6 ms·

Thank you (seriously) for demonstrating the part where I said, "but they'd rather tell you why you're wrong rather than really listen to why you're frustrated."

Thank you (seriously) for demonstrating the part where I said, "but they'd rather tell you why you're wrong rather than really listen to why you're frustrated." > ...as well as any other missing AD features... This isn't exactly a feature, it's a core part of AD permissions. Samba 4 was developed for the purpose of taking on server roles in an AD environment. > We are not your servants, we are people. Give value, get value. Open source is not your custom-fit panacea. OK, I hear that a lot. And it's a fair criticism. Now, here's the other half of it: support people are not your janitors. Quit expecting us to spend hours digging through arcane documentation, followed by further hours troubleshooting things that you left half-finished, and then turn around and tell us to write it our own damn selves. Because, seriously, there just aren't enough hours in the day. I'd love to contribute more to open source, but first I have to get enough revenue in my business to support that, and before I can do that, I have to figure out how to fix my clients' technical issues without raping their pocketbooks. The harder my job gets, the less likely I am to contribute. For example, I might be writing a Jooma migration tool right now to fix the stupid 1.5->1.7 issues, and I'd be happy to release it and even support it for as long as people need it, but first I have to figure out what the hell is wrong with the wireless drivers in Linux on the new laptop... > We're dipping into two different pools of shitware for examples of bad software now. Yeah, that was the point: examples of bad software cross all disciplines, all companies, all environments. If it was just one company that consistently produced crap software, it would be easy to say that there's probably something broken at that company. But when there are so many companies, and so many freelancers, and so many open source developers producing crap software -- there's probably some issue with software development itself. > That or you should take up buddhism, seriously. Eh, I appreciate that, really, but I don't want to stop caring. I want it to be better.

jebblue 15y ago
> support people are not your janitors. Quit expecting us to spend hours digging through arcane documentation, followed by further hours troubleshooting things that you left half-finished, and then turn around and tell us to write it our own damn selves. Because, seriously, there just aren't enough hours in the day. Unless I'm missing something, if software were perfect then there wouldn't be a need for support people?
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- thaumaturgy 15y ago
  Yeah, and I think that would be OK. I'm not certain about it, but I think that a lot of the time and energy that goes into support could go into development instead, and most people would be happier. For example, clients that are paying me to fix things might pay me instead to make new things for them that would better fit their needs. I'm not under any illusion that it would work that way for everyone. But, I can't think of a single support-level person (whether consultant, phone, on-site, or otherwise) that's been doing it for more than a few years that's really happy with it. It can be exceptionally frustrating to be the go-between between users and fluky systems. So, at the very least, it would eliminate a necessary evil that makes a lot of people unhappy. It might also result in fewer jobs to go around. But I don't think so.
  - alnayyir 15y ago
    >It might also result in fewer jobs to go around. But I don't think so. It would result in more wealth and efficiency, not more jobs. Capitalism says nothing about jobs, only wealth. We don't really (in western society) have a mechanism for transferring wealth beyond trade, labor, and government fiat. In the absence of busywork created by government fiat, we're going to have a hard time socially speaking midwifing an increasingly efficient world where redundant jobs get replaced with technology and processes. This will continue the trend of increasing wealth stratification as whomever has control over the means of production will be subject to the will of others less and less, and be able to keep more of their profits. Incidentally, this means it'll be fantastic to be a programmer, and terrible to be a laborer. If a novel solution isn't found, the best many could hope for is a service job or medieval-style patronage of arts as production and maintenance of product pipelines requires fewer humans.
- jodrellblank 15y ago
  You're missing that software which works perfectly still wont do what you want magically. Just because it works on a terminal server doesn't mean it will select and install itself on your cluster when you want it. Just because it generates reports promptly without crashing every time doesn't mean it will know which reports to generate or which data to pull from, or how to include your new office statistics. Just because your phone synchronises email when abroad without messing up doesn't mean it knows which email addresses to forward to which people. Support people would then be primarily involved in using technology to help businesses do things, instead of primarily using technology workaround other technology's problems.
alnayyir 15y ago
>Eh, I appreciate that, really, but I don't want to stop caring. I want it to be better. Corpses write no code. shrugs > If it was just one company that consistently produced crap software, it would be easy to say that there's probably something broken at that company. Anything below the top, say, 2-5% of software is guaranteed to be shit because all the programmers below the top 2-5% are shit. There is no grand movement or methodology to be had here. It's a people problem. >For example, I might be writing a Jooma migration tool right now to fix the stupid 1.5->1.7 issues, and I'd be happy to release it and even support it for as long as people need it, but first I have to figure out what the hell is wrong with the wireless drivers in Linux on the new laptop... This is why I use Linux for workstations where it seems more comfortable, and my Mac for my mobile machine as it's more tolerant of network/display disruption. I'm not trying to troll or be a Mac fanboy here, I prefer working in Linux as I am simply more productive and it's my production OS. But, a laptop that is on the move plays to the strengths of OS X sufficiently that I am travelling right now and using my Mac instead of my Linux laptop. You're going to have to accept that if you use the wrong software for the wrong problems, you're going to keep getting poked in the eye. You're using bad hammers and complaining about how bad hammers are. There's a distinction to be made, an important one. >Now, here's the other half of it: support people are not your janitors. Open source projects don't have "support people", they have contributors and devs that volunteer their time. I worked for a MOTU and volunteered in the #ubuntu channel on FreeNode for years. I've done thousands of man-hours of support. I know exactly how bad software is, and how bad the situation is. I'm on your side here, but until you start solving the problems one at a time, nothing changes. My apartment gets cleaned one trash bag at a time. >The harder my job gets, the less likely I am to contribute. Something's gotta give. Stuff like Joomla registers as shitware in the circles I go in. Complaining about things like Joomla, PHP, Drupal, Outlook, etc. doesn't really register with me. Might as well buy a Kia and complain about how terrible the state of automobiles are. The author had much stronger points than you have. You work with some terrible stuff, period.
- michaelochurch 15y ago
  Anything below the top, say, 2-5% of software is guaranteed to be shit because all the programmers below the top 2-5% are shit. There is no grand movement or methodology to be had here. It's a people problem. Disagree. I don't think 95-98% of programmers are idiots. However, a lot of programmers (even some very smart ones) are terrible architects and have no sense of the big picture. Moreover, a lot of projects start out well but turn to shit through neglect and departure from the original architecture. 95-98% of software architecture is deplorable, but that's not because our industry is has 20+ idiots for every decently smart person. It's a lot more subtle than that. A big part of the problem is that most of professional programming is so disconnected and often alienating that a lot of programmers never learn architecture and its importance; the only way to really learn it is to support your own creation and experience first-hand the consequences of your original decisions. A lot of programmers never have that experience. In sum, I think the general shittiness of the software industry and of architecture has a lot more to do with the fact that few programmers never have the experiences that will make them any good, than it does with a lack of talent. It takes 10,000 hours of deliberate practice to become good at something, but most of what most programmers do for work is not "deliberate practice"; it's repetitive drudge work that they often don't have the creative control to automate.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
robotresearcher 15y ago
> support people are not your janitors. Quit expecting us to spend hours digging through arcane documentation, followed by further hours troubleshooting things that you left half-finished I am amazed once again at some people's ability to take free stuff and complain that it isn't making them money fast enough. Just take a few seconds to think about the value we all get out of the deep and broad Free Software stacks. Finding bugs and fixing docs is a part of that process. You're not entitled to any of it, but you're welcome to participate and partake of the fruits.
- Confusion 15y ago
  The problem is that writing the code yourself is nice, while tracing/solving bugs in the code of others and fixing docs sucks. Too many free software authors do the nice work and rely on others to do the dirty work. They write code, release it and claim victory, while their code is only barely usable. The problem is that something barely usable is better than something nonexistent, so it gets used and we are stuck with a suboptimal solution. In this respect, free software development constantly gets stuck in a local maximum.
  - billswift 15y ago
    >The problem is that something barely usable is better than something nonexistent No necessarily. I think sometimes the existence of something, even if only barely usable, blocks the creation of something else that might be better.
    - alnayyir 15y ago
      OTOH, perfect can at times be the enemy of good. You have to weigh the value of immediacy against permanently enshrined qualities and perform your own cost-benefit analysis. This is called critical thinking, they introduce this around age 12 in most western societies. You don't have to pick a religion and stick with it, you can just make a judgment call on a case-by-case basis. Works great for me, fyi.
- jodrellblank 15y ago

jebblue 15y ago

> support people are not your janitors. Quit expecting us to spend hours digging through arcane documentation, followed by further hours troubleshooting things that you left half-finished, and then turn around and tell us to write it our own damn selves. Because, seriously, there just aren't enough hours in the day. Unless I'm missing something, if software were perfect then there wouldn't be a need for support people?

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
thaumaturgy 15y ago
Yeah, and I think that would be OK. I'm not certain about it, but I think that a lot of the time and energy that goes into support could go into development instead, and most people would be happier. For example, clients that are paying me to fix things might pay me instead to make new things for them that would better fit their needs. I'm not under any illusion that it would work that way for everyone. But, I can't think of a single support-level person (whether consultant, phone, on-site, or otherwise) that's been doing it for more than a few years that's really happy with it. It can be exceptionally frustrating to be the go-between between users and fluky systems. So, at the very least, it would eliminate a necessary evil that makes a lot of people unhappy. It might also result in fewer jobs to go around. But I don't think so.
- alnayyir 15y ago
  >It might also result in fewer jobs to go around. But I don't think so. It would result in more wealth and efficiency, not more jobs. Capitalism says nothing about jobs, only wealth. We don't really (in western society) have a mechanism for transferring wealth beyond trade, labor, and government fiat. In the absence of busywork created by government fiat, we're going to have a hard time socially speaking midwifing an increasingly efficient world where redundant jobs get replaced with technology and processes. This will continue the trend of increasing wealth stratification as whomever has control over the means of production will be subject to the will of others less and less, and be able to keep more of their profits. Incidentally, this means it'll be fantastic to be a programmer, and terrible to be a laborer. If a novel solution isn't found, the best many could hope for is a service job or medieval-style patronage of arts as production and maintenance of product pipelines requires fewer humans.
jodrellblank 15y ago
You're missing that software which works perfectly still wont do what you want magically. Just because it works on a terminal server doesn't mean it will select and install itself on your cluster when you want it. Just because it generates reports promptly without crashing every time doesn't mean it will know which reports to generate or which data to pull from, or how to include your new office statistics. Just because your phone synchronises email when abroad without messing up doesn't mean it knows which email addresses to forward to which people. Support people would then be primarily involved in using technology to help businesses do things, instead of primarily using technology workaround other technology's problems.

alnayyir 15y ago

>Eh, I appreciate that, really, but I don't want to stop caring. I want it to be better. Corpses write no code. shrugs > If it was just one company that consistently produced crap software, it would be easy to say that there's probably something broken at that company. Anything below the top, say, 2-5% of software is guaranteed to be shit because all the programmers below the top 2-5% are shit. There is no grand movement or methodology to be had here. It's a people problem. >For example, I might be writing a Jooma migration tool right now to fix the stupid 1.5->1.7 issues, and I'd be happy to release it and even support it for as long as people need it, but first I have to figure out what the hell is wrong with the wireless drivers in Linux on the new laptop... This is why I use Linux for workstations where it seems more comfortable, and my Mac for my mobile machine as it's more tolerant of network/display disruption. I'm not trying to troll or be a Mac fanboy here, I prefer working in Linux as I am simply more productive and it's my production OS. But, a laptop that is on the move plays to the strengths of OS X sufficiently that I am travelling right now and using my Mac instead of my Linux laptop. You're going to have to accept that if you use the wrong software for the wrong problems, you're going to keep getting poked in the eye. You're using bad hammers and complaining about how bad hammers are. There's a distinction to be made, an important one. >Now, here's the other half of it: support people are not your janitors. Open source projects don't have "support people", they have contributors and devs that volunteer their time. I worked for a MOTU and volunteered in the #ubuntu channel on FreeNode for years. I've done thousands of man-hours of support. I know exactly how bad software is, and how bad the situation is. I'm on your side here, but until you start solving the problems one at a time, nothing changes. My apartment gets cleaned one trash bag at a time. >The harder my job gets, the less likely I am to contribute. Something's gotta give. Stuff like Joomla registers as shitware in the circles I go in. Complaining about things like Joomla, PHP, Drupal, Outlook, etc. doesn't really register with me. Might as well buy a Kia and complain about how terrible the state of automobiles are. The author had much stronger points than you have. You work with some terrible stuff, period.

michaelochurch 15y ago
Anything below the top, say, 2-5% of software is guaranteed to be shit because all the programmers below the top 2-5% are shit. There is no grand movement or methodology to be had here. It's a people problem. Disagree. I don't think 95-98% of programmers are idiots. However, a lot of programmers (even some very smart ones) are terrible architects and have no sense of the big picture. Moreover, a lot of projects start out well but turn to shit through neglect and departure from the original architecture. 95-98% of software architecture is deplorable, but that's not because our industry is has 20+ idiots for every decently smart person. It's a lot more subtle than that. A big part of the problem is that most of professional programming is so disconnected and often alienating that a lot of programmers never learn architecture and its importance; the only way to really learn it is to support your own creation and experience first-hand the consequences of your original decisions. A lot of programmers never have that experience. In sum, I think the general shittiness of the software industry and of architecture has a lot more to do with the fact that few programmers never have the experiences that will make them any good, than it does with a lack of talent. It takes 10,000 hours of deliberate practice to become good at something, but most of what most programmers do for work is not "deliberate practice"; it's repetitive drudge work that they often don't have the creative control to automate.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

robotresearcher 15y ago

> support people are not your janitors. Quit expecting us to spend hours digging through arcane documentation, followed by further hours troubleshooting things that you left half-finished I am amazed once again at some people's ability to take free stuff and complain that it isn't making them money fast enough. Just take a few seconds to think about the value we all get out of the deep and broad Free Software stacks. Finding bugs and fixing docs is a part of that process. You're not entitled to any of it, but you're welcome to participate and partake of the fruits.

Confusion 15y ago
The problem is that writing the code yourself is nice, while tracing/solving bugs in the code of others and fixing docs sucks. Too many free software authors do the nice work and rely on others to do the dirty work. They write code, release it and claim victory, while their code is only barely usable. The problem is that something barely usable is better than something nonexistent, so it gets used and we are stuck with a suboptimal solution. In this respect, free software development constantly gets stuck in a local maximum.
- billswift 15y ago
  >The problem is that something barely usable is better than something nonexistent No necessarily. I think sometimes the existence of something, even if only barely usable, blocks the creation of something else that might be better.
  - alnayyir 15y ago
    OTOH, perfect can at times be the enemy of good. You have to weigh the value of immediacy against permanently enshrined qualities and perform your own cost-benefit analysis. This is called critical thinking, they introduce this around age 12 in most western societies. You don't have to pick a religion and stick with it, you can just make a judgment call on a case-by-case basis. Works great for me, fyi.
jodrellblank 15y ago