Hello, I see a significant existing problem with support for existing end-users of Mozilla based browsers and Mozilla itself (even though you may argue that Mozilla itself is not an "end-user product".)
Netscape - the dominant distributor of Mozilla based browsers - had made it increasingly difficult (if not impossible) to get quick cost-free help via email on its existing products. They do provide a feedback form on their website which states : " Note: Due to the number of suggestions and comments that we receive, we are unable to respond directly to all feedback submitted. But your feed back is extremely important to us. So please do let us know what you think. " If all current Mozilla users were to contact the people responsible for existing (so-called) "end-user" distributions (excluding Netscape because the chance of receiving a response is low) such as Beonex or Galeon, these respective teams would be flooded with messages. Whether these small groups can support the flood of messages is unclear. The fact of the matter is that there is no existing, established, and officially sanctioned end-user support forum by Netscape or Mozilla.org. The Mozilla.org mission statement ( http://www.mozilla.org/mission.html ) says : " A group exists that is chartered to act as the virtual meeting place for the Mozilla code. That group is mozilla.org. We will provide a central point of contact and community for those interested in using or improving the source code: [...] We will operate discussion forums (mailing lists, newsgroups, or whatever seems most appropriate.) [...] And we will, above all, be flexible and responsive. We realize that if we are not perceived as providing a useful service, we will become irrelevant, and someone else will take our place. [...] We are code integrators. And, through our forums, we will try to help people reach consensus, and thereby provide direction and coordination for future improvements. " These selected quotes lead me to interpret them as follows: 1)Mozilla.org is a meeting place for "contact and community" for those interested in "improving the source code", i.e. Mozilla.org is to co-ordinate the efforts of those people working on the Mozilla product. If my estimation serves me right, there are about 200 Netscape and non-Netscape "contributors" working on the Mozilla product. However, according to Mitchell Baker of mozilla.org (in her recent newsgroup post), there have been 400,000 downloads of Mozilla 1.0 RC 1. What does this tell you? What does this tell Mozilla.org ? That there are 2000 times the number of Mozilla "testers" or "users" as Mozilla "developers". Whether or not these newsgroups were originally designed for "end - user support" Mozilla.org (and Netscape) should be thinking about where the feedback from all these testers is to be routed. Having 400,000 people test a product is of absolutely no use if: a) they have no one (or no place ) to give their feedback to b)it is not clear whether existing testers or "users" report their feedback to Bugzilla or some other unspecified feedback area (private distributions such as Beonex, for example) c) If feedback is collected in a decentralized way, how is it assimilated again so that the product can be improved? 2) The mission statement mentions that it will operate "discussion forums" but does not mention for whom. This uncertainty about the "correct" or "true" purpose of these newsgroups is not in Mozilla or Netscape's best interest, because their testers or "users" are unsure of who give their feedback to and where it is appropriate to do so. 3)Mozilla.org's mission statement as quoted above states that Mozilla.org will "try to help people reach consensus, and thereby provide direction and coordination for future improvements." I think that without Mozilla.org or Netscape taking concrete steps to address where users send their feedback will lead to Mozilla'org failure in its stated goal of providing "direction and co-ordination for future improvements." How can developers improve a product if a) they refuse to hear user views because it "interferes with development work" or b) users are unaware of how to or unable to submit their feedback through existing predefined channels of communication ? The open source development methodology puts developers into much closer contact with end-users than a closed source development one. So what should be done about this? Refuse access to Mozilla to those people who cannot program so they stop bugging the development team? In my opinion, if you do that, you can forget about "open source" because then the product of that "open source" project is not "open" to just anyone at all. Mozilla.org's declaring that "binaries are for testing purposes only", will not stop people from downloading them and using them. And if Mozilla.org is unhappy that "normal people" are using their product, I think it is the wrong way to go. If Mozilla.org were a company (which it isn't) it would never think that way. I think there is definite problem with the Netscape/Mozilla.org combo - While interest in Netscape has declined over the last few years, interest in Mozilla seems to be increasing, precisely because Mozilla-the-product offers what Netscape-the-product current does not : a product free from commercial constraints (it is okay to have pop-up blocking and ad blocking in Mozilla), yet one which has an existing community, where one seems to be able to wander in and ask questions without having to pull out a credit card and call a "low cost" 800 support number. Mozilla currently offers a "community", at least for developers. If those developers tell their users to get lost, I can see only one of the following alternatives: 1)The people who do care about which browser they use (and who do not want to use a Microsoft browser) will go to Opera, because it offers a great product, a great support community ( http://my.opera.com ) and a company which actively wants to listen to its users. Opera charges for its product, unlike Netscape and thus can afford to pay for end-user support. Those who cannot afford their product can use the ad-sponsored one for free, which to many will be an acceptable alternative to using a Microsoft browser, or Mozilla (to whose developers their opinion is not valued.) 2)Everybody will stop caring ( even existing Mozilla and Opera users), everybody will upgrade to Windows XP, and everyone will use Internet Explorer. I think the first case is more likely. If Mozilla developers are unwilling to hear user feedback and Mozilla.org (or Netscape which supports Mozilla.org) is unwilling to set up a support medium to help them, and the open community fails to find a way to devise a useful support medium for those people trying out Mozilla, there soon might not be something to worry about: after the noise has died down, and the last Mozilla end-user is evicted from the newsgroups, their will be lots of time for Mozilla developers to develop the next great thing. The only problem will be: there will be no one to develop it for, except themselves. Regards, - Jay Sheth [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ben Bucksch) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... > Jost Ammon wrote: > > > 2. the more users come visit, the better feedback re bugs you become > > Interestingly, the opposite is the case. The more people participate > here on the newsgroup and in bugzilla, the less useable it gets. > I'm not saying that we should close them, but we need some way to deal > with the flooding by inappropriate posts. > Currently, there is nothing more I can do than just asking to follow the > rules. > > > 3. at openoffice.org we have mailinglists devoted to users. Their > > concerns are taken care for there. > > At mozilla.org, we just say "We make binaries available for testing > purposes only!" and 'these groups are for developers only'. > I agree that this is not enough, and solutions have been proposed, but > not ignored or rejected, that's what I meant with mozilla.org's faults > below. > > > 4. netscape has no clear way to direct me to a newsgroup where I can > > discuss occasional questions about the behaviour of the software. I > > would like to go there but I never did find the right place. > > That used to be the case, but it's no longer true (see > <http://help.netscape.com>). > > They do have newsgroups, I'll see what I can do. > > > 5. Not every user who has found a bug has the time for long evaluation > > if this bug has already taken care for. I seem to have found one > > (filters). Now I have to check 137 filed bugs without understanding > > what has been written in the files. What else should I do then asking > > in the appropriate newsgroup if this has been already dealt with ? > > If you did go that far, just file an UNCONFIRMED bug. If it's a DUP, it > will be marked so by people who know the set of open (and frequently > reported) bugs. > > > At openoffice.org we have mailing lists that are not or only > > diffcultly publicly accessible. Maybe this is what you should opt for. > > Can you explain that further in n.pm.general, please? > > > Ben Bucksch wrote: > > > >> This problem is IMO partially the fault of mozilla.org, but I'll save > >> this discussion for another time. > >
