A tale of two doc sectionsin
I don't know about you, but the difference between an exciting open source project and a less than exciting open source project boils down for me when I get to the first page of their documentation.
Note on the CiviCRM site they have a link that says "Make a PDF". Notice how on the SugarCRM site they have a mile long table of contents that helps you none whatsoever. Note how much background information there is once you get into the Civi documentation about what CRM actually is, and how it might help your organization. Notice how much of the beginning of the Sugar docs is devoted to installing the thing, which is helpful but come on. There's an automated installer file. It's pretty simple for a developer.
I can't help but think of projects like Sugar as somehow "faker" than projects like Civi just because the very essence of open source is to encourage audience participation, not to make it easier for a consultant market to emerge because I can't wade through your shitty documentation.
Getting off the soapbox now.