Thatās a fine, nuanced take. I think the key part is that accepting that you are using a flawed option because itās critical for your employerās standard practices or required for a clientās needs (or is the only option that is acceptable to said employer or client) is perfectly fine. You are accepting that the enshittified software is aggravating and not what youād prefer, but arenāt dismissive of alternatives and would consider them if you had the flexibility to.
What Iām trying to poke at here is people finding the āperfect saviorā to their existing tools that were made out of choice (that enshittified) or complacency (unwilling to move until they find something that is effectively a reverse engineered clone). Of course, that usually doesnāt exist, so they whine about how āFOSS doesnāt match everything I want!ā despite being capable of learning and not truly bound to their tools by say an employer.
āHurdle to useā (In my opinion) is just the outcome of being used to the old platform rather than poor design by the developer (even if some FOSS projects may need some UI love).
There are indeed a lot of people who completely dismiss good things because theyāre not perfect.
But Iād argue āhurdle to useā goes a bit further.
UX is obviously a part of that. Itās the main reason you canāt make me touch gimp, for example.
But, on top of that, a lot of those foss programs require a more involved setup, especially if you want all features to work. Getting hardware de-/encoding to work in kdenlive, for example, isnāt necessarily something everyone can easily do but something thatās absolutely necessary for professional use.
And of course thereās the endless gamble, whether the foss community will happily aid you or curse you, when youāre asking for guidance.
Or if the tutorials and documentation need you to use the terminal for setup or certain features.
Most paid software has both a large community of users (forums, tutorials) and is polished to an extent that every idiot can install and start using it.
Thatās what I mean with hurdle. Iām personally tech savvy enough, that I could deal with any problem that might occur, even if Iām not willing to learn a developer designed UI, but lots of people I know would not.
Thatās why, for example, for video editing software, I love to recommend DaVinci resolve. Itās closed source but itās free, polished n powerful. (And in my humble opinion better that Adobe premiere in every single way). Good software doesnāt have to cost anything, but it also doesnāt always have to be foss either. Thereās a middle ground.
Thatās a fine, nuanced take. I think the key part is that accepting that you are using a flawed option because itās critical for your employerās standard practices or required for a clientās needs (or is the only option that is acceptable to said employer or client) is perfectly fine. You are accepting that the enshittified software is aggravating and not what youād prefer, but arenāt dismissive of alternatives and would consider them if you had the flexibility to.
What Iām trying to poke at here is people finding the āperfect saviorā to their existing tools that were made out of choice (that enshittified) or complacency (unwilling to move until they find something that is effectively a reverse engineered clone). Of course, that usually doesnāt exist, so they whine about how āFOSS doesnāt match everything I want!ā despite being capable of learning and not truly bound to their tools by say an employer.
āHurdle to useā (In my opinion) is just the outcome of being used to the old platform rather than poor design by the developer (even if some FOSS projects may need some UI love).
There are indeed a lot of people who completely dismiss good things because theyāre not perfect.
But Iād argue āhurdle to useā goes a bit further.
UX is obviously a part of that. Itās the main reason you canāt make me touch gimp, for example.
But, on top of that, a lot of those foss programs require a more involved setup, especially if you want all features to work. Getting hardware de-/encoding to work in kdenlive, for example, isnāt necessarily something everyone can easily do but something thatās absolutely necessary for professional use.
And of course thereās the endless gamble, whether the foss community will happily aid you or curse you, when youāre asking for guidance.
Or if the tutorials and documentation need you to use the terminal for setup or certain features.
Most paid software has both a large community of users (forums, tutorials) and is polished to an extent that every idiot can install and start using it.
Thatās what I mean with hurdle. Iām personally tech savvy enough, that I could deal with any problem that might occur, even if Iām not willing to learn a developer designed UI, but lots of people I know would not.
Thatās why, for example, for video editing software, I love to recommend DaVinci resolve. Itās closed source but itās free, polished n powerful. (And in my humble opinion better that Adobe premiere in every single way). Good software doesnāt have to cost anything, but it also doesnāt always have to be foss either. Thereās a middle ground.