cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/47692342
Not OC question, but rather copied this from the pragmatic programmer
As a user, would you rather (1) wait for them [the software dev/company] to get all the bugs out, (2) have complex software and accept some bugs, or (3) opt for simpler software with fewer defects?
Software is never finished, it’s always just ‘good enough’.
Eh, sometimes it’s just ‘not good enough’.
depends on how familiar I am with the software. generally (and this is being more on the conservative end) I’d wait for a developer to fix it, if I am familiar with how the software works, I won’t even look for complex software, I’d just build it on my own get the initial bugs out and improve it if it needs improvement.
I’ve done this a couple of times but whenever I do bring this up, I usually give the time when I made a script to convert my scilab code into MATLAB code. My linear algebra professor uses MATLAB for compiling and running code and I’m too petty to use it. yes, the reason I made a script can be generalized to my pettiness and hatred for MATLAB.
Highly dependent on what features I need from the software in question and what the alternatives are. For a business case, I would probably go with 3. I deal with software deployments at my company, so I know how bad some bugs can be to the business. For games, I tend to go with 1. For other software, 3, as I’m not really a power user for things like photo editing, spreadsheets, etc.
There is a road in Poland. A4 it’s called. It’s officially a highway but never in it’s history did it satisfy requirements for that title. Label of highway cannot be removed for as long as road is under repairs, renovations or upgrades.
So there is a highway that shouldn’t be one, permanently in construction and never finished. It’s also paid road, one of the most expensive roads to use in EU.
And yet people still pay to use this road because alternative is a slower route through smaller roads and varied towns.
Software is the same - your application can be buggy shit, but as long as it’s best buggy shit available people will prefer it over more finished ones.
Complexity alone is useless.
If you do something simple software can’t I’ll accept bugs.
If you do something faster or easier for me as a user then I’ll accept some bugs but less than the impossible case above.
If you do something i could do faster and easier with a stable command line software from 1992 I’ll not use your software until you fix it.
- Unix philosophy goes BRRRRRR
However, if 3 is not possible because it’s say, a game or something where complexity is the point, then 1.
