3 ms·

The issue here is a lack of communication. For example in LedgerSMB, we get occasional users asking for MySQL support. We send them a (lengthy) canned respons

The issue here is a lack of communication. For example in LedgerSMB, we get occasional users asking for MySQL support. We send them a (lengthy) canned response detailing why MySQL support is not on our priority list and in fact why we wouldn't accept patches if they were written. We politely advise people to look for other accounting programs if this doesn't seem desirable to them. Pretty soon we got fewer and fewer. People could see what our position was, why it wasn't open to debate, and so forth. But reading a lot of this what I see is "won't fix. Sorry, against our design" with no attempt to either leave the door open for future changes or figure out what the user wants. Better approaches include a long-term feature requests queue or some other way of preserving feedback for later review during design sessions, or a canned response which details why a category of feature requests is unwelcome and inviting further discussion of what could be done instead. If it is not applicable, the user ideally should be challenged and asked to justify why they need what they say they need before the bug is marked wont-fix with no discussion.

DanBC 15y ago
Better communication would probably have solved many problems for them. A canned FAQ with, as you say, details of why they're doing stuff would have helped. More importantly, links to instructions for removing Unity and installing other environments would have been good. But that would have opened another problem: Installing Gnome 2.x is only going to be viable short term. Dependencies will start to break more and more stuff until users are forced to upgrade. Really, Gnome should have forked and had a stable 2.x release with gentle bug fixing, and a renamed 3 release with fun new features.
enobrev 15y ago
I wholeheartedly agree that communication is the issue. And everybody is doing an awful job of it right now (Users and Canonical). "Figuring out what the user wants" isn't necessarily the answer either. Not if your goals are as lofty as bringing Linux to the masses. Un/fortunately, the current user base is NOT necessarily the future. But if they want to bring "us" along, there are options. Drive the design-centric stake into the ground. Put their designers front and center with blog posts and marketing and workshops. Make it real. Let those who want the same-old to make the choice to go elsewhere - cordially. And from there, teach the function-first world from which it comes why design is important, by leading through example. Open the curtains on this dark basement of a community to let some light in and start a long and important conversation about personal hygiene, kerning fonts and rounded corners. Help a couple app developers make some real money selling a simple yet well designed app through the new software center. In my mind, that's real communication and leadership. Bickering over features won't get anyone anywhere, and while their hand-waving "won't-fix" is NOT the way to go about it, neither is wasting too much time on people who probably won't like what Ubuntu is trying to become. Personally, I like the new stuff, and I'm looking forward to seeing what's next.
- einhverfr 15y ago
  It's not an issue just of figuring out what the user wants. It's figuring out what is not working for the user and why. In general you can assume that what's not working for current users will not work for a large subset of future desired users.

DanBC 15y ago

Better communication would probably have solved many problems for them. A canned FAQ with, as you say, details of why they're doing stuff would have helped. More importantly, links to instructions for removing Unity and installing other environments would have been good. But that would have opened another problem: Installing Gnome 2.x is only going to be viable short term. Dependencies will start to break more and more stuff until users are forced to upgrade. Really, Gnome should have forked and had a stable 2.x release with gentle bug fixing, and a renamed 3 release with fun new features.

enobrev 15y ago

I wholeheartedly agree that communication is the issue. And everybody is doing an awful job of it right now (Users and Canonical). "Figuring out what the user wants" isn't necessarily the answer either. Not if your goals are as lofty as bringing Linux to the masses. Un/fortunately, the current user base is NOT necessarily the future. But if they want to bring "us" along, there are options. Drive the design-centric stake into the ground. Put their designers front and center with blog posts and marketing and workshops. Make it real. Let those who want the same-old to make the choice to go elsewhere - cordially. And from there, teach the function-first world from which it comes why design is important, by leading through example. Open the curtains on this dark basement of a community to let some light in and start a long and important conversation about personal hygiene, kerning fonts and rounded corners. Help a couple app developers make some real money selling a simple yet well designed app through the new software center. In my mind, that's real communication and leadership. Bickering over features won't get anyone anywhere, and while their hand-waving "won't-fix" is NOT the way to go about it, neither is wasting too much time on people who probably won't like what Ubuntu is trying to become. Personally, I like the new stuff, and I'm looking forward to seeing what's next.

einhverfr 15y ago
It's not an issue just of figuring out what the user wants. It's figuring out what is not working for the user and why. In general you can assume that what's not working for current users will not work for a large subset of future desired users.