The Problem With Open Source

[gusl]

The Problem With Open Source
confirms my view that open-source software doesn't HAVE to be hard. It's a problem of instructional communication: how do you make people understand what they need to do? (my answer, of course, is to have more intelligent interaction, including logical)

Comments

more intelligent interaction vs. documentation

[seattlesque.livejournal.com]

When I worked on Microsoft Access, I was a Program Manager Intern and I developed a prototype for the next-generation table editor. While doing so, I had the opportunity to participate in one of the neatest parts of MS's development process--the usability labs.

Users would sit in a room behind a one-way mirror where there was a computer and several cameras, including one that would record their fingers on the keyboard. They were shown the lab behind the mirror before the study and introduced to the people who were going to be watching...but the programmers and program managers were not allowed to talk to the user during the test.

The user would be given a little mission printed out on a sheet of paper and *no documentation*. Then they were asked to talk out loud as they tried to use the software to conduct the task. I learned--for instance--that my idea about letting users "double-click" on column headers to edit the field name was completely subverted by having the background be gray. Users (logically) assumed that anything with a gray background that looked like a column header could not be edited...at all! By changing the column headers to use a white background and be bold, with a single click placing the cursor inside...everything was made much more comprehensible.

It was amazing, and I learned all kinds of things and managed to redesign the prototype so it was possible to create well-formed relational databases without any documentation at all. Although it was written in Visual Basic, it actually worked (using data access APIs) and Bill Gates was asking why we couldn't just ship it as it was. (Of course everyone was like "Bill, we can't, it's written in VISUAL BASIC!!! Vomit! It uses third-party controls in a thoroughly bizarre way to achieve the visual effects...")

Unfortunately, usability was eclipsed by web functionality and the software was never developed integrated into the product. At least not in this dimension!!!

[spritedreams.livejournal.com]

in terms of linux (which is what the article is primarily addressing), i think that there are many distros that are extremely user friendly. in fact some of them are so user friendly that you really dont need to know how to use the command line to use them (my boyfriend learned to use linux using only the gui interfaces with no problem (well aside from me yelling at him to use the shell and man files)). and typical end user in an office should not be installing software anyhow. not to mention practically everything a typical end user will ever need will most likely come with the distro or in some kind of precompiled binary. if all else fails, there are numerous newsgroups/message boards/mailing lists/etc where one can get help with any problem (if one chooses not to read/cant understand a man file/readme/howto/etc). sure linux used to be much harder to use, but that is certainly not the case now.

i truely believe that anyone with a reasonable amount of common sense can learn to use open source software. it might take a little effort on their part, a little getting used to, and if they are seriously unwilling to try and learn, then fine, maybe it's best that they stick to microsoft products. (no open source developers are going to cry over it!)