4 ms·

Yet FLOSS often has very poor UX - the users are very self selecting

Shared404 6y ago
> FLOSS often has very poor UX For much of FLOSS software I would agree. However, almost any program I've used I would say is plenty adequate. Of course, I would fall into those users you mention, so this probably doesn't mean much.
grawprog 6y ago
You know what else tends to have poor ux in my experience? Overly priced specialized commercial software targeted towards a specific industry. I think the worst i've ever experienced between floss and commercial software had to be the software to program the waterjet cnc at my last job. For some reason, half the menu items were in german, all the configuration was done in a text file where variables were a mix between english and german, the machine manufacturer stopped officially supporting the program and literally one person at their tech support office even knew how to use it and his knowledge had gotten pretty rusty. That program was an ugly, bug ridden, confusing mess that at one time cost lots of money. According to the tech i talked to, it was written by one german guy who had a poor grasp of english, vanished years before and nobody knew how to contact him.
- TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
  The CAM software that came with the 4wK laser I use at work had an amazing nesting algorithm, but was otherwise entirely unsuited to our needs. SigmaTech make SigmaNest which, as of version 1.7, I feel confident in highly recommending. And they’ve put on an additional team member for tech support in my region and I can now confidently praise that aspect of their business too.
  - grawprog 6y ago
    We used alphacam for our routers, but my boss was delaying paying for another alphacam license for as long as possible. It was nearly $10k per license or something.
    - TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
      Similar price rang for SigmaNest for the features we use, ongoing maintenance is under AUD$5k per year which we’re happy with. I’ll have a look at Alphacam.
numpad0 6y ago
Pure proprietary < Mostly FLOSS < Pure FLOSS < Mostly proprietary

> FLOSS often has very poor UX For much of FLOSS software I would agree. However, almost any program I've used I would say is plenty adequate. Of course, I would fall into those users you mention, so this probably doesn't mean much.

grawprog 6y ago

You know what else tends to have poor ux in my experience? Overly priced specialized commercial software targeted towards a specific industry. I think the worst i've ever experienced between floss and commercial software had to be the software to program the waterjet cnc at my last job. For some reason, half the menu items were in german, all the configuration was done in a text file where variables were a mix between english and german, the machine manufacturer stopped officially supporting the program and literally one person at their tech support office even knew how to use it and his knowledge had gotten pretty rusty. That program was an ugly, bug ridden, confusing mess that at one time cost lots of money. According to the tech i talked to, it was written by one german guy who had a poor grasp of english, vanished years before and nobody knew how to contact him.

TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
The CAM software that came with the 4wK laser I use at work had an amazing nesting algorithm, but was otherwise entirely unsuited to our needs. SigmaTech make SigmaNest which, as of version 1.7, I feel confident in highly recommending. And they’ve put on an additional team member for tech support in my region and I can now confidently praise that aspect of their business too.
- grawprog 6y ago
  We used alphacam for our routers, but my boss was delaying paying for another alphacam license for as long as possible. It was nearly $10k per license or something.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
    Similar price rang for SigmaNest for the features we use, ongoing maintenance is under AUD$5k per year which we’re happy with. I’ll have a look at Alphacam.

numpad0 6y ago

Pure proprietary < Mostly FLOSS < Pure FLOSS < Mostly proprietary