3 ms·
> Also, not to rain on anybody’s parade, but OSS is - generally - not held to the same performance standards that proprietary code is. This makes sense intuitiv
by nikanj 6y ago
> Also, not to rain on anybody’s parade, but OSS is - generally - not held to the same performance standards that proprietary code is. This makes sense intuitively right? “If I’m paying for it, it better work.”
I've noticed the opposite to be true. Code from a proprietary vendor is buggy? Too bad, the corp just a faceless, nameless borg of an entity that doesn't care about your bugs. OSS has bugs? You can easily go rant at the poor coders who are working on it
- fiddlerwoaroof 6y agoIt really depends on the software: I have a maintenance contract for LispWorks and, whenever I report a bug, I get a custom patch and/or a resolution in an impressively short window. For a lot of SAAS-type products (JIRA, for example), oftentimes the users are fairly decoupled from the company: since the admins/purchasing people have more contact with the vendor, but less direct usage of the software, it’s harder to get this sort of support.
- nikanj 6y agoI was thinking about bugs in something like Windows or Photoshop. Can you imagine Adobe giving a single hug that I paid for Illustrator?
- cryptica 6y agoYes, this is also my experience. In fact, proprietary products are more likely to break because it means the company has to come back to the provider an pay them to have it fixed... These big bureaucratic corporations have infinite patience... It's like these big companies expect things to constantly break.