You're viewing a single thread.
From the perspective of someone who isn't currently in the "Bad If Not FOSS" mindset, this image really gets the impression backwards. To the average user who doesn't appreciate the user-unfriendly klunk and jank that is inherent to FOSS interfaces, it really feels like the image should depict a bunch of FOSS Teletubbies being intruded upon by a competent Power Ranger.
I used to be a FOSS guy. And then I realized I valued my time and sanity way too much to spend more time troubleshooting and nudging my software into just working normally than I did actually using it.
FOSS software as the underpinning of the platform that is then accessed by a closed-source client is, ultimately, the best circumstance we could ask for. Clients are what the user actually interacts with. If that experience is more engaging and approachable, you get many more users on the platform overall, without threatening the sanctity of the freedom of the FOSS platform it all runs on. There is no one authority to make unilateral decisions to derail the platform, while still offering a more welcoming public face. If you can't understand that, or don't care to recognize it, that you're content to let the platform wallow in obscurity.
What about FOSS software is inherently jank? This is a stupid take that's likely informed by some bad past experiences, of which I've had many with proprietary crapware.
It is easier to find crap FOSS software because it is easier to make & maintain a FOSN project when you're less competent & you don't have a strategy for long term success. Proprietary software relies on for-profit motives to improve, while FOSS software relies on user feedback & community incentives. This is why, while the average quality of service from FOSS programs is potentially worse, the best QoS is usually from a FOSS program. See Elk for Mastodon for a fantastic example of premium quality.
@gianni @RavenFellBlade, well, there are also FOSS which is way better as an equvalent proprietary soft, but the sense of FOSS is to permit the sharing of scripts which has many advantages in the development of new applications. The common mistake is the belief that by definition FOSS is more secure, stable and private than proprietary soft that many users have, which is false. This depends on many other factors, like maintenance and the purpose of the developer company.
It comes from a ten year period of distro-hopping a dozen different Linux distros that ultimately all fell short of delivering an experience anywhere near as stable or reliable as Windows or Mac OS. The closest I got to that was Mint, which I ended up using from Mint 9 thru Mint 17. And then the drivers for my nVidia graphics card just...broke. I had my laptop set up as a dual boot, and until that driver mess, rarely ever booted Windows. After the driver busted, I found myself having less and less interest in spending ungodly hours trying to coax some other distro into cooperating (Ubuntu, Pentoo, Kali, Knoppix). Every distro would have some kind of conflict or missing libs or some other issue requiring hours of fixing config files or finding exactly the correct repo to install from so as not to break compatibility with something else. It just got exhausting, like having a second job just to maintain a functioning desktop that wasn't full of obsolete or deprecated software. Mind you, I gave up back in 2015. I did wonder if I should have given LM 18 a try when it came out about a year later, but by then, I had largely just moved on from PCs as an interest altogether. I just didn't have the budget to keep up with hardware, and my job as an over the road driver at a time lent itself to portable gaming and consoles. I couldn't justify spending another 2 grand on another laptop that would be obsolete in two or three years.
So yes, it is my own experience with FOSS software, and lots and lots of it, and all of the headaches that went along with it. I absolutely adored Mint when it worked. It's just too bad that that only lasted a couple years, at least for me.
Why is it "inherent"?
Yeah, some FOSS apps are very good exemples of polished and effective UI design. An example that comes to my mind is Jellyfin, it is prettier, more reaponsive and way less buggy than Amazon Prime or Netflix (my experience on nvidia shield).
FOSS software as the underpinning of the platform that is then accessed by a closed-source client is, ultimately, the best circumstance we could ask for.
Red Hat is one of the most successful companies that relies on FOSS, but what do one think of their attempt to restrict access to their source code.
Yeah also trying to stay FOSS on Android/iOS seems like a lost cause given the OS themselves.