While I was listening to the latest MacBreak Weekly there was a particularly engrossing and thoughtful discussion about the merits of Open Source to the end-user. Merlin Mann took the position that the fruits of Open Source were ripe and ready for the picking in the form of a stable Linux operating system, namely the latest distribution of Ubuntu, many open source applications that have excellent functionality for the end-user, and frameworks for web development like Druple. The ever verbose and highly entertaining Andy Ihnatko took the opposite side, citing difficulties with configuring Linux on his laptop and pains with Drupal. Perhaps the most interesting comment came from the show’s host, Leo Laporte, which was in effect the comment that software developers do not want to be working for the “man” to create excellent products. And while I won’t argue that independent developers can make some great software while working in small teams or even alone; Gus Mueller of Flying Meat Software springs immediately to mind as well as the good folks over at Rouge Amoeba, I will say that the major problem with the whole open source movement is the mentality that everything must be free and open.
Of course that takes for granted the entire ethos of open source, but it also emphasizes the definition of open source. For application building frameworks and the underpinnings of an OS an open source seems to be an excellent idea as it allows the developer to spot errors or dealing with difficult to use interfaces, as well as the entire of the community to deal with these errors. However, while the adage may be that it takes a village to raise a child, it may not be the best way to build software. Building on open source framework might make sense in the overall, but trying to create something like advanced tools for graphic editing and user interface by consensus only dooms it to failure. Some will insist on adhering strictly to established user interface guidelines and Fitt’s Law even when there is a point where strict adherence impedes the usability. Others will stick to more holistic methods about atheistic and vague notions of user-friendliness. Either way one will end up with a product that is a kludge of both ends of the spectrum or one dominant with shades of the other rearing its’ ugly head to intrude.
Therein lies the major problem of trying to build an end-user app with the whole village. Consensus is difficult to build, but is ultimately feasible to get on a wide area of effect open source end-user application, the problem then rapidly becomes one of polish and overall usability. Take GIMP, for example, which is a completely open-source free-to-the-public photo editing app that could be considered an Adobe Photoshop replacement. It has most of the major features, but I would be terribly surprised if anyone who is serious about photo editing or effects creation who would use GIMP. The application is perfectly serviceable, once you learn how to act around it. One might say that most pro-grade tools also have steep learning curves and often esoteric commands. However the pro-application has been developed over years by many people with clear documentation and support systems. There is one caveat in this though, Photoshop is a professional application designed and used by graphics pros around the world; GIMP was hobbled together by a bunch of people who didn’t want to pay for Photoshop to edit some graphics for a website. So, you might ask, how could I compare the two when there is such disparity between the two? I have used the new CS3 it is simply fantastic, however I can’t afford to plunk down 300 beans to justify its use for what little I use it for. That is precisely the point, when you have all the resources that Adobe does you can create some fantastic software. Some would say that GIMP is not bad for what it is, I say phooey, there are literally dozens of competent image editors (at least for Mac OS X) that have most of the critical features that Photoshop does. No they don’t al have the same features, but they all offer something and definitely something more that GIMP ever did, but for a cost. Graphic Converter, Intaglio, Line Form to name a few, not to mention Pixelmator, which is still in a closed beta, but fulfilling the promise of a Photoshop light for most image tasks.
To move beyond the image editor there are dozens of comparisons even within the indie developers to projects in the open source which just cry out for attention. Transmission v. XTorrent, Microsoft Office (or iWork) v. OpenOffice/NeoOffice, iChat v. Adium; this list could just go on. In fact the only one in the list worth mentioning is Adium, but it still lacks some key features that make iChat so appealing like voice and now video chat. Open source is great for creating and applying standards for file formats and other things, open formats are always a good thing, but they have yet to create something that even comes close to Photoshop or Office despite protestations about “it will happen eventually”. And therein lies the problem, consumers do not want to wait for new features to be coded in to the applications as when the open source/free software developer gets around to it with many, many intrusions into his life be they personal or professional. The best thing about the open source movement is that is a great place for an upcoming software engineer to cut his teeth, with something that is a hobby and worked on in spare time. Many little freeware apps are essentially resume builders and that is good thing, because then these developers can get noticed by the big guys and actually start building real and useable applications. Or they can pursue the American dream an start their own company, because the oldest of adages “There is no such thing as a free lunch” rings truest in this age of bits and bytes.
Link of the Day
Many of you (OK so I know that no one reads this bloody thing, but I thought that I would make a comment) have commented about two things: 1. the lack of recent activity and 2. the lack of links of the day on some of the more recent posts. There are reasons for both of these. I have just finished a rather grueling move and a rather enjoyable few days where I did nothing but decompress. After leaving Hilterade un-attended for almost a month, I considered just pulling it and perhaps this time for good. Then I realized while no one may be reading this but a select few, writing is a skill, and it happens to be a skill that I rather enjoy and to not utilize it is to loose it. Practice, practice, practice!
Beyond that I have come to the realization that I don’t feel like pointing out particularly interesting things to you Faithful Reader. You can damn well find your own interesting shit. That said however if there is something pertinent that seems to fall within the purview of this writing then I will not only write about it but link it excessively. I feel that this is more than sufficient for interesting things to be found, and there are often too many weblogs that suffer from the “I have to throw up lots of interesting things so that people will read my blog” syndrome. While it is often the case with these that I find them interesting, I don’t know how useful it is to share these insights with others. Rest assured there will be some dedicated links for particularly interesting sights, but for the most part the meat of the blog will be the prose.
For those who still want there daily fixes, might I suggest Metafilter, Neatorama, and Boing Boing for a daily and sometimes hourly fix of informations.
