5 ms·

> I'm coming to the realisation that open source projects will always provide a lower quality than commercial ones That's demonstrably wrong. Examples are so a

> I'm coming to the realisation that open source projects will always provide a lower quality than commercial ones That's demonstrably wrong. Examples are so abundant and obvious that I'm not sure I need to mention any, but for the sake of argument. In software: Linux, Gimp, Firefox, VLC, Blender, OpenOffice, ... In hardware: Arduino, Raspberry Pi, Beagleboard, UltiMaker, Adafruit products, Sparkfun Electronics products, etc...

dataflow 5y ago
> Examples are so abundant and obvious that I'm not sure I need to mention any, but for the sake of argument. In software: Linux, Gimp, Firefox, VLC, Blender, OpenOffice If you picked an average computer user at random (read: not people on HN) and had them try out Linux, Gimp, and OpenOffice, I don't think they'd agree with you that they're as high-quality as their commercial alternatives.
- Aeolun 5y ago
  > I don't think they'd agree with you I think that’s mostly due to them being different from the thing they are used to, not because they’re inferior. I’d be more interested in what people going in the other direction (e.g. from LibreOffice to MS Office) would say.
- throwawayswede 5y ago
  I assume you're defining high-quality as easy-to use? If so, then that definition is lacking at best.
  - dataflow 5y ago
    No, I'm not defining it. "High-quality" is in the question you would ask the user. They respond to you based on their own best judgment of what it means to them.
    - throwawayswede 5y ago
      I don't know what to tell you other than you probably haven't used any recent version of these software. I know many people who are not tech-savvy and use OpenOffice, Gimp or Blender daily. They're both reliable and function (in some aspects) on par with the commercially available stuff.
      - dataflow 5y ago
        > I don't know what to tell you other than you probably haven't used any recent version of these software. Well you would be wrong. I have LibreOffice 7.1.4.2 in front of me right now and it still can't correctly render stuff I had from 2014. The text boxes and stuff all end up in massively wrong positions, like they always have. (And they render fine in Word, like they always have.) Similarly, first Excel spreadsheet I try to open in it gives this error: Warning loading {document}: The data could not be loaded completely because the maximum number of columns per sheet was exceeded. I could waste my time with other examples but it would be that: wasting my time. Don't get me wrong, I'm rooting for them. Maybe someday there will finally come a free office program that can function like MS Office did a decade ago. I'm looking forward to seeing it before I die. But in the meantime, there's just no way we can honestly tell people LibreOffice is as high-quality as MS Office, regardless of how much we want that to be the case. It's just a lie we keep telling ourselves. > (in some aspects) ...you just made my point for me.
        throwawayswede 5y ago
        > Similarly, first Excel document I try to open in it gives this error: Warning loading {document}: The data could not be loaded completely because the maximum number of columns per sheet was exceeded. That's not exactly a fair assessment exercise. I'm not sure what format is the original excel file, but xlsb is a proprietary format. My experience with Writer is wonderful. Have not had any issues and I know many people who use it daily with no issues. Try to balance a picture and a couple of paragraphs in M$ Word in a long document and then come back to me on how that "high-quality" software handles it. > there's just no way we can honestly tell people it's as high-quality as MS Office Apparently, like many others in this entire thread, you've totally missed the point. I wasn't saying it's "as" high quality as M$ word (although I disagree with the usage of the word high quality here) but just that it is high quality by itself. This is known as an irrelevant conclusion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrelevant_conclusion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrelevant_conclusion
- fsflover 5y ago
  My relatives are using Linux with LibreOffice just fine, no complains. You will only have problems if you must use proprietary apps from monopolies which actively fight against freedom.
  - stOneskull 5y ago
    i use libreoffice every day and love it. writer is great. it has an easy menu. (personally, i have found ms office annoying ever since their ribbon device). and calc is a great spreadsheet. i think it is psychic a lot of the time, knowing what i want to do.
- akho 5y ago
  Average users use Linux all the time, it’s in everything. You’d need to ask the developers writing all these router OSes, smart televisions, Android phones, … whether they chose Linux because of its high quality or, I guess, randomly?.. Try giving an average user Photoshop. See how they weep. These thought experiments are really hard to apply to software on complex domains. OpenOffice is indeed a terrible example.
  - pjmlp 5y ago
    Indeed, and they do so willingness, because the Linux kernel is a detail completely hidden away to them. The OS vendor can change the kernel being used, and those average users won't notice it all. The only quality is being a free beer OS, that the OEM vendors can leech at will without bothering one second up-streaming their changes. And when the community started to be too vocal about it, efforts to use MIT/BSD licensed alternatives were set in motion. In a couple of years those router OSes, smart televisions, Android phones won't be using the Linux kernel any longer.
    - akho 5y ago
      The quality is being solid, easy to develop for, and, yes, free. I think you overestimate the ability of appliance companies to develop proprietary OS kernels. MIT/BSD licensed stuff is still free software.
      - pjmlp 5y ago
        Having fun enjoying the free software from PlayStation 4 OS? I advise you to read about Zephyr OS, FreeRTOS, Azure RTOS, Fuchsia, NuttX,....
        akho 5y ago
        Zephyr is Apache licensed, FreeRTOS MIT, Fuchsia BSD/MIT/Apache, NuttX Apache. ThreadX is the only one on your list that's not free software, and the success it achieved over its 24 years of existence is not anything to write home about. A closed-source OS in this space has no real chance, as it has to be adapted by hardware makers. Microsoft may be able to provide the backing for wider ThreadX adoption, but don't hold your breath. I don't see how the fact that BSD allows proprietary forks implies it is not high-quality software.

dataflow 5y ago

> Examples are so abundant and obvious that I'm not sure I need to mention any, but for the sake of argument. In software: Linux, Gimp, Firefox, VLC, Blender, OpenOffice If you picked an average computer user at random (read: not people on HN) and had them try out Linux, Gimp, and OpenOffice, I don't think they'd agree with you that they're as high-quality as their commercial alternatives.

Aeolun 5y ago
> I don't think they'd agree with you I think that’s mostly due to them being different from the thing they are used to, not because they’re inferior. I’d be more interested in what people going in the other direction (e.g. from LibreOffice to MS Office) would say.
throwawayswede 5y ago
I assume you're defining high-quality as easy-to use? If so, then that definition is lacking at best.
- dataflow 5y ago
  No, I'm not defining it. "High-quality" is in the question you would ask the user. They respond to you based on their own best judgment of what it means to them.
  - throwawayswede 5y ago
    I don't know what to tell you other than you probably haven't used any recent version of these software. I know many people who are not tech-savvy and use OpenOffice, Gimp or Blender daily. They're both reliable and function (in some aspects) on par with the commercially available stuff.
    - dataflow 5y ago
      > I don't know what to tell you other than you probably haven't used any recent version of these software. Well you would be wrong. I have LibreOffice 7.1.4.2 in front of me right now and it still can't correctly render stuff I had from 2014. The text boxes and stuff all end up in massively wrong positions, like they always have. (And they render fine in Word, like they always have.) Similarly, first Excel spreadsheet I try to open in it gives this error: Warning loading {document}: The data could not be loaded completely because the maximum number of columns per sheet was exceeded. I could waste my time with other examples but it would be that: wasting my time. Don't get me wrong, I'm rooting for them. Maybe someday there will finally come a free office program that can function like MS Office did a decade ago. I'm looking forward to seeing it before I die. But in the meantime, there's just no way we can honestly tell people LibreOffice is as high-quality as MS Office, regardless of how much we want that to be the case. It's just a lie we keep telling ourselves. > (in some aspects) ...you just made my point for me.
      - throwawayswede 5y ago
        > Similarly, first Excel document I try to open in it gives this error: Warning loading {document}: The data could not be loaded completely because the maximum number of columns per sheet was exceeded. That's not exactly a fair assessment exercise. I'm not sure what format is the original excel file, but xlsb is a proprietary format. My experience with Writer is wonderful. Have not had any issues and I know many people who use it daily with no issues. Try to balance a picture and a couple of paragraphs in M$ Word in a long document and then come back to me on how that "high-quality" software handles it. > there's just no way we can honestly tell people it's as high-quality as MS Office Apparently, like many others in this entire thread, you've totally missed the point. I wasn't saying it's "as" high quality as M$ word (although I disagree with the usage of the word high quality here) but just that it is high quality by itself. This is known as an irrelevant conclusion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrelevant_conclusion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrelevant_conclusion
fsflover 5y ago
My relatives are using Linux with LibreOffice just fine, no complains. You will only have problems if you must use proprietary apps from monopolies which actively fight against freedom.
- stOneskull 5y ago
  i use libreoffice every day and love it. writer is great. it has an easy menu. (personally, i have found ms office annoying ever since their ribbon device). and calc is a great spreadsheet. i think it is psychic a lot of the time, knowing what i want to do.
akho 5y ago
Average users use Linux all the time, it’s in everything. You’d need to ask the developers writing all these router OSes, smart televisions, Android phones, … whether they chose Linux because of its high quality or, I guess, randomly?.. Try giving an average user Photoshop. See how they weep. These thought experiments are really hard to apply to software on complex domains. OpenOffice is indeed a terrible example.
- pjmlp 5y ago
  Indeed, and they do so willingness, because the Linux kernel is a detail completely hidden away to them. The OS vendor can change the kernel being used, and those average users won't notice it all. The only quality is being a free beer OS, that the OEM vendors can leech at will without bothering one second up-streaming their changes. And when the community started to be too vocal about it, efforts to use MIT/BSD licensed alternatives were set in motion. In a couple of years those router OSes, smart televisions, Android phones won't be using the Linux kernel any longer.
  - akho 5y ago
    The quality is being solid, easy to develop for, and, yes, free. I think you overestimate the ability of appliance companies to develop proprietary OS kernels. MIT/BSD licensed stuff is still free software.
    - pjmlp 5y ago
      Having fun enjoying the free software from PlayStation 4 OS? I advise you to read about Zephyr OS, FreeRTOS, Azure RTOS, Fuchsia, NuttX,....
      - akho 5y ago
        Zephyr is Apache licensed, FreeRTOS MIT, Fuchsia BSD/MIT/Apache, NuttX Apache. ThreadX is the only one on your list that's not free software, and the success it achieved over its 24 years of existence is not anything to write home about. A closed-source OS in this space has no real chance, as it has to be adapted by hardware makers. Microsoft may be able to provide the backing for wider ThreadX adoption, but don't hold your breath. I don't see how the fact that BSD allows proprietary forks implies it is not high-quality software.