// Internet Duct Tape

Why Open Source Software Sucks – Software Simplicity Isn’t Simple

Posted in Programming and Software Development, Technology by engtech on December 06, 2007

Programming Tips

Aside: Hosted software would be something like Gmail, while installable software would be something like Outlook. WordPress.com is hosted software by Automattic, but it is also available at WordPress.org where you can download it and install it yourself where ever you want.

There are a few “internet rockstars” in programming circles, and most programmers who read blogs will have heard of Joel Spolsky (one of the few people who writes entertaining tech books) and 37signals (the guys who made Ruby on Rails and Basecamp). The guys at 37signals recently wrote a post about how they prefer creating web-based software that they host vs software that a user would have to download and install themselves because it is so much easier for the software developer. When you don’t have to release your software into the wild you have so many less things to worry about: different operating systems, memory performance, installation dependencies, hardware dependencies.

“You have to deal with endless operating environment variations that are out of your control. When something goes wrong it’s a lot harder to figure out why if you aren’t in control of the OS or the third party software or hardware that may be interfering with the install, upgrade, or general performance of your product. This is even more complicated with remote server installs when there may be different versions of Ruby, Rails, MYSQL, etc. at play.”

Joel looks at his stats and points out that if he didn’t provide installable software then he’d be out of business, because it accounts for 80% of his revenue compared to hosted software.  He also makes a great point that software that people are willing to buy is software that solves a gnarly problem, IE: it deals with complicated stuff. Any other kind of problem can be solved by free software because its uncomplicated enough that one guy in his mom’s basement can churn it out over a weekend.

“The one thing that so many of today’s cute startups have in common is that all they have is a simple little Ruby-on-Rails Ajax site that has no barriers to entry and doesn’t solve any gnarly problems. So many of these companies feel insubstantial and fluffy, because, out of necessity (the whole company is three kids and an iguana), they haven’t solved anything difficult yet. Until they do, they won’t be solving problems for people. People pay for solutions to their problems.”

But he then follows through with a great point that the gnarly problem that 37signals’ applications solve is the problem of design. 37signals might be building fluffy Ruby-on-Rails Ajax sites, but that’s beside the point of the problem they’re really solving: how to design a great looking user experience that makes people happy.

I think this draws a great parallel to what’s wrong with free software: it’s created to scratch a certain itch, and that’s usually all it does. Compelling user interface? Joy to use? Nope, it solves the original programmer’s problem and that’s about it. And before you get all uppity that I’m attacking open source software, let me clarify that I’m talking about the open source software I create.

The problem is two-fold: I have a natural tendency to over-complicate things and I have trouble sharing the customer’s pain (stepping away from the code, and seeing how a stranger would view the end result). Jeff “Metal” Atwood asks “When was the last time you even met a customer, much less tried to talk to them about a problem they’re having with your website or software?”

This hit me last week when I sat down with another engineer to show him an internal tool I was building for him. He started poking a usage case that confused him. It wasn’t in the spec, and it didn’t follow the way he thought of the flow. It was an artifact of the internal data structures I was using that I was exposing to the user. This happens too often. It’s the opposite of opinionated software [1]: pushing the decision making on to the user. [2]

Of course, writing open source software has its benefits because quite often there’s no barrier between you and the people who are using your software other than computer screens. You are your own quality assurance, and you are your own customer service. You have to explain to the users why they should install your software, you have to deal with the installation headaches your platform choice created, you have to explain any complexities with how to use it, and you have to help them when problems occur.

My open source software might suck, but its helping me explore the solution to a gnarly problem: how to solve problems in a way that is easy for other people to use.

Related Posts


1 – There’s an interested essay to be written comparing opinionated software to considerate software.

2 – This programming talk might bore you, but the problem of simplicity in design is cross-discipline and applies to any blogger.