Or maybe Twitter is more useful than the average Slashdotter wants to believe. I was baffled last time when I read the Slashdot reactions on Identi.ca and microblogging. Apparently people here have never heard of microblogging as a way to keep in touch with one's friends.
I don't hate users who make suggestions. I hate people who criticize me while not providing any suggestions, and generally act like jerks. The kind of people that seem to be overwhelming the open source world as of late.
So if I am a client, I can call you names, say that you suck, and keep harassing you while not giving you even one penny?
Sure, I understand your position. But is it so unreasonable to assert that respect has to come from both sides? After all, there is this saying "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you". Suppose you knock on your neighbor's door. As soon as he opens the door, you tell him how big of an idiot he is and how he's lousy at doing his job. You do this several times. If after the first time (or if you're lucky, after several times) he becomes insulted and angry, you threaten not to hire him, what do you think he would think?
Unfortunately this is exactly what's happening with OSS software: many people expect that all respect come from the side of developers and that they themselves don't have to show any respect at all.
The situation can quickly become ridiculous. Several years ago I wrote a GUI application. I was, and still am, very into usability. So I followed the GNOME Human User Interface Guidelines (which was inspired by Apple's HIG and had contributions by large companies). I followed the GNOME HIG's recommendation about notifying the user about a process that takes an unknown amount of time. So I implemented a "throbbing" progress bar, as was suggested.
And what kind of reactions do you think I got? - "OMG this sucks" - "you have no idea how to make usable software!" - "someone should kill you for having designed it that way"
So what does this mean? What am I supposed to do with this kind of reactions?
Most hobby projects are released under the hope that it'll be useful. Nobody's *expecting* or *forcing* anybody to use it. Please, don't confuse zealots with developers.
"So basically you admit that proprietary software has a business model more responsive to users' needs than open-source?"
1. You've obviously never heard of commercial open source software. 2. So if I close the source of my program, but still provide it for free (i.e. closed source freeware) then all of a sudden it has magically become better?
No it isn't. Notice the word "welcome". It means I don't have time and/or don't care enough, but you're welcome to do the relevant work.
Look at your response. You're taking offense in what's otherwise a normal, neutral response. You're behaving like a jerk and you expect the developer not to behave like a jerk in front of you?
And how's any of that supposed to convince anybody to do work for you for free? You accuse developers of being jerks, yet you're the one who started being a jerk. And then you expect them not behaving like jerks in front of you?
"You already think submitters of usability issues are stupid morons and don't want to help them or deal with them."
No I don't. I like people who can give constructive feedback about usability issues. In fact, whenever those people give feedback, I do my best to fix things:
Person Y: hey Me: hi Person Y: this stuff is good, I've been using it for a few weeks now and I'm totally loving it:) but don't you think this and that would be better if this and that is moved there or looks like this? Me: I'm not sure what you mean, can you explain it a bit more?...conversation... Person Y: okay, I've just made a mockup. *sends file* Me: yeah that does look better. let me see what I can do...a few hours later... Me: okay, it's done. can you verify? Person Y: yep, all better now. thanks:)
What I don't like, however, is people like this:
Person X: your product X sucks, it's totally unusable like any other FOSS out there and a monkey can design a better UI than you do! Me: (holding back anger) okay, could you explain what it is that you don't like? Person X: WTF? you're not a craftsman, you're just a programmer/coding monkey. no wonder FOSS sucks Person X: *logs off*
What I am supposed to do with these kind of people? Unfortunately it seems that a lot of FOSS critiques are exactly like this.
"If I was that baker, I wouldn't be offended. Why would I be? Feedback means my pay products can be improved."
Great. Please do try it out at your local bakery. Don't buy anything from him and tell him that his bread sucks. Do this repeatedly. Then perhaps you'll find out that many people out there can get offended.
And this is exactly what's happening with OSS software. People are constantly criticizing. Few people are giving words of praise or even helpful feedback. Being polite and helpful seem to be a foreign concept to most Slashdotters/OSNewsers/Redditers. And then they're still wondering why the developers don't want to listen.
That's why I don't use Emacs, I use Gedit and Kate, which are both GUI text editors. They're every bit as usable as their Windows and Mac equivalents. Just because you've found a 20-30 year old piece of software that was written before the rise of graphical user interfaces, doesn't mean that all open source software have poor usability.
Exactly. Most people that I help are the polite ones who offer helpful feedback. But it seems that people on Slashdot/Reddit/OSNews think that they can flame OSS developers and somehow expect that after all this flaming, the developers should still be motivated to help them.
"A) writing documentation will not fix the UI problem. And yes, UI problems should be seen as bugs not just suggestions. What should they do then to help?"
I know. That's why I also said "mockups".
"You are expecting people to use your software for free no matter what."
I'm not expecting anybody to use it. It's a gift to the world in the hope that it'll be useful. And certainly, I do address criticisms, but don't *expect* me to do it or *demand* from me to do it. If after having processed 10 criticisms, people are still criticizing you, often for invalid reasons or for things that you've already addressed, things get tedious soon.
And that's exactly that's happening in the open source world. Everybody takes open source for granted. People are constantly criticizing and complaining, and almost nobody's giving the developers any praise. And somehow you think that it's strange that a lot of developers become jerks?
"No where in most OSS licenses does it say your users have to be nice to use your software. But, being a jerk will probably not make your bug report looked at and fixed quicker (which is probably close to what you were saying)."
The converse is also true. If the users are jerks, demanding from the developer to do things for free (which I've already done for a large part), why shouldn't the developer be a jerk? Nowhere in the license does it say that the developer is obligated to help. The license does say that users can help themselves.
And that's exactly what I'm already doing. I know that not everybody is or can be a programmer. I take criticisms seriously and improve my software with the best of my ability.
However, despite doing all this, people are constantly criticizing "Free Software" or "Open Source", as a whole, while at the same time I've already spent much effort in helping users for free. Apparently people are taking my work for granted and expecting me to do *more* work for free. Don't you think that's getting ridiculous?
"Perhaps instead of the "patches are welcome" you just say that you don't have time to work on it, don't want to work on it, or that it is very low on your priority list."
Maybe it's just me, but to me, "patches welcome" already means that. To me it means that I don't care enough personally, especially because I'm not getting paid, and that it's up to me when or whether I'll do something. You're of course completely free to contribute, either by doing it yourself or by hiring me or someone else. It's your problem after all.
"Why do you expect people to help you with YOUR project when you won't even give them a useful response? You just told them that their concern was beneath you"
What kind of response do you expect from someone who's working for free? If I responded with "Sure, hire me and I'll do everything I can to address these issues. My rate is $150 per hour." then how would you respond? (the $150 per hour is not an exaggeration)
"and that they should bugger off."
No, I told them that it's not my concern, and that they should do the work if it's their concern. I said patches welcome, so if they help then I'll care a bit more.
"You really think that's going to motivate someone to help you?"
Do you really think it's going to motivate me to care more if all you're doing is criticizing? After hearing the first 10 complaints, things become tedious quickly. Especially if people *still* criticize me even after having put so much time and effort into helping them, for free.
Hey, but maybe it's just me. I suppose you don't think "screw them" if everybody's constantly criticizing you, even after having spent a lot of effort into addressing those criticisms... or do you?.
I care. I usually respond to criticism by improving my software. But come on, don't you think it's getting ridiculous when people take this for granted and demand that you work for them for free?
"That's understandable, if a bit anti-social, but it's part of what keeps so much open source software from being commercial quality."
So it's anti-social not to work for complete strangers, for free? What is in it for me if the software is commercial quality? I'm not getting paid. How am I suppose to buy my next meal if all I'm doing is implementing requests from users, for free? Have I no say in these matters any more?
Maybe he won't say exactly that. But if he gave some bread away for free, and you criticize his bread, and demand from him to make it better, do you not think that he'd be at least a little offended? If you were that baker, wouldn't you be offended if some random freeloader told you that your stuff is bad, and demands from you that you give him better bread?
And which craftsman works for you for free? If a craftsman gives something to you for free, do you expect him to do more work for you for free?
If you're paying me, I'll listen. If not, it's up to me to decide whether I want to care. I also gave you the choice to do it yourself, or finding someone else to do it for you. A choice that you didn't have in the first place.
But which open source projects have you tried to join? Obviously, if the developers are hardcore Unix gurus who are still using commandline email clients, then they're not likely to listen to you.
But you have you tried joining GNOME, KDE or even Firefox? They're devoting a lot of effort into usability. They're constantly trying to improve it. They're the kind of people who *want* professional user interface designers to contribute. You should try it.
But when someone points out a usability issue, this tradition turns into "patches welcome," which is unhelpful since most designers aren't programmers. And it's not obvious how else usability specialists should help out.'"
There seems to be a whole movement who's against the "patches welcome" statement. I fail to understand this.
I'm an open source developer. Look at it from my point of view. I've written software that people find useful. It's not perfect, but it's useful. Then, one day, someone criticizes my software:
Person X: [...] this and this sucks [...] Me: patches are welcome Person X: what? what an unhelpful response! no wonder open source sucks, and you suck too!
Now, tell me. I have a job. I maintain this software in my free time. Why should I devote that time to you, for free, instead of, say, hanging out with friends or seeing a movie? You're not paying me for this software. You probably would go away if I ask you to hire me. What exactly do I owe you? I already made the source code available. Why do you criticize me for not working for you for free? Why don't you do it yourself, or hire someone to do it for you? If you can't do either of those, why don't you contribute documentation, mockups, or something else that's not technical but is still useful? Do you expect a baker to give bread to you for free when you criticize his breads for not being tasty enough?
Poor usability? Is there really anybody who thinks that Internet Explorer 7's user interface is better than Firefox 3's?
I'm getting tired of hearing this over and over again. For example, in the past 7 years, GNOME has invested an insane amount of effort in usability. Go read about all those professional GNOME usability studies that Sun has funded. Also, go read Ubuntu and "desktop environments", written by the same author who wrote TFA. In that article, he criticizes people for wanting to include a configuration option in Ubuntu's installer which asks the user whether he wants GNOME, KDE or XCFE. He argues that such a choice is simply too confusing to most non-technical people. And indeed, people like my dad and mom don't know, or want to know, what GNOME is.
In the past 7 years, GNOME has done its best to address exactly that kind of criticism. Almost every single feature is scrutinized with usability in mind. GNOME has been removing more and more configuration options from the user interface in order to make things easier for the average user. In fact, they've done so much their best that the technical audiance, i.e. Slashdot/OSNews/Reddit, is constantly flaming them for removing config options. Yet this same audience is flaming them for not being usable.
KDE, too, has invested a lot of effort in usability. But what's the community doing? Instead of offering helpful feedback, perhaps mockups or even professional usability studies, they're flaming the developers. By flaming, instead of offering useful feedback, they're discouraging the very people who made the software from improving it. And you're wondering why they're having a hard time?
It's impressive that 95% of the population has high-speed Internet, but "high-speed" is limited to within the country only. Links to foreign countries are slow - VERY slow. Especially to U.S. sites. It took a very long time to load Slashdot.
That said, the links within the country are insanely fast - and cheap. People over there don't even use Bittorrent: they host all their movies on public HTTP servers. Bandwidth is so cheap that they don't even need Bittorrent. There is even some kind of urban myth over there which says that Bittorrent will wear off your hard drive because of excessive hard drive activity.
Slashdot Mirror
Or maybe Twitter is more useful than the average Slashdotter wants to believe. I was baffled last time when I read the Slashdot reactions on Identi.ca and microblogging. Apparently people here have never heard of microblogging as a way to keep in touch with one's friends.
I don't hate users who make suggestions. I hate people who criticize me while not providing any suggestions, and generally act like jerks. The kind of people that seem to be overwhelming the open source world as of late.
So if I am a client, I can call you names, say that you suck, and keep harassing you while not giving you even one penny?
Sure, I understand your position. But is it so unreasonable to assert that respect has to come from both sides? After all, there is this saying "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you". Suppose you knock on your neighbor's door. As soon as he opens the door, you tell him how big of an idiot he is and how he's lousy at doing his job. You do this several times. If after the first time (or if you're lucky, after several times) he becomes insulted and angry, you threaten not to hire him, what do you think he would think?
Unfortunately this is exactly what's happening with OSS software: many people expect that all respect come from the side of developers and that they themselves don't have to show any respect at all.
"If you're not an experienced developer yourself, it is utterly impossible to contribute a patch."
But it's not impossible to hire an experienced developer to do the work for you. Why don't you do that instead?
The situation can quickly become ridiculous. Several years ago I wrote a GUI application. I was, and still am, very into usability. So I followed the GNOME Human User Interface Guidelines (which was inspired by Apple's HIG and had contributions by large companies). I followed the GNOME HIG's recommendation about notifying the user about a process that takes an unknown amount of time. So I implemented a "throbbing" progress bar, as was suggested.
And what kind of reactions do you think I got?
- "OMG this sucks"
- "you have no idea how to make usable software!"
- "someone should kill you for having designed it that way"
So what does this mean? What am I supposed to do with this kind of reactions?
"Do you want me to use your project?"
Most hobby projects are released under the hope that it'll be useful. Nobody's *expecting* or *forcing* anybody to use it. Please, don't confuse zealots with developers.
"So basically you admit that proprietary software has a business model more responsive to users' needs than open-source?"
1. You've obviously never heard of commercial open source software.
2. So if I close the source of my program, but still provide it for free (i.e. closed source freeware) then all of a sudden it has magically become better?
No it isn't. Notice the word "welcome". It means I don't have time and/or don't care enough, but you're welcome to do the relevant work.
Look at your response. You're taking offense in what's otherwise a normal, neutral response. You're behaving like a jerk and you expect the developer not to behave like a jerk in front of you?
And how's any of that supposed to convince anybody to do work for you for free? You accuse developers of being jerks, yet you're the one who started being a jerk. And then you expect them not behaving like jerks in front of you?
"You already think submitters of usability issues are stupid morons and don't want to help them or deal with them."
No I don't. I like people who can give constructive feedback about usability issues. In fact, whenever those people give feedback, I do my best to fix things:
Person Y: hey :) but don't you think this and that would be better if this and that is moved there or looks like this? ...conversation... ...a few hours later... :)
Me: hi
Person Y: this stuff is good, I've been using it for a few weeks now and I'm totally loving it
Me: I'm not sure what you mean, can you explain it a bit more?
Person Y: okay, I've just made a mockup. *sends file*
Me: yeah that does look better. let me see what I can do
Me: okay, it's done. can you verify?
Person Y: yep, all better now. thanks
What I don't like, however, is people like this:
Person X: your product X sucks, it's totally unusable like any other FOSS out there and a monkey can design a better UI than you do!
Me: (holding back anger) okay, could you explain what it is that you don't like?
Person X: WTF? you're not a craftsman, you're just a programmer/coding monkey. no wonder FOSS sucks
Person X: *logs off*
What I am supposed to do with these kind of people? Unfortunately it seems that a lot of FOSS critiques are exactly like this.
"If I was that baker, I wouldn't be offended. Why would I be? Feedback means my pay products can be improved."
Great. Please do try it out at your local bakery. Don't buy anything from him and tell him that his bread sucks. Do this repeatedly. Then perhaps you'll find out that many people out there can get offended.
And this is exactly what's happening with OSS software. People are constantly criticizing. Few people are giving words of praise or even helpful feedback. Being polite and helpful seem to be a foreign concept to most Slashdotters/OSNewsers/Redditers. And then they're still wondering why the developers don't want to listen.
I already know that. But nobody has offered to help me with UI work so what do you expect me to do?
"It seems you've never used emacs, little one."
That's why I don't use Emacs, I use Gedit and Kate, which are both GUI text editors. They're every bit as usable as their Windows and Mac equivalents. Just because you've found a 20-30 year old piece of software that was written before the rise of graphical user interfaces, doesn't mean that all open source software have poor usability.
Exactly. Most people that I help are the polite ones who offer helpful feedback. But it seems that people on Slashdot/Reddit/OSNews think that they can flame OSS developers and somehow expect that after all this flaming, the developers should still be motivated to help them.
"A) writing documentation will not fix the UI problem. And yes, UI problems should be seen as bugs not just suggestions. What should they do then to help?"
I know. That's why I also said "mockups".
"You are expecting people to use your software for free no matter what."
I'm not expecting anybody to use it. It's a gift to the world in the hope that it'll be useful. And certainly, I do address criticisms, but don't *expect* me to do it or *demand* from me to do it. If after having processed 10 criticisms, people are still criticizing you, often for invalid reasons or for things that you've already addressed, things get tedious soon.
And that's exactly that's happening in the open source world. Everybody takes open source for granted. People are constantly criticizing and complaining, and almost nobody's giving the developers any praise. And somehow you think that it's strange that a lot of developers become jerks?
"No where in most OSS licenses does it say your users have to be nice to use your software. But, being a jerk will probably not make your bug report looked at and fixed quicker (which is probably close to what you were saying)."
The converse is also true. If the users are jerks, demanding from the developer to do things for free (which I've already done for a large part), why shouldn't the developer be a jerk? Nowhere in the license does it say that the developer is obligated to help. The license does say that users can help themselves.
And that's exactly what I'm already doing. I know that not everybody is or can be a programmer. I take criticisms seriously and improve my software with the best of my ability.
However, despite doing all this, people are constantly criticizing "Free Software" or "Open Source", as a whole, while at the same time I've already spent much effort in helping users for free. Apparently people are taking my work for granted and expecting me to do *more* work for free. Don't you think that's getting ridiculous?
"Perhaps instead of the "patches are welcome" you just say that you don't have time to work on it, don't want to work on it, or that it is very low on your priority list."
Maybe it's just me, but to me, "patches welcome" already means that. To me it means that I don't care enough personally, especially because I'm not getting paid, and that it's up to me when or whether I'll do something. You're of course completely free to contribute, either by doing it yourself or by hiring me or someone else. It's your problem after all.
"Why do you expect people to help you with YOUR project when you won't even give them a useful response? You just told them that their concern was beneath you"
What kind of response do you expect from someone who's working for free? If I responded with "Sure, hire me and I'll do everything I can to address these issues. My rate is $150 per hour." then how would you respond? (the $150 per hour is not an exaggeration)
"and that they should bugger off."
No, I told them that it's not my concern, and that they should do the work if it's their concern. I said patches welcome, so if they help then I'll care a bit more.
"You really think that's going to motivate someone to help you?"
Do you really think it's going to motivate me to care more if all you're doing is criticizing? After hearing the first 10 complaints, things become tedious quickly. Especially if people *still* criticize me even after having put so much time and effort into helping them, for free.
Hey, but maybe it's just me. I suppose you don't think "screw them" if everybody's constantly criticizing you, even after having spent a lot of effort into addressing those criticisms... or do you?.
I care. I usually respond to criticism by improving my software. But come on, don't you think it's getting ridiculous when people take this for granted and demand that you work for them for free?
"That's understandable, if a bit anti-social, but it's part of what keeps so much open source software from being commercial quality."
So it's anti-social not to work for complete strangers, for free? What is in it for me if the software is commercial quality? I'm not getting paid. How am I suppose to buy my next meal if all I'm doing is implementing requests from users, for free? Have I no say in these matters any more?
Maybe he won't say exactly that. But if he gave some bread away for free, and you criticize his bread, and demand from him to make it better, do you not think that he'd be at least a little offended? If you were that baker, wouldn't you be offended if some random freeloader told you that your stuff is bad, and demands from you that you give him better bread?
And which craftsman works for you for free? If a craftsman gives something to you for free, do you expect him to do more work for you for free?
If you're paying me, I'll listen. If not, it's up to me to decide whether I want to care. I also gave you the choice to do it yourself, or finding someone else to do it for you. A choice that you didn't have in the first place.
But which open source projects have you tried to join? Obviously, if the developers are hardcore Unix gurus who are still using commandline email clients, then they're not likely to listen to you.
But you have you tried joining GNOME, KDE or even Firefox? They're devoting a lot of effort into usability. They're constantly trying to improve it. They're the kind of people who *want* professional user interface designers to contribute. You should try it.
There seems to be a whole movement who's against the "patches welcome" statement. I fail to understand this.
I'm an open source developer. Look at it from my point of view. I've written software that people find useful. It's not perfect, but it's useful. Then, one day, someone criticizes my software:
Person X: [...] this and this sucks [...]
Me: patches are welcome
Person X: what? what an unhelpful response! no wonder open source sucks, and you suck too!
Now, tell me. I have a job. I maintain this software in my free time. Why should I devote that time to you, for free, instead of, say, hanging out with friends or seeing a movie? You're not paying me for this software. You probably would go away if I ask you to hire me. What exactly do I owe you? I already made the source code available. Why do you criticize me for not working for you for free? Why don't you do it yourself, or hire someone to do it for you? If you can't do either of those, why don't you contribute documentation, mockups, or something else that's not technical but is still useful? Do you expect a baker to give bread to you for free when you criticize his breads for not being tasty enough?
Poor usability? Is there really anybody who thinks that Internet Explorer 7's user interface is better than Firefox 3's?
I'm getting tired of hearing this over and over again. For example, in the past 7 years, GNOME has invested an insane amount of effort in usability. Go read about all those professional GNOME usability studies that Sun has funded. Also, go read Ubuntu and "desktop environments", written by the same author who wrote TFA. In that article, he criticizes people for wanting to include a configuration option in Ubuntu's installer which asks the user whether he wants GNOME, KDE or XCFE. He argues that such a choice is simply too confusing to most non-technical people. And indeed, people like my dad and mom don't know, or want to know, what GNOME is.
In the past 7 years, GNOME has done its best to address exactly that kind of criticism. Almost every single feature is scrutinized with usability in mind. GNOME has been removing more and more configuration options from the user interface in order to make things easier for the average user. In fact, they've done so much their best that the technical audiance, i.e. Slashdot/OSNews/Reddit, is constantly flaming them for removing config options. Yet this same audience is flaming them for not being usable.
KDE, too, has invested a lot of effort in usability. But what's the community doing? Instead of offering helpful feedback, perhaps mockups or even professional usability studies, they're flaming the developers. By flaming, instead of offering useful feedback, they're discouraging the very people who made the software from improving it. And you're wondering why they're having a hard time?
Go figure.
It's impressive that 95% of the population has high-speed Internet, but "high-speed" is limited to within the country only. Links to foreign countries are slow - VERY slow. Especially to U.S. sites. It took a very long time to load Slashdot.
That said, the links within the country are insanely fast - and cheap. People over there don't even use Bittorrent: they host all their movies on public HTTP servers. Bandwidth is so cheap that they don't even need Bittorrent. There is even some kind of urban myth over there which says that Bittorrent will wear off your hard drive because of excessive hard drive activity.
"A system which spews diagnostic messages will fill up /var, and is far more than an "annoyance"."
Yeah, so instead of the 8 years that it would normally take to completely fill up /var, it'll now take 7 years and 11 months. Boo hoo.
Different bugs have different severity. Get used to it.