Abiword: Support Expectations 412
bockman
writes "Abiword developers have put up a
letter,
explaining what they expect from their user community and what the
community should (and should not) expect from a volunteer-based open
source software project like theirs. A much needed reality-check in
these times when a large number of non-developers have joined the
Linux users world." This is a must read for anyone who uses any
open source software.
Re:I have ony one request for all developers (Score:2, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Expect to see this linked from Microsoft.com (Score:5, Insightful)
That's funny, because it appears to me that the "you get what you pay for" ratio is still in favor of Open Source projects, as opposed to Microsoft. I guess it depends on how happy you are with your last Microsoft purchase versus your last use of software downloaded for free. I know which one I'm happier with.
See, if AbiSource was like Microsoft, they would be promising a completely secure and easy-to-use product in a couple months, miss their date by almost a year, and have recurring security issues (all of them completely denied, then considered "features", then patched quickly so as to break other parts of the product) up until it was time to release their next bloated version, and then repeat the whole cycle. So I don't really see where AbiSource has anything to be ashamed of, unless complete honesty with your user base is some sort of black mark against you.
Can't have it both ways... (Score:5, Insightful)
Still, it's also easy to see why users have expectations. After all, they've been told by journalists that Linux is Ready For The Desktop. They've read spewing by zealots about how fantastically superior Linux applications are and how there's limitless free, quick support available from The Community. They've read the stuff on the Red Hat or Mandrake box and spent money for it. They've invested time in installing Linux and in creating work on it. I can understand why they're annoyed to be told, "It's free and it's my spare-time hobby so deal with it."
I accept that dealing with a desktop Linux installation is a hobby in its own right and that you have to spend time to make it work and deal with some things that justa aren't there. But it's easy to see why a lot of users don't realize that.
Then there are the free software whackos who think that they're owed the world on a silver platter. But that's a whole other issue...
Users that make an effort are rewarded (Score:4, Insightful)
Tell users what they expect from them? (Score:5, Insightful)
I can't say I got that from the letter, but it is nice to see developers standing up from themselves. Especially in this day of "Free Software can compete with Pay software" it's great seeing someone telling it like it is. My favourite sentement:
The problem here is expecting too much all the time. Many of the more visible free software projects have made huge leaps in the past, and to many users that then makes them expect that sort of delivery to be the norm. If you deliver the best most of the time, it's expected all of the time. And as a developer, I'm flattered that users belive in a product and like it so much that the want to be able use it better. But as much as we love code, we also love just relaxing after work sometimes. The Abiword dev's want the software to get as good as it can be, but they also need to have time to work at their day jobs, cut the grass and walk the dog.
Perhaps in the future people will start paying for "free" software. That day, my friends, will be a glorious day.
Hurray for Abiword (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Expect to see this linked from Microsoft.com (Score:2, Insightful)
In fact, the support I see for most OSS projects that have some steam rolling is very impressive. People tend to be polite and try to be helpful if you seem to be having a real problem that isn't caused by dismissing the manuals and how-tos. Sure, sometimes there's flame wars, jerks, trolls, and other assorted assholes. That happens. If I'm not paying for the support, I don't mind too much. How many customer service horror stories do we all have? And that's for products and service that we actually paid money for! There's something really wrong when the customer service track record for free stuff is better than that of stuff that I paid for.
Whoo, I just got trolled.
Re:Can't have it both ways... (Score:3, Insightful)
I know which direction you are going, but I don't think that the article is addressing those type of people that go to the local store, see a Red Hat (or insert your favorite retail linux here) Linux display and purchase it.
Those people get to call Red Hat for support (that's why you *buy* the retail version) and to complain. The article is addressing the people who downloaded a linux-iso, installed it and are now expecting a free version of M$ Word. It's not going to happen, and the article is trying to set those people straight....IMHO
Re:Huh? (Score:3, Insightful)
And in their list of intended goals it is made quite clear that they don't intend to produce the successor to Word.
Whether it meets your needs depends on what your needs are (and whether or not you can get it up). If you read their list of goals, then you have something valid to compare it against. It you compare it against your hopes
.
Not at all. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's that if you -do- get what you pay for, you can't complain.
AbiWord is much more useful than it's cost, but some people take that to mean they can just then start making demands. And people also don't know how to ask for the support that _is_ readily available.
And seriously, who the hell are these people calling when their software breaks? I've never even heard of someone having Word break and then picking up the phone to dial Microsoft. And if they did and started being beligerent to the person on the line, how much help do you think they'd get?
Reading this memo as an excuse of any kind is just wrong, because you don't need an "excuse" to not be able to hand the world to people who are irrationaly demanding it of you.
Not necessarily. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Can't have it both ways... (Score:2, Insightful)
Their Help page [abisource.com] needs a good forum for its users to help each other in. That way anytime you answer a question it is
1. Able to be searched for by DIY knowledgeable users
2. Allows the amplification of any official responses to multiple users. Mailing lists are fine and dandy for this but unless someone was subscribed to the list at the time they will never see the message, forum software solved this limitation. Faqs don't have to be updated as often as people can respond "on the fly".
3. This is the most important by far. Users help each other out the majority of the time and you build a viable support community around your product. 3.
Re:Abiword is doomed.. what? (Score:3, Insightful)
Volunteers can provide better-than-pay support (Score:3, Insightful)
When I first began installing and using open-source software, for the first time, I was shocked by the high quality of the support that I received from both developers and other users.
The first "real work" I ever did using Linux was replacing an old MS Exchange 5.0 server with QMail. (yes, I know about the debates about Qmail's license or lack thereof, but that's not the point here) Not really understanding what I was doing, I posted some (in retrospect) truly silly questions to some of the qmail mailing lists. I remember one particular email that abused me for being ignorant and asking a question in the wrong mailing list (I didn't realize it at the time, but it was more of a general Linux question than a qmail question), and then continued to very clearly and concisely explain my error and point me in the right direction. Compare that to a similar situation with a commercial vendor, where the response would likely have been something along the lines of "the problem you are describing is caused by some other piece of software and we cannot help you."
In truth, I don't find the support process to be that different for Microsoft and Linux. If I have a problem with a Microsoft product, I search the Microsoft knowledge base, do a google search (including Usenet), and maybe post a question to the appropriate newsgroup. If I have a problem with a Linux or open source program, I search the LDP, do a google search (including Usenet) and maybe post a question to the appropriate newsgroup. The process is almost identical, and the results are pretty darn similar. If I want more hands on support, I have to pay a vendor (MS, Redhat, VA, etc.)
Word processing for everyone? (Score:3, Insightful)
The first thing that caught my eye when I went to the site was the phrase "Word processing for everyone". With a catch-phrase like that, you had better be able to deliver on your promise. "Everyone" includes those rushed business execs who are too busy to become computer literate and need support *now*.
Maybe Abi should either drop the slogan, or deliver on it, before they give too many people the worng idea.
Re:I have ony one request for all developers (Score:3, Insightful)
I run a Debian Potato system, and when I tried the *.deb package there were a bunch of errors. No problem, I'll get the source and compile it. There were a bunch of missing liraries, and I had to fix those. Finally, it was compiled. It core dumped. I figured out that it had to do with the fonts not being handled properly on my X server. Did I complain? Hell no! I used CVS to get the latest development release and tried that. It worked. The fonts are screwed up, but am I upset? No, I'm very happy. I have a word processor that is already excellent, and it's getting better every day. When Woody stabilizes, then I'll upgrade. That will give me the right Xserver to allow ABIWord to display and print nice fonts. I can live without them for now.
The lesson here is that if you are dealing with software that isn't even at version 1.0, then you'd better be prepared to go to the lengths I went to. That's not harsh, that's not mean, that's a fact of life. Versions 1.0 of anything cannot be expected to do anything more than dump core. Less experienced people should see this as an *opportunity* to learn how to get around problems on their box.
What you're really paying (Score:3, Insightful)
To each their own. At work, we run several key services on Linux boxes, due in part to the lack of security we've experienced in MS products in the past. However, our IT guys seem to have far more problems with keeping the Linux boxes up and running on a day to day basis. In terms of time spent supporting a product -- which is far more of the cost than the initial purchase -- Linux is lagging waaaaay behind Windows-based systems at our place. We use it for the security, not the cost.
Re:Expect to see this linked from Microsoft.com (Score:4, Insightful)
sPh
Re:low expectations (Score:5, Insightful)
The funny thing is, people think that paying for software gives them the right to "sue someone." Um, nope. Does the following look familiar? It should. It's attached to just about every commercial software package license agreeement:
We've all see this verbiage before--Microsoft uses it, even. But, what's really interesting is where I got this legal verbage from: The GPL. [gnu.org] At least the Open-Source community is up-front and honest about what you can expect. Sue someone. Hrumph.
Overestimating commercial effort (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft's practices are harder to determine for an outsider, but they don't put in the huge amount of effort that the Abiword people think. For example, the Internet Explorer team is much smaller than the number of people working on Mozilla (in fact, it is smaller than the team working on Mozilla/ Netscape full time). The MS Word team is probably larger than the Abiword team, and support comes from a different group of people. However, if you email them and say, "Get this feature by tomorrow or I'm switching to something else!" they will have the exact same response as Abiword.
The days of 200 people working on a shell script to change directories using a web page went away with the end of the
Please note: development != distributor (Score:5, Insightful)
- Linux kernel version 2.4.mumble has problems and people ask "how can this be releasable". It's not stable!
- gcc 3.0 is unstable for the first few releases and folks start whining about how this isn't a production-quality compiler
- AbiWord says that they're not providing commercial-grade support services and everyone gets honked off and claims that open source software can't work
Can you all just take a step back, breathe deeply and remind yourselves that in any software organization with more than 10 developers there are two versions of the software (at least):- The development snapshot (or mainline, depending one your local terminology). This is a stable release from the developers to inernal customers such as Q/A, release engineering and perhaps alpha testers for integration testing and embeded product testing.
- The release. This is the ready-for-prime-time code that will be supported and maintained by the company.
Are you seeing the parallel here? When Linus releases kernel 2.4.57, he's releaseing a snapshot that lets Q/A (made up of Q/A groups in numerous companies that sell Linux-based products) release engineering (the distribution vendors) and alpha integration testers (embedded systems customers) begin their test and release cycle. Same for AbiWord. Ximian, Red Hat and many others release AbiWord, but I doubt that they ever release it absolutely as shipped. Their Q/A process only begins when AbiSource creates a new version.So, here's the question of the day: why are people shocked when the developers start acting like developers and say "we're not going to hand-hold you"? Well, there's a few reasons. Obviously there are the folks who just wait for an opportunity to slam OSS. Then there are the people who have become confused and don't realize that the Mozilla developers or the AbiWord developers are just that: developers. Then there are the folks who get their priorities confused. They say that they don't want to deal with "big business software", so they go it alone. This is all well and good, but when you do this, you have to expect the other shoe to drop.
If you're downloading gcc 3.0 the day it comes out because you want the new features fast, great! But, don't be shocked when your code fails to work correctly because you have a hardware combination that was not well tested. If you'd waited for Red Hat 7.2, you would have found the optional gcc 3.0.x binaries with a big old wad of patches. Why? Because they tested it, patched it, and released it.
Get over it. Software support is hard, and there are people in the OSS world that do it well. But, to expect every project to come out the gate with good Q/A and support is just silly.
Re:Word processing for everyone? (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem with that approach is the same problem that most "lite word processors" have. You often hear reasonable-if-guessed figures like "90% of word processor users only use 10% of the features." It's almost right. It's more accurate to say that 90% of word processor users use about 15% of the features, and that extra 5% changes from user to user. If you make a word processor with only that 10% everyone uses, almost everyone will applaud you--and they'll keep using Microsoft Word anyway. And just to make things more difficult, to get a significant number of users away from Word, you're going to have to duplicate the majority of its functions, to be able to get as many different "five percents" as you can.
Cathedral or bazaar? (Score:3, Insightful)
I think that the underlying point is that it's difficult for them to keep up with high expectations when they are such a small group of developers. It seems to me that this is an example of a project that is, unfortunately, not benefitting from the strengths of open source development.
Ideally, when you have a project whose source is open, all users are free to contribute. The entire user body joins in the development effort and the project almost evolves by itself. That's how I understand the "bazaar" model of development.
OTOH, from the sound of this letter, AbiWord is not getting the benefit from a large user base. They still only have a small group of their users who contribute to the code or even report bugs through the proper channels. It sounds like they have fallen into the "cathedral" model, even as they are trying to be a bazaar.
So what's an open source project to do? I think they are on the right track. They need to mobilize their user base to report bugs and encourage more developers to contribute. Again, I don't mean this as criticism at all, but as encouragement. Open source is strong because everybody helps.
Calling Microsoft about their broken software (Score:1, Insightful)
I have. I found some bugs in the version of Microsoft Word that came with my legally purchased copy of Office 2000 Professional, I called them up and naively expected to be able to talk to someone about the bug I found. Furthermore (and yes, this is just how clueless I was about the process of dealing with Microsoft) I actually expected to get a response that would help me.
As is probably obvious to those of you who have dealt with Microsoft, I did not get anything close to what I expected. I was not belligerant at all. I was calm and friendly at all times. But I expected bugs in software I paid 100% of the asking price for to be fixed at some indeterminate point in the future. At the least, I expected to be able to tell Microsoft about the bugs. And I expected the fixes to be made available to me either for free (as a way of saying 'thank you' for reporting the bugs) or at a reasonable sum to cover shipping (if the fix required a new CD). I knew nothing about the process of dealing with Microsoft. I was in for a rude awakening.
I was courteously told that if I wanted to pay them more money per hour to hear my problem, I could do so (in fact I could give them my Visa number right over the phone and continue talking with the operator I was talking to). I told them I thought it was ridiculous of them to expect me to pay them to help them by reporting bugs in their software. I asked if there was a guarantee I'd get the fixes if I paid the hourly fee? "No, there is no guarantee. A fix will either be made available for free as an update or in the next version of Microsoft Word." "Which I'll be expected to pay for?" "Yes.". I told the operator I wasn't mad at them personally (I realize they are just doing their job) but I hope they understood my perspective on this. The operator understood, I then politely declined and we hung up.
It was then I learned I wasn't going to get any reasonable bug support (not even listening to a bug report) from Microsoft. I began looking at alternative word processors and I ended up learning about AbiWord. It certainly wasn't true for me that you get what you pay for with Microsoft. I could have paid them and never have seen fixes to my problems.
Re:RPM Doesn't work? FIX IT.... (Score:3, Insightful)
What should have happenned is that the distro shouldn't have been sent out with a broken RPM.
But given that it was, what Abiword should have done was put a big bold link on their web page saying that "Red Hat 7.1 shipped with a completely broken RPM. Click here to fix it." That link would take you to a page with two instructions.
1) download _this_ ( with a link )
2) rpm -i
Instead users poke around wonderring what the problem is and how to fix it. The version of Abiword online is much more recent but it talks about all these depends and stuff and so people aren't sure if it will work for Red Hat 7.1 or if they will have to mess around to fix it. Users don't want to screw around with that and so they just decide to save often and hope that it doesn't crash.
Also, it could be that Red Hat packaged that software themselves, I don't know.
And Red Hat's bug tracking site is not as easy to navigate as debian's.
And Red Hat doesn't do enough to educate users about how to update their packages automatically. With Debian it is the first thing that users learn how to do.
I respect Red Hat a lot. They hire many great programmers. They have done a lot for the Linux community. But they really need to work on user interface issues better.
Thank you, Abi Word.....Keep up the good work! (Score:2, Insightful)
I've also used WP on both windows and Linux. The Linux version is a little buggy, but at least it exchanges files with the windows version in both directions.
For the causual user Abi Word is more than usable right now. For the enterprise, Star Office might be a better choice. I like Abi Word's method of coding future features, they give the source file and line where to go to add the feature that is not yet there! (I bet they have received quite a few patches for new features!).
If more people would READ the text of the GPL license maybe they would stop flamming products like Abi Word. "This software is released in the hope that it may be usefull" or something like that. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth.
Thank you Abi Word, keep up the good work.