >>promote the
> >>language improves the situation for others in the community.
> >>
> >>Consequently, I would like to encourage any budding authors to  
> >>write books on
> >>OCaml and help to promote the language.
> >[...]
> >
> >So your mail is not altruism ;-)
> >
> >
> >For my taste you too often mention your book here in this list....
> >it's ok, if you tell it once or twice, but this is not your personal
> >advertising channel.
> >
> >Why don't you pay the television for sending advertising spots on  
> >your book?!
> >
> >Ciao,
> >   Oliver
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
> >http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
> >Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> >Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> >Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
> http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
> Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs

Re: [Caml-list] Book sales

[skaller]

On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 17:01 +0200, lloyd wrote:

> At the same time, I appreciate that people do have their own opinions and
> while this is true, they should refrain from petty snipes at  
> somebody who has invested a LOT of time and effort to produce something
> that will help other developers achieve a broader playing field of
> computer instruction.

The OP wasn't doing that. He simply voiced a simple opinion
that Jon was overdoing it a bit pushing his book.

Well, yes, he probably was just a tad, but he has to make
a living, and who can complain about trying to do that
in a way that helps Ocaml?

O"Reilly wouldn't publish an English Ocaml book. Harrop took
a substantial risk with his time and money. Lets hope he sells
enough to get the print runs up and the price down a bit --
it's way out of reach of students.


-- 
John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net>
Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net

Re: [Caml-list] Book sales

[Ken Rose]

Oliver Bandel wrote:

> For my taste you too often mention your book here in this list....
> it's ok, if you tell it once or twice, but this is not your personal
> advertising channel.

OK, so I had some time to kill this morning...

I counted 123 posts from Jon this year so far.  In those, not counting
his .signature (which is, as protocol demands, not more than 4 lines
long), he mentioned his book in 8.  Some of those are replies to posts
that essentially ask for pointers to books.  A few are more blatantly
self-serving, but even so, it doesn't seem excessive to me.

 - ken

Re: [Caml-list] Book sales

[Oliver Bandel]

On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 01:41:09AM +0100, Jon Harrop wrote:
> On Wednesday 23 May 2007 01:20:52 you wrote:
> > So your mail is not altruism ;-)
> >
> > For my taste you too often mention your book here in this list....
> > it's ok, if you tell it once or twice, but this is not your personal
> > advertising channel.
> 
> Did you ever get a copy of OCaml for Scientists?
> 
[...]

As I wrote in my mail, I asked the library of a university
to buy one. And they did. And so I could read it.

But you can send me one (for free) :)

Ciao,
   Oliver

Re: [Caml-list] Book sales

[Jacques Garrigue]

From: Jon Harrop <jon@ffconsultancy.com>
> 
> Tim O'Reilly recently published an article about book sales and, in 
> particular, gave a breakdown of units sold per programming language:
> 
>   http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2007/05/state_of_the_co_10.html
> 
> As the author and publisher of a book on OCaml, this naturally caught my eye. 
> So I spent some time dissecting the results and the conclusions were quite 
> interesting:
> 
>   http://ocamlnews.blogspot.com/2007/05/ocaml-revolution.html
> 
> Most notably, we are outselling APress in terms of units sold. Also,
> the OCaml community is desperately short of cheap introductory books.

I think you're right on introductory books. At least in English.
There are several books on ocaml in French, there are already
two (cheap and good) books in Japanese, so what's wrong with English
language publishers? I would suppose there are some people ready to
write, but is it so much more difficult to get published?

Jacques Garrigue