Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
David Kramer wrote: | | And my point (that hasn't been refuted) is this is exactly what most | users are asking for. More features. Actually, I'd say that it's not so much that most users want "more features", as they want some specific features that they've been using with whatever software they've been using. But most users don't use (or even know about) most of the features in the software they're using; they only use the small subset that they've somehow stumbled onto and learned to use. The rest of the app sits there unused but still occupying a chunk of memory. I learned this very clearly back in the 80s, when I worked for a company that among other things made modems. Repeatedly, the sales guys would go to management saying "We can get this $N million order if only these few features are added to our modem." This is so that the modem will function as a drop-in replacement for whatever modem the prospective customer is now using. Orders came down to the developers that these few features be added ASAP. After a dozen or so such sales-driven feature sets, the result was a bloated mess of confusing, incompatible features controlled by a flock of mysterious option settings. The features generally weren't very well documented, because each was used by only one or two customers, and the only thing important was that a feature work correctly for exactly those customers that used it. The same thing is driving feature bloat in a lot of linux software. We constantly read that "linux isn't ready for the desktop" because it lacks such-and-such features. Invariably, what this means is that there are Windows users using specific software that has those features, and those users won't switch until the linux software functions as a drop-in replacement for their old software, so they won't have to learn anything new. In each case, this doesn't sound unreasonable, and it's not too hard to add just those features. But after it has happened N times, the result is a bloated, confusing mess of incompatible features that attempt to mimic the functioning of every version of a similar piece of Windows software. Then, of course, the users don't switch because the mess of features is too confusing. But you can't remove the features, because a few new users have come to depend on them. It's an old story in the computing biz. -- What if the Hokey Pokey really IS what it's all about? -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |