4 ms·

> a significant percentage (up to 48.5%) of configuration issues are about users' difficulties in finding or setting the parameters to obtain the intended syste

> a significant percentage (up to 48.5%) of configuration issues are about users' difficulties in finding or setting the parameters to obtain the intended system behavior this is the important bit to me. i don't like using software that feels like it could fall over because i turned the wrong combination of knobs the developer didn't anticipate. opinionated, fixed configuration is a nicer experience than an app that can do anything, if you bend it to your will.

TeMPOraL 10y ago
The thing is - some of us want software not for "experience", but for its utility. If I want "experience", I can go to a theme park or play a video game. I expect my software to help me achieve my goals faster and more efficiently, or to at least eliminate clutter in my life. Also, nothing really prevents one from having the settings hidden in the "advanced" menu. It's not either/or.
- red_admiral 10y ago
  Or a configuration file with proper documentation.
- Hondor 10y ago
  Nobody ever says they want fewer options, but that's because it's never such a pressing issue as not having the one you want. In a program I develop, I sometimes remove an option and people complain, then it turns out they were randomly tweaking that option to try to solve some problems that it was never going to solve in the first place. They just liked the feeling of being able to control _something_. So those are cases of bad options that should have been removed because they made it harder for people. People just can't help but try changing settings when something doesn't work, and hiding them in an "advanced" menu doesn't deter them. That's where all the most powerful settings are afertall! It encourages frustrating time wasting.
jasonlotito 10y ago
> opinionated, fixed configuration is a nicer experience Even when those opinions are wrong?
Too 10y ago
Compiz is the perfect example of this, the defaults are broken, there are thousands of options with no constraints, if you change one option to fix the broken default you will be guaranteed to break some other feature.

TeMPOraL 10y ago

The thing is - some of us want software not for "experience", but for its utility. If I want "experience", I can go to a theme park or play a video game. I expect my software to help me achieve my goals faster and more efficiently, or to at least eliminate clutter in my life. Also, nothing really prevents one from having the settings hidden in the "advanced" menu. It's not either/or.

red_admiral 10y ago
Or a configuration file with proper documentation.
Hondor 10y ago
Nobody ever says they want fewer options, but that's because it's never such a pressing issue as not having the one you want. In a program I develop, I sometimes remove an option and people complain, then it turns out they were randomly tweaking that option to try to solve some problems that it was never going to solve in the first place. They just liked the feeling of being able to control _something_. So those are cases of bad options that should have been removed because they made it harder for people. People just can't help but try changing settings when something doesn't work, and hiding them in an "advanced" menu doesn't deter them. That's where all the most powerful settings are afertall! It encourages frustrating time wasting.

jasonlotito 10y ago

> opinionated, fixed configuration is a nicer experience Even when those opinions are wrong?

Too 10y ago

Compiz is the perfect example of this, the defaults are broken, there are thousands of options with no constraints, if you change one option to fix the broken default you will be guaranteed to break some other feature.