←back to thread

917 points cryptophreak | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.2s | source
Show context
jasonthorsness ◴[] No.45761160[source]
Some reasons for this:

1. Free software is developed for the developer's own needs and developers are going to be power users.

2. The cost to expose options is low so from the developer's perspective it's low effort to add high value (perceiving the options as valuable).

3. The developer doesn't know who the customer is and rather than research/refine just tries to hit all the boxes.

4. The distribution of the software itself means anyone who successfully installs it themselves really is a power user and does like the options. Installing it for family and friends doesn't work.

Probably many other factors!

replies(3): >>45761513 #>>45766078 #>>45769305 #
1. luqtas ◴[] No.45766078[source]
> 4. The distribution of the software itself means anyone who successfully installs it themselves really is a power user and does like the options. Installing it for family and friends doesn't work.

i have seen many comments, by lay people, out of Sonobus [0] being superb on what it does and impressive by being 100% free. that's a niche case that if it was implemented on Ardour, could fit the same problem OP describes

[0] https://sonobus.net/

however i can't feel where the problem of FOSS UX scaring normal people is. someone getting a .h264 and a .wav file out of a video-record isn't normal after all. there are plenty of converters on the web, i dunno if they run ffmpeg at their server but i wouldn't get surprised. the problem lies on the whole digital infrastructure running on FOSS without returning anything back. power-user software shouldn't simplify stuff. tech literacy hopefully can be a thing and by quickly learning how to import and export a file in a complex software feels better to install 5 different limited software over the years because your demands are growing