[mythtv-users] Why Free Software has poor usability ?

Nate Bargmann n0nb at n0nb.us
Tue Aug 5 22:10:51 UTC 2008


* Steve Peters - Priority Electronics <steve at priorityelectronics.com> [2008 Aug 05 14:47 -0500]:
> 
> >
> >On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Param Singh 
> ><mithu.singh at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> If everything about mythtv and its usability is good, then why
> >> competitors are using "mythtv is a lot of work" as marketing tool ?
> >>
> >> Screenshot :: http://img360.imageshack.us/img360/5687/mythtvju4.png
> >>
> >I laugh every time I see that being that their product requires
> >windows. Which to me is much more work and headaches than MythTV could
> >possibly cause considering that using windows safely will requires
> >usually a virus checker and anti-spyware software. And if you use
> >these tools from Symantec there goes 200 or so MB of ram.
> >
> >John
> >_______
> 
> 
> I thought I saw a version you could buy for linux. Besides, linux itself is
> more headaches that windows for most people. 

I guess that would depend on the way they install MythTV, no?  I've
used Linux for nearly a dozen years and last week I made my first foray
into MythTV using Mythbuntu.  I didn't have to touch *a thing* that had
to do with the Linux kernel or the underlying system.  I've been
spending my time learning about Myth and working with my various pieces
of hardware.  This has been a very sane project, actually.

> Only those people who've used linux before using mythtv are the ones that
> find linux easier to setup on. For the windows versions, you just install
> the software program, but for mythtv, I had to learn a heck of a lot about
> linux in general in order for it to function. After a year and a half of
> mythtv, it still gives me problems from time to time.

Maybe I'll run into something yet and reading about other methods of
installing Myth seem to make it a quite involved process, but I think
the Mythbuntu folks have done an outstanding job.  As far as the
underlying system being Linux, I hardly know its there.

Sorry, but I don't automatically buy the argument that Linux ==
difficult and Windows == intuitive as I have plenty of experience with
both to counter each argument.

As for usability, I've never used a DVR of any sort, but I have
experience with various VCRs and Myth is no worse to deal with than
them.  They say the only intuitive interface is the nipple and
everything else involves a learning curve.  Like quality (those who've
read Zen, and Art of Motorcycle Maintenance will understand), usability
is a nebulous concept.  What I find perfectly usable may be an enigma
to someone else and vice versa.  Each of us have our own concept of
"usable" and that may or may not match what someone else finds usable. 
For example, enough people find Vim usable to keep it a worthwhile
project, yet I find it among the most horrible editors I've ever
encountered.  I've tried to learn it and love it, but it doesn't mesh
with me.

We could go on and continue to pan developers for poor usability as
it's a straw man brought out every time someone decides to take 
F/OSS to task.  I'm willing to bet that there are plenty of programs
designed by usability "experts" that are utter bilge.  One of the holy
grails of usability is consistency throughout the UI.  Fine.   Usually
Windows gets trotted out as a shining example, yet the consistency
lasted for all of two revisions and then it was all tossed out the
window.

Can Myth or other mainstream F/OSS software gain from UI improvements. 
Certainly, they can, but it isn't automatic that as software moves toward
freedom that usability approaches zero.

- Nate >>

-- 

"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
possible worlds.  The pessimist fears this is true."

Ham radio, Linux, bikes, and more: http://n0nb.us/index.html


More information about the mythtv-users mailing list