←back to thread

917 points cryptophreak | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
squeedles ◴[] No.45761639[source]
Good article, but the reasoning is wrong. It isn't easy to make a simple interface in the same way that Pascal apologized for writing a long letter because he didn't have time to write a shorter one.

Implementing the UI for one exact use case is not much trouble, but figuring out what that use case is difficult. And defending that use case from the line of people who want "that + this little extra thing", or the "I just need ..." is difficult. It takes a single strong-willed defender, or some sort of onerous management structure, to prevent the interface from quickly devolving back into the million options or schizming into other projects.

Simply put, it is a desirable state, but an unstable one.

replies(22): >>45761688 #>>45761787 #>>45761946 #>>45762556 #>>45763000 #>>45763132 #>>45763419 #>>45763515 #>>45764215 #>>45765589 #>>45766183 #>>45766281 #>>45768514 #>>45769691 #>>45771196 #>>45771307 #>>45771846 #>>45772026 #>>45773411 #>>45773951 #>>45776266 #>>45779651 #
dayvid ◴[] No.45761688[source]
The contributors of free software tend to be power users who want to ensure their use case works. I don't think they're investing a lot of thought into the 80/20 use case for normal/majority or users or would risk hurting their workflow to make it easier for others
replies(4): >>45761808 #>>45763689 #>>45764090 #>>45774820 #
zeroq ◴[] No.45761808[source]
> contributors of free software tend to be power users

or, simply put, nerds

it takes both a different background, approach and skillset to design ux and interface

if anything FOSS should figure out how to attract skilled artists so majority of designs and logos doesn't look so blatantly amateurish.

replies(6): >>45761885 #>>45761961 #>>45761973 #>>45763079 #>>45766506 #>>45766954 #
WD-42 ◴[] No.45761973[source]
My guess is that, as has always been, the pool of people willing to code for free on their own time because it's fun is just much larger than the people willing to make icons for software projects on their own time because they think it's fun.
replies(4): >>45762137 #>>45762256 #>>45762872 #>>45779699 #
ChrisMarshallNY ◴[] No.45762872[source]
Graphic designers and artists get ripped off, all the time; frequently, by nerds, who tend to do so, in a manner that insults the value of the artist's work.

It's difficult to get those kinds of creatives to donate their time (trust me on this, I'm always trying).

I'm an ex-artist, and I'm a nerd. I can definitively say that creating good designs, is at least as difficult as creating good software, but seldom makes the kind of margin that you can, from software, so misappropriation hurts artists a lot more than programmers.

replies(3): >>45763151 #>>45763230 #>>45770109 #
renewiltord ◴[] No.45763230[source]
Most fields just don’t have the same culture of collaborative everyone-wins that software does. Artists don’t produce CC art in anywhere close to the same influence as engineers produce software. This is probably due to some kind of compounding effect available in software that isn’t available in graphics.

Software people love writing software to a degree where they’ll just give it away. You just won’t find artists doing the same at the same scale. Or architects, or structural engineers. Maybe the closest are some boat designs but even those are accidental.

It might just be that we were lucky to have some Stallmans in this field early.

replies(5): >>45763517 #>>45763540 #>>45765738 #>>45766121 #>>45779711 #
1. pfannkuchen ◴[] No.45765738{6}[source]
Isn’t there a lot more compensation available in software? Like as a developer, you can make a lot of money without having to even value money highly. I think in other fields you don’t generally get compensated well unless you are gunning/grinding for it specifically. “For the love of the art” people in visual arts are painters or something like that, probably. Whereas with software you can end up with people who don’t value money that much and have enough already, at least to take a break from paid work or to not devote as much effort to their paid work. I imagine a lot of open source people are in that position?
replies(2): >>45765869 #>>45766106 #
2. renewiltord ◴[] No.45765869[source]
Well, early '90s Torvalds wasn't the wealthy fellow he is now and he was busy churning things out and then relicensed Linux under GPL.
3. prepend ◴[] No.45766106[source]
I think most OSS projects are started by unemployed people as hobbies. Or ego projects to get jobs.
replies(1): >>45773149 #
4. ChrisMarshallNY ◴[] No.45773149[source]
I'm unemployed (retired), and it's a hobby (that I take quite seriously).

Ego is likely involved. I love my babies, but what others think of my work isn't that important (which is good, because others aren't very impressed).

I make tools that I use, mostly.