distrowatch comment: "Ubuntu Breezy Badger - is it too dumbed down? "

[Anders Karlsson]

On 12/30/05, Scott <angrykeyboarder at angrykeyboarder.com> wrote:
> Eric Dunbar wrote:

[snip]

> > Every developer HAS TO USE the "we know what's good for users and they
> > don't" approach.
>
> How odd.
> >
> > WITHOUT IT, YOU CANNOT WRITE SOFTWARE FOR OTHERS!!!
>
> And why not?

Let's pretend you are going to write a spreadsheet application Scott..
Just for arguments sake yeah? Let's for arguments sake say that you
include a ROUND() function in your application, because it makes sense
and it is a rather handy function after all. You are at that moment
making assumptions about your users (if you intend for anyone else
ever to use that spreadsheet application that is). You are at that
very moment saying "I know what is good for my users" - whether you
like it or not.

Now imagine a couple of users giving you grief over your decission to
include that ROUND() function because it isn't the right type of
ROUND() function. You decided to do it the mathematical way, and these
users expected it to work the way Excel does it.

You included functionality because you found it useful, perhaps other
users requested it, but a small select few didn't like it. They get
very vocal, slag you off on mailing lists, say your application is
under attack by the developers (i.e. you) and openly claim you are
using dictator tactics to tell the users how they should use your
application.

Out of interest, how would you go about writing software if you did
not make assumptions about how potential users would use the software?

Regards,

--
Anders Karlsson <trudheim at gmail.com>