> One thing I've learned about software in general is that I never want to be outside of the primary use case. If you're not using it the same way that the people building it do, it's going to be a pain to use, and your requests will be ignored.
While this might be true in general, one of the main advantages in choosing FOSS is that features used by a small subset of users are more likely to be kept than for proprietary software.
When a software package starts out, early-adopting power users build its popularity and help shape its growth ... until the package becomes so useful that it is now marketable to the masses. Then, for proprietary software at least, there's a strong incentive to streamline and remove anything the masses don't care about...which can alienate the same people who helped make their package great.
For FOSS, there's powerful motiviation to retain features that even only a handful of power users rely on -- lest that project be forked.
I can't remember the last time I've been feature-burned by a FOSS project. My feature-burn scars for proprietary software, however, are many -- and at least a few are quite deep.
While this might be true in general, one of the main advantages in choosing FOSS is that features used by a small subset of users are more likely to be kept than for proprietary software.
When a software package starts out, early-adopting power users build its popularity and help shape its growth ... until the package becomes so useful that it is now marketable to the masses. Then, for proprietary software at least, there's a strong incentive to streamline and remove anything the masses don't care about...which can alienate the same people who helped make their package great.
For FOSS, there's powerful motiviation to retain features that even only a handful of power users rely on -- lest that project be forked.
I can't remember the last time I've been feature-burned by a FOSS project. My feature-burn scars for proprietary software, however, are many -- and at least a few are quite deep.