TiredLegs;450224 Wrote: 
> 
> In my view, a key problem with open source software is that the techies
> develop it for their own desires, not those of Joe and Jane Sixpack who
> don't give a rats a** about SQLite vs. MySQL. The masses just want
> something that works well (even if it has a few bugs), without having to
> tinker under the hood. Think iPod or TiVo. When both of those products
> were first introduced, they already had very well thought out (if
> imperfect) user experiences which kept the technical details hidden from
> view. You didn't have to be a tech geek to appreciate them, but tech
> geeks could appreciate them anyway, despite their frustrations at not
> having full access to the inner workings. I hate to say this, and I'm
> sure I'll catch flak for it, but Logitech might be better off taking
> development entirely in house. I especially hate to say it, because the
> open source platform is one of the things that attracted me to buy
> Squeezeboxes in the first place.
> 
If we would talk about some open source project driven by the community
I would partly agree with your comments but here we talk about an open
source project driven by a company. In an open source project where the
community makes the decisions a lot of your comments is valid, but this
definitely isn't the case here.

You have to understand that open source doesn't mean that the community
makes the decisions or even that the decisions are available to the
public. 

Logitech takes 100% of all decisions regarding the development of
Squeezebox Server themselves and even though I'm not involved in them
I'm pretty sure most decisions taken are based on business
advantages/disadvantages. The code of Squeezebox Server is mostly
written by Logitech employees and it's written the way it is because
some manager within Logitech has told the employee they want a specific
feature or solution. 

Sure, Logitech sometimes listens to developers AND users which aren't
employees, but there is a huge difference between listening in on other
developers/users and letting the other developers/users take the
decisions.

So please, don't blame the open source model for the decisions made.

The only difference as far as I can see if this was a closed source
project would be that:
- Logitech would have a hard time to get feedback on code and decisions
from outside developers.
- Logitech would have a hard time to get free help from third party
developers.
- Logitech would have a harder time getting people to help them testing
the product without economical compensation.

The open source model makes it possible for Logitech to get help from
people outside the company. 

TiredLegs;450224 Wrote: 
> 
> But Joe and Jane Sixpack don't frequent this forum, and that leads to
> skewed input into the open source development process unless your target
> market is open source developers. Sure, I can set up a Squeezebox system
> that's so easy to use that my girlfriend can handle it and even like it,
> but no way in heck could she set it up herself. 
> 
I completely agree.

If Logitech wants to target Joe and Jane Sixpack, they definitely need
to look outside this forum for feedback. I'm sure they already have
these kind of channels, we just don't know because we only sees what's
posted in this forum. So please, don't make the mistake to think that
this forum is the only input Logitech gets.

TiredLegs;450224 Wrote: 
> 
> Does anybody here believe that open source development of Squeezecenter
> will ever lead to a product that is easy enough to set up that his or
> her mother could do it?
> 
Once again, don't blame the open source model for this.

Logitech can still keep the open source development model, they'll just
have to make sure this forum isn't their only input when making the
decisions.

If we would have talked about an open source project where the
decisions were taken by the community and where the decisions was taken
based on other things than what's good for the business, your comments
are completely valid. However, this isn't really the case here.

Don't get me wrong, I still party agree with you on this point. As long
as Logitech only makes decisions which the users on this forum is happy
with, it will be a hard time to make the Squeezebox products user
friendly. However, the open source model isn't the cause to this, the
situation would be exactly the same if this was a closed source project
and Logitech only used the community for beta testing and feedback. The
reasons a lot of options exists in Squeezebox Server IS because beta
testers has requested them, not because this is a open source project.

IMHO, to solve this Logitech needs to start taking decisions which the
community isn't 100% happy with, the reason is that the current
community member might not be the typical future user. There will be
complains when this happens, but as long as the decisions are explained
I'm sure most people on these forums will agree after a while.

TiredLegs;450224 Wrote: 
> 
> I'll go back to a question Moonbase asked in his original post of this
> thread: "where is the target market?" If Logitech has answered that
> question internally, then is open source development the best path to a
> product that nails that target?
> 
Yes, I believe it is

TiredLegs;450224 Wrote: 
> 
> If Logitech hasn't truly answered that question, then the software will
> wander at the whim of the developers.
> 
Once again, I completely agree. 
If you haven't set the goal, it's hard for everyone to make the right
decisions.

Of course, just because Logitech hasn't officially made the goal and
target user public, it doesn't have to mean they don't have it
internally. 

However, a problem with only having the goal and future target user
specified internally is that it's harder for beta testers and third
party developers to help. If there isn't a public available goal and
target user, beta testers and third party developers tends to give
feedback in a direction that's good for themselves. I'm pretty sure this
is a big reason why the current software looks like it does, there
really hasn't been any clearly defined goal and target user available to
the beta testers and third party developers.

Of course, sometimes there are reasons why you like to keep goals and
target user internally:
- You might want to hide what future products you are working on
- You might not want to scare everyone away since they might not match
the future target user category
- You might want to get feedback based on what a beta tester thinks is
good for himself instead of requesting that he/she tries to be someone
else


-- 
erland

Erland Isaksson
'My homepage' (http://erland.isaksson.info) (Install my plugins through
Extension Downloader)
(Developer of 'TrackStat, SQLPlayList, DynamicPlayList, Custom Browse,
Custom Scan,  Custom Skip, Multi Library, Title Switcher and Database
Query plugins'
(http://wiki.erland.isaksson.info/index.php/Category:SlimServer))
------------------------------------------------------------------------
erland's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3124
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=66745

_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Reply via email to