• nehal3m@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Eh. One thing proprietary software has going for it is clear design goals and the leadership to create a cohesive UX. Open source projects tend to be a grab bag of tools that work well for developers.

    Not saying I don’t love FOSS, but there’s definitely stuff that proprietary software does better in a practical sense, whatever else your opinion of it.

      • MMNT@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        8 hours ago

        I am a designer with 20 years of experience. I’ve tried contributing to FOSS, but the developers are incredibly stubborn and work purely guided by their own assumptions. Hence the horrible UX on so much FOSS. There are more than enough design people that would love to contribute, but are met with nothing but ridicule and insults.

        • index@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 hours ago

          That has not much do to with FOSS but with the people you are working with. Proprietary software you can’t even contribute freely to begin with

        • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          This has been my experience as well but as a coder.

          I can’t count the number of contributions I’ve made, many of them minor. I’m talking 20-30 lines of code max.

          I can count on two hands the number that have been either accepted or declined for a legitimate reason.

      • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        Counterpoint - if everything was FOSS it would be absolute chaos with no direction, conflicting goals, incomplete projects, and limited oversight… and also lots of inter-dev-team drama and forking.

        For instance…

        source

        • index@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 hours ago

          it would be absolute chaos with no direction, conflicting goals, incomplete projects, and limited oversight

          You are describing the current scenario where everything is proprietary

    • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      There’s a very good reasons why people and organisations will pay for proprietary software when there is a free alternative available. I’ve used FOSS word processors before, for example, and they’re okay, but nothing like what Microsoft Office can do. Same with video editing.

      • index@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 hours ago

        There’s a very good reasons why people and organisations will pay for proprietary software when there is a free alternative available.

        And there are also very good reasons why people and organisations are stopping relying on proprietary software and switching to open alternatives that won’t lock them up.

      • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        There’s a very good reasons why people and organisations will pay for proprietary software when there is a free alternative available.

        Yup… risk transfer

        Pay somebody else to take responsibility for pieces of your business process, then blame them when something goes wrong - that’s why we have a contract.

    • 299792458ms@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Not to mention the Customer/Service Suppport, that is at enterprise level because regular customer support is … well you all know already.