The Open Source Design Conundrum 322
Matt Asay writes "Walk the halls of any open-source conference and you'll see a large percentage of attendees with ironically non-open-source Apple laptops and iPhones. One reason for this seeming contradiction can be found in reading Matthew Thomas' classic 'Why free software usability tends to suck.' Open-source advocates like good design as much as anyone, but the open-source development process is often not the best way to achieve it. Open-source projects have tended to be great commoditizers, but not necessarily the best innovators. Hence, Red Hat CEO Jim Whitehurst recently stated that Red Hat is "focused on commoditizing important layers in the stack." This is fine, but for those that want open source to push the envelope on innovation, it may be unavoidable to introduce a bit more cathedral into the bazaar. Without an IBM, Red Hat, or Mozilla bringing cash and discipline to an open-source project, including paying people to do the 'dirt work' that no one would otherwise do, can open source hope to thrive?"
Re:Already handled (Score:3, Interesting)
Window managers (Score:5, Interesting)
While this might be true for apps -- they change too much to settle on a thought-through UI concept, and new ones are constantly created for the same task by not so experienced UI designers -- I'd like to add that IMHO Linux has the best window managers out there. That is one of the reasons I don't use Windows and would put a Linux distribution on a Mac. Because I need to move and resize windows without finding the borders (e.g. Alt-click or Alt-doubleclick and drag). And I need sane virtual desktops for more screen space and for grouping my windows.
These are UI features lacking in non-open-source. Granted, it is not something the novice user will miss.
KDE is very usable (Score:5, Interesting)
I disagree with the premise that FOSS usability is always bad. I'm not a developer, I can't write code, but I use *nix exclusively for my home computers, running KDE. And they are WAY more usable than my windows computers at work. Small things make such a huge difference--with windows, when you move the mouse wheel, the active window scrolls, even if you have 2 open side by side. You have to click on the one you want to scroll. With KDE, the window that your mouse cursor is hovering over scrolls. This is so intuitive it took me a month or so to even notice. I've found all kinds of other small usability tweaks.
My KDE desktop at home is so much more usable and intuitive than my windows xp box at work that I often work at home just for the pleasure of using KDE.
Doesn't handle, it's Being handled, as a Weapon (Score:4, Interesting)
This is already being done. Many of the most successful FOSS projects have corporate contributors, so this "design conundrum" doesn't really exist.
That's not how I read it. FOSS projects have corporate contributors as a weapon used to commoditize their rival's products. (IBM versus Sun, to make it impossible to monetize Java) FOSS projects are also funded in order to create commodity complements to company's products. Sell servers? Commoditize software that runs on servers!
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/StrategyLetterV.html [joelonsoftware.com]
There's a problem with this. It reduces FOSS to ammunition. A tactical move. If FOSS can't produce really slick interfaces, then FOSS will always be a lackey of the corporations in order to achieve first-rate success. If the corporations don't like you or can't use you, then you're left out in the bush leagues, the farm teams. Just look at the software out there. Almost every piece of software that gets widespread corporate or consumer traction is being used as a weapon or market driver.
In fact Apple, like it or not, is a pretty good example of how to monetize FOSS. Can't say I'm thrilled with the methods they employ to achieve that, but it's still a fact that they do achieve it.
The problem is that it makes FOSS critically dependent on the corporate masters if a particular project wants to be "first-rate." It's as if FOSS is like indy music/film, and the corporations are the music industry, and everyone is trying to get signed. Maybe that's how things should be. But it would be better if we never had to admit, "can't say I'm thrilled," about how our funders are treating our ideals. FOSS needs its equivalent of bittorrent, Pirate Bay, and independent musicians who can give the finger to the big music distributors, yet still turn out first-rate product. Where's our Protools for interfaces? (Actually, the problem is likely cultural and not technological.)
Re:free advice sucks when it's logically inconsist (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Most of the Apple distribution is Free (Score:3, Interesting)
Mac No - iPhone Yes (Score:3, Interesting)
I would never buy a Mac especially not with all the reliability problems they have and mis-features like locking the SATA port to SATA 1 speed, disabling 802.11n on the older ones and requiring people pay to get the feature, etc. On top of that I would never run MacOS X, as I am a Linux developer, so why pay more (the Apple tax) for less hardware. I personally own a ThinkPad X200 which is much better and cheaper than anything I have seen from Apple.
As far as open phones go, there is really not much choice on that front. There is Openmoko which doesn't even have Edge/3G support or the T-Mobile G1 Android phone. It also looks like openmoko is dying off and they have canceled their phones planned to have Edge/3G support. Android looks promising but the phone still needs a lot more work and/or there needs to be more than one of them available. More Android phones should be available later this summer so perhaps it will gain more marketshare. So I am not surprised at all that currently people at open-source conferences are using iPhones. I recently bought one for myself after sitting on the fence about whether to continue to wait until a nicer Android phone became available. Hopefully in 2 years once my at&t contract finally runs out there will be much better Android phones available. With respect to at&t they are planning on releasing an Android phone as well but with crippled resolution only 320x240.
Re:Window managers (Score:5, Interesting)
And there is much more, like the middle button select pasting (you laugh once you realise how ineffective copy/pase is).
I also love the (non default) functions of compiz, like workspace and window overview zoom and application switcher (basically Alt-Tab) mapped to a click on one of the corners of the screen.
Workplace switcher mapped to a click on the edges of the screen.
And so on. Seriously, every time I have to sit in front of a Windows machine, my basic productivity drops 95% as everything is so cumbersome, slow and ineffective. Not to mention that it lacks a basic tool-set.
Re:Already handled (Score:2, Interesting)
Just about every important thing we do in software was thought of by 1980.
As a grad student in CS, whose research is in algorithms, I cannot stress how wrong you are. CS research is very fast paced. You'd be amazed at some of the stuff that is published in the last year, let alone the last 10 or 20. Just because you don't see it on your desktop, doesn't mean it isn't there.
I thought so, too... (Score:5, Interesting)
I bought a Powerbook, for that reason. I figured, I'd never run Windows on it, so may as well put Linux on the best laptop ever, right?
Didn't work too well. I never quite got it working, and just ended up using OS X.
In fact, from personal experience, the reason people choose Macs seems to have less to do with the overall UI, and more to do with specific things Just Working that Just Don't on Linux. Example: Maybe it's gotten better, and there's a nice GUI for this somewhere, but when I plug in a second monitor to my laptop, I restart my X server -- I could never quite get Xinerama or the nvidia stuff to cooperate without a restart.
Contrast this to a Macbook -- just plug it in, and it works. Open System Settings if you want it to behave other than as a clone.
So, I still use Linux, and I really don't get the people who would be into open source and use an iPhone, but I can certainly see why people would choose a Mac. Everything just works, just about all the commercial software you want, and a decent (not great, but decent) Unix under the hood for development.
Re:Already handled (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Apple makes good hardware (Score:4, Interesting)
Thing is apple laptops are usually pretty good in design
They are also built on a rock-solid UNIX foundation. Tell me why you need Linux for Open Source.
Re:Already handled (Score:3, Interesting)
Citation needed.
And define "kowtow". I just want them to stop doing wild and crazy things, and bring it up to the level of KDE3.
Examples of stuff that still doesn't work on Kubuntu Jaunty: About half the wireless networks I try to connect to, the brightness keys on my laptop, transcoding in Amarok, switch compositing on and off more than once or twice and compositing slows to a crawl, with a high chance of krunner or plasma crashing.
Re:Apple makes good hardware (Score:5, Interesting)
I really hate that term 'usability' that a lot of people never define and expect to be the answer to their troubles. It gets thrown around by many in the open source desktop world mainly as a response to mask the internal troubles in the software that they're using and if someone starts talking about 'usability' and 'Mac OS' as benchmarks then maybe people will think 'Hey, they're going to be as cool as Macs!' and that they're doing something about the issues and it will all go away. Usability is about far more than making some sad Mac clone. It's about developers, developers, developers, developers - creating the useful applications and functionality that people want, making it easy for developers to create it and getting that functionality to users. Windows has that. Mac OS has that (albeit with a few speed bumps), and can run the open source software most open source developers use, so it's what you're going to see most of them use.
The Linux desktop is not the answer. It doesn't have to be that way but it's going to take a distributor to really grab hold of the situation, make sensible software choices on behalf of developers and users and identify just what system it is they're putting together. Given that we have desktops in the open source world that have limited functionality in the name of 'simplicity' (read JoelSpolsky on 80/20 method of software development - http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000020.html [joelonsoftware.com]) and we have brain damage such as PulseAudio that distributors readily lap up without any thought then I really cannot see who's going to do it. 'Just Works' is so far away it's just stopped being funny.
Re:Apple makes good hardware (Score:2, Interesting)
Does that mean that one of the hallmarks of closed development, or closed source, is having a closed mind?
Re:It isn't dirt work, it is conflicting work (Score:2, Interesting)
..., the culture of open source development will have to shift to make use UI guys are not only included in the entire development cycle, but more important--they are seen as the overlords in the process.
fixed that for you.
I figure this is a very unpopular measure, but I imagine (correct me if I am wrong) this is more what it is like at Apple or Google. A paid developer when presenting his (however awesome but difficult to use) work will just be told to do it all over directly to his face. It just won't make money. An unpaid open source developer will be approached by any UI guy working with him in a much politer but probably less honest way. The UI guy may obviously take into account that the developer put all this effort into it without earning a dime.
Maybe software development should start by thinking of a useful UI regardless of any possible realizability limitations and then try to get as close as possible. I guess that's old news though.
Disclosure: I suck at programming.
Re:Already handled (Score:3, Interesting)
Gratuitous changes are far more of a problem than any lack of compliance to some design dogma.
That speaks to the original point. Gratuitous is a lot easier to recognize if at least the guiding principle "people use this as a tool to get work done - if we make this change the tool will break" is kept in mind.
Re:It isn't dirt work, it is conflicting work (Score:1, Interesting)
I don't think the reason is that technical. After some failed attempts I now know how to separate the UI from the rest of the code. The thing is, I still can't design good UIs, simply because the requirements of an UI are hard to define in a useful way. There are almoste no guidelines that can be translated directly to a good design.
When I create UIs I usually just copy existing stuff. Being creative here doesn't seem to help. But the prefered way is that I just create some prototype that shows all the functions and hand that to someone who actually can create a good UI for it.
Re:KDE is very usable (Score:1, Interesting)