4 ms·

It is true that highest quality FOSS is found at the level of libraries and frameworks, not on the end-user app level. There's still a lot to win by improving t

by rapnie 3y ago

It is true that highest quality FOSS is found at the level of libraries and frameworks, not on the end-user app level. There's still a lot to win by improving the practices on this level, which require more than pure technical focus. And other people than devs getting involved with their skills. Requires better FOSS tools and practices to make that happen. That is a challenge for the future of FOSS. It's also one tackled by people using the FOSS apps, prepared to bear with inconveniences, give their feedback, and not ditching them on a whim for the first proprietary competitor that is better. Yes, that is not for everyone to be involved with. I am quite happy to see more people who do.

TulliusCicero 3y ago
A lot of FOSS enthusiasts want the UX to be bad, because to them the UX that is bad for most people is actually fine. I think the issue is less getting a designer interested, and more that it would be really hard to get consensus. Changing UX is more subjective AND intrusive compared to adding more features or improving performance. Changing the UI means changing people's existing flows, as opposed to a new feature that can just be one more button somewhere.
- rapnie 3y ago
  It is understandable, since the majority of FOSS enthusiasts consist of developers, techie folks. An audience of power users that indeed have different preferences for their UX. There's a lack of people involved in FOSS projects (e.g. designers) that inform these developers on the expectations of the user base that their FOSS project is targeting. FOSS devs want to see their project get uptake and use, and need different voices that tell them (with good arguments) how to achieve that. Lacking that biased UX hampers project objectives.
  - hx8 3y ago
    I don't think there is a consensus among developers of front-end FOSS that becoming the market leader is a high priority. Non-power users will never submit a PR, and rarely even write a useful bug report. They effectively give very little back to the project, except maybe some clout that comes with a large user base. There are some exceptions, but the ones that care the most about market share either have a corporate backer that is profiting from the project (Microsoft, Chromium) or require large numbers for the project to be successful (Firefox, Fediverse).
    - rapnie 3y ago
      Before striving for market share and leadership, there's product-market fit. The ambitions of FOSS projects needn't be (and often aren't) to become a leader. Offering a good alternative to some proprietary product is already a good start. FOSS projects are predominantly started and maintained by developers and this is reflected in both the tool choices and the organization / governance model of the project, which makes it hard for other stakeholders to have a proper say in it. Those are areas to focus on and where much can be improved. And with the help of said stakeholders to encourage that trend.
  - andai 3y ago
    > the majority of FOSS enthusiasts consist of developers, techie folks. Is this for the same reason that most Linux users don't care about free software (i.e. are happy running various proprietary blobs on Linux, Windows games in Wine etc.) i.e. as far as I can tell most users of free software don't care about the free software aspect very much. Talked to a Linux user about this last night and he seemed to think the "free" part means "no cost"... Sad!

by rapnie 3y ago

TulliusCicero 3y ago

A lot of FOSS enthusiasts want the UX to be bad, because to them the UX that is bad for most people is actually fine. I think the issue is less getting a designer interested, and more that it would be really hard to get consensus. Changing UX is more subjective AND intrusive compared to adding more features or improving performance. Changing the UI means changing people's existing flows, as opposed to a new feature that can just be one more button somewhere.

rapnie 3y ago
It is understandable, since the majority of FOSS enthusiasts consist of developers, techie folks. An audience of power users that indeed have different preferences for their UX. There's a lack of people involved in FOSS projects (e.g. designers) that inform these developers on the expectations of the user base that their FOSS project is targeting. FOSS devs want to see their project get uptake and use, and need different voices that tell them (with good arguments) how to achieve that. Lacking that biased UX hampers project objectives.
- hx8 3y ago
  I don't think there is a consensus among developers of front-end FOSS that becoming the market leader is a high priority. Non-power users will never submit a PR, and rarely even write a useful bug report. They effectively give very little back to the project, except maybe some clout that comes with a large user base. There are some exceptions, but the ones that care the most about market share either have a corporate backer that is profiting from the project (Microsoft, Chromium) or require large numbers for the project to be successful (Firefox, Fediverse).
  - rapnie 3y ago
    Before striving for market share and leadership, there's product-market fit. The ambitions of FOSS projects needn't be (and often aren't) to become a leader. Offering a good alternative to some proprietary product is already a good start. FOSS projects are predominantly started and maintained by developers and this is reflected in both the tool choices and the organization / governance model of the project, which makes it hard for other stakeholders to have a proper say in it. Those are areas to focus on and where much can be improved. And with the help of said stakeholders to encourage that trend.
- andai 3y ago
  > the majority of FOSS enthusiasts consist of developers, techie folks. Is this for the same reason that most Linux users don't care about free software (i.e. are happy running various proprietary blobs on Linux, Windows games in Wine etc.) i.e. as far as I can tell most users of free software don't care about the free software aspect very much. Talked to a Linux user about this last night and he seemed to think the "free" part means "no cost"... Sad!