5 ms·

What you call a “mistake” is actually just having empathy for the user. User experience is king. It’s not tech debt, it’s a feature.

tcmb 4y ago
I agree that it's empathy for the user, but I'd say it's a workaround, and as such it's tech debt.
- muspimerol 4y ago
  A workaround does not necessitate tech debt. "Workaround" is a conflated term - it basically implies something works differently than one might expect, which is subjective. Anyway, what is the alternative? Saying "that's not my problem"? Users don't care about who is technically at fault, they care about a well functioning product.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    The alternative is to let it break and force developers to update their software. Doing that allowed Apple to not have to maintain 32 bit compatibility which allowed Apple to make the operating system smaller (all shared libraries have to be duplicated including in memory) and allowed Apple to completely remove 32 bit support in the later ARM processors.
    - layer8 4y ago
      …and forced me to stop using some favorite iOS apps because they didn’t get updated — in one case because the developer had died. Windows is certainly more user-friendly in that respect.
      - scarface74 4y ago
        So Apple should have kept 32 bit support in the chip and processor forever? Libraries being able to consume less memory and being able to either reduce the die size or add more features is a direct consumer benefit.
        EamonnMR 4y ago
        Yes, absolutely. Memory is cheap, software is valuable, forcing everyone to churn constantly to satisfy some sort of aesthetic is a massive waste of resources.
        scarface74 4y ago
        Die space on a processor is definitely not cheap. Also memory takes energy to keep refreshed both die space and power are at a premium on mobile devices. Shouid Apple also have kept PPC support in Macs forever? 68K support? OS 9 support? Why stop there, why not ship with Apple //e 65C02 support? I’m sure I lost some valuable AppleSoft basic programs over the years.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        EamonnMR 4y ago
        I would consider that wonderful. I'm no huge Microsoft fan, but it's very nice that I can run 90s and 2000s programs on my current windows box. Though I hear we're losing Win32...
- Beltalowda 4y ago
  "Tech debt" is doing things quickly now with the price that you have to clean up (i.e. invest more time) later, hence the word "debt". This is sometimes a good trade-off, just as financial debt is. Not everything that looks a bit ugly is "tech debt". And yes, it's ugly, but reality is ugly so we have to deal with it.
DrewADesign 4y ago
Yeah... I've put well over 10k hours into writing FOSS and consistently encounter this attitude there, too. I never imagined we could get this far tolerating such frequent contempt for both end-users and their advocates, such as interface designers. If your PR poses even a theoretical future inconvenience to developers, good luck getting it merged, regardless of the user benefit. Until this changes, user-facing open source alternatives will always be alternatives rather than the standard.
- ethbr0 4y ago
  Boxed software Microsoft: if it breaks, then Microsoft is wrong. FOSS and new Microsoft: if it breaks, have you tried pulling the latest? Yes? Then it's a bug in your expectations.
- baq 4y ago
  It’s easy to optimize for developer convenience when you aren’t getting paid to do the work… arguably it’s the only way non-profit open source software can progress at all on average. The tails are heavy, though.
  - hulitu 4y ago
    If you write the program for yourself, yes. Why then bother with an OSS licence ?
- RedShift1 4y ago
  Not just devs and end users, but also devs and other devs. Not in rejecting pulls but changing API's like renaming functions, removing functions, swapping argument positions, changing the complete workflow of a library, etc... without care. The amount of breakage in the OSS world is just ridiculous. I'm probably biased because I deal with a lot of Javascript where this sort of behaviour is rampant.
  - hulitu 4y ago
    > I'm probably biased because I deal with a lot of Javascript where this sort of behaviour is rampant. It's overall. The size of libraries in a linux system [1] has grown steadily over the years wirhout bringing anything useful. The QT and GTK libraries are the perfect example of incompatibilities and bad design. [1] Slackware which did not changed much in term of offered programs over the years.
tshaddox 4y ago
Surely it’s both? Some technical debt can be okay just like some personal or corporate debt can be okay.
scarface74 4y ago
Every piece of code you write automatically becomes code you have to maintain. It’s tech debt.

tcmb 4y ago

I agree that it's empathy for the user, but I'd say it's a workaround, and as such it's tech debt.

muspimerol 4y ago
A workaround does not necessitate tech debt. "Workaround" is a conflated term - it basically implies something works differently than one might expect, which is subjective. Anyway, what is the alternative? Saying "that's not my problem"? Users don't care about who is technically at fault, they care about a well functioning product.
- scarface74 4y ago
  The alternative is to let it break and force developers to update their software. Doing that allowed Apple to not have to maintain 32 bit compatibility which allowed Apple to make the operating system smaller (all shared libraries have to be duplicated including in memory) and allowed Apple to completely remove 32 bit support in the later ARM processors.
  - layer8 4y ago
    …and forced me to stop using some favorite iOS apps because they didn’t get updated — in one case because the developer had died. Windows is certainly more user-friendly in that respect.
    - scarface74 4y ago
      So Apple should have kept 32 bit support in the chip and processor forever? Libraries being able to consume less memory and being able to either reduce the die size or add more features is a direct consumer benefit.
      - EamonnMR 4y ago
        Yes, absolutely. Memory is cheap, software is valuable, forcing everyone to churn constantly to satisfy some sort of aesthetic is a massive waste of resources.
        scarface74 4y ago
        Die space on a processor is definitely not cheap. Also memory takes energy to keep refreshed both die space and power are at a premium on mobile devices. Shouid Apple also have kept PPC support in Macs forever? 68K support? OS 9 support? Why stop there, why not ship with Apple //e 65C02 support? I’m sure I lost some valuable AppleSoft basic programs over the years.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        EamonnMR 4y ago
        I would consider that wonderful. I'm no huge Microsoft fan, but it's very nice that I can run 90s and 2000s programs on my current windows box. Though I hear we're losing Win32...
Beltalowda 4y ago
"Tech debt" is doing things quickly now with the price that you have to clean up (i.e. invest more time) later, hence the word "debt". This is sometimes a good trade-off, just as financial debt is. Not everything that looks a bit ugly is "tech debt". And yes, it's ugly, but reality is ugly so we have to deal with it.

DrewADesign 4y ago

Yeah... I've put well over 10k hours into writing FOSS and consistently encounter this attitude there, too. I never imagined we could get this far tolerating such frequent contempt for both end-users and their advocates, such as interface designers. If your PR poses even a theoretical future inconvenience to developers, good luck getting it merged, regardless of the user benefit. Until this changes, user-facing open source alternatives will always be alternatives rather than the standard.

ethbr0 4y ago
Boxed software Microsoft: if it breaks, then Microsoft is wrong. FOSS and new Microsoft: if it breaks, have you tried pulling the latest? Yes? Then it's a bug in your expectations.
baq 4y ago
It’s easy to optimize for developer convenience when you aren’t getting paid to do the work… arguably it’s the only way non-profit open source software can progress at all on average. The tails are heavy, though.
- hulitu 4y ago
  If you write the program for yourself, yes. Why then bother with an OSS licence ?
RedShift1 4y ago
Not just devs and end users, but also devs and other devs. Not in rejecting pulls but changing API's like renaming functions, removing functions, swapping argument positions, changing the complete workflow of a library, etc... without care. The amount of breakage in the OSS world is just ridiculous. I'm probably biased because I deal with a lot of Javascript where this sort of behaviour is rampant.
- hulitu 4y ago
  > I'm probably biased because I deal with a lot of Javascript where this sort of behaviour is rampant. It's overall. The size of libraries in a linux system [1] has grown steadily over the years wirhout bringing anything useful. The QT and GTK libraries are the perfect example of incompatibilities and bad design. [1] Slackware which did not changed much in term of offered programs over the years.

tshaddox 4y ago

Surely it’s both? Some technical debt can be okay just like some personal or corporate debt can be okay.

scarface74 4y ago

Every piece of code you write automatically becomes code you have to maintain. It’s tech debt.