Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The rise of user-hostile software

den.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 303 posts

Re: The rise of user-hostile software

#201

Post by MrStonedOne »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #26

Agreed on all points. Interesting to see this: > You can argue that all of this has existed for a very long time, back from the days of all kinds of toolbars and extensions that created multiple levels of address bar nesting in your web browser and taskbar. What I find ironic about the whole situation is, back then it was universally known that those toolbars and extensions are distributed by assholes. The whole soft…

The smartphone era gave the internet as a whole its Eternal September.

User growth outpaced culture absorption so the tech leaders got to direct the new culture, at least wrt to expectations on companies in the internet.

Re: The rise of user-hostile software

#202

Post by therealjumbo »

mschuster91 wrote: post #142
erhk wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If adware makes money, then even hardware is impacted since you can now undercut competitors. Two mice, essentially the same but $40 price tag. Which one do you buy? Can you smell the bloatware on them in the store?

> Which one do you buy? Can you smell the bloatware on them in the store? This is why I prefer to shop online or at least do a quick search on the internet to show potential issues. On the other hand, I would really prefer a requirement for products that are sold in a physical store to be reviewed by a government-run, independent organization on build quality and sustainability, and that this review be presented or e…

Government run? The EU is about to _require_ the sort of CSAM scanning that Apple is running on devices and the rest are running on the cloud. Also: https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-facebook-tech-g...

Governments have a very long ugly history.

Re: The rise of user-hostile software

#203

Post by dspillett »

II2II wrote: post #108
dspillett wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your primary printer should not be an inkjet unless you only ever print color photos. And unless you print photos very regularly or sometimes need them right-this-instant-gods-damn-it, you are usually better off going to a local shop and having them printed there on better paper with better equipment, cheaper. My main printer is a relatively inexpensive[†] laser, that has a true-black-only mode. [†] not _absolutely…

> And unless you print photos very regularly or sometimes need them right-this-instant-gods-damn-it, you are usually better off going to a local shop and having them printed there on better paper with better equipment, cheaper. If I had any need for colour prints, it would be a viable option since there is a shop a block away. For many people who regularly print in colour, the cost of the printer could be justified b…

> For many people who regularly print in colour, the cost of the printer could be justified by the time it takes to stop off at the shop to pick up the prints

Agreed. Though for me, assuming an inkjet in full quality mode isn't at least an order of magnitude faster than they were last time I had a supposedly high-spec one, printing a few A4 prints (or more of a smaller size), even assuming no “need several head cleans as I've not used the device for a week or two” or “had to reprint as something went odd half-way through a page” issues or similar, would take longer than marching to the nearest shop with printing facility, printing there, and getting home! Time of day makes a difference of course, my nearest 24-hour place is a noticeably further walk.

> Convenience is why I maintain a relatively inexpensive laser printer.

Same, mostly. I like to be able to print things to annotate. Wasteful environment wise but I'll take the deserved selfishness accusation on the chin there! The main use for it ATM is printing custom maps and other notes for trail runs, on fancy “thin but indestructible” paper that I doubt a print shop would offer, and sometimes being able to make a late correction before heading out to travel to the start is useful.

Re: The rise of user-hostile software

#204

Post by GuB-42 »

I think it is correlated to the rise of free (as in $0) software.

People don't like to pay and developers want to make money. So the strategy is to make the initial cost low, preferably zero, and then make the user pay, directly or indirectly. It is not new, we had things like shareware in the past, but now, developers have more options, and they use them, because the most "user-hostile" thing is to ask for money, especially a large up-front payment.

I know some people prefer to pay, but they are a minority, and therefore, it is not the most profitable way to monetize.

Re: The rise of user-hostile software

#205

Post by mixmastamyk »

This piece is a great idea, but I was disappointed at the execution.

New, but doesn’t mention Apple’s photo scanning. Forced Windows upgrades and telemetry mentioned but buried. Focuses on keyboard lights, which is fine but not exactly near the top of my list of concerns. Doesn’t mention ads in the OS.

Finally it blames “developers.” This phrase could include management from certain perspective. Honestly, I’m sure approximately zero engineers are pushing for this stuff.

Re: The rise of user-hostile software

#206

Post by joshuaissac »

thefr0g wrote: post #146
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately: - A lot of free software either sucks or is entirely non-existent for many use cases - Free software is not entirely immune to this behavior either

The point is that with FLOSS you can fix both of these problems yourself.

That is not the case for any software that is not trivial. Recompiling to remove ads from a free program may be achievable but something like adding the missing support for Excel VBA into LibreOffice Calc is beyond the capability of almost all users.

Re: The rise of user-hostile software

#207

Post by michaelmrose »

sneak wrote: post #149
marcodiego wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most mainstream software from renowned companies should be [...] classified as malware. Most FLOSS has not fallen in this category.

But even a significant portion of FLOSS can be legitimately called spyware. Firefox, Chromium, Docker (although Docker Desktop is no longer open source), Homebrew, Mattermost, Netdata, Bitwarden - all of these are common, popular FLOSS that embed spyware, oftentimes operating silently (other than a little notice at install time that the authors think constitutes informed consent). The spyware epidemic is real, and FL…

This is what Mozilla says about data collection.

> By default, Mozilla collects limited data from Firefox to help us understand how people are using the browser, such as information about the number of open tabs and windows or number of webpages visited. This does not include data that can reveal sensitive information about users’ activity online, such as search queries or the websites users visit.

I think you are defining the term spyware too broadly.

Re: The rise of user-hostile software

#208

Post by Ensorceled »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #205

This piece is a great idea, but I was disappointed at the execution. New, but doesn’t mention Apple’s photo scanning. Forced Windows upgrades and telemetry mentioned but buried. Focuses on keyboard lights, which is fine but not exactly near the top of my list of concerns. Doesn’t mention ads in the OS. Finally it blames “developers.” This phrase could include management from certain perspective. Honestly, I’m sure ap…

> New, but doesn’t mention Apple’s photo scanning. Forced Windows upgrades and telemetry buried.

Those two things are different issues, the article is about software that makes it difficult to perform the actual task you are using the product for.

Apple's photo scanning doesn't make my camera difficult to use. Windows telemetry doesn't make Windows difficult to use. Yes, they are user hostile, just not in the way you wish the article was written.

Re: The rise of user-hostile software

#209

Post by jclardy »

ryandrake wrote: post #160
greatgib wrote: post #44

This article is globally so true, but there is a major error: It is not "needs of developers" the problem, but the "needs of product manager, marketing, c-level asshole". Like for telemetry, most of the time the business side "can", so they do. And again, for specific app and co, most developer would complain and not like release such user-hostile software but they are forced by business to do it. Like this stupid pr…

> And again, for specific app and co, most developer would complain and not like release such user-hostile software but they are forced by business to do it For every dark pattern, invasive analytics package, adware, malware, spyware that gets added to a product, there is an actual software developer sitting in a chair, voluntarily adding it. Maybe someone here on HN, reading this very thread! Nobody is putting a gun…

Both, because different organizations prioritize different things. In some places, developers can run the show, in others, it is the marketing team calling the shots.

I think the early startup area is driven by developers, but once a product gets some traction they transition into the product manager/marketer driven mode where dark patterns start to show up.

Re: The rise of user-hostile software

#210

Post by wilde »

dend wrote: post #186
wilde wrote: post #114

But who will pay for this software? Not the author, they’ve made that very clear. The things they’re railing against fall into two categories: 1. The OS vendor hasn’t built it into the OS. 2. Cost saving measures. One the developer has little influence over. The other is business physics.

OP here. Au contraire - I am happy to pay a bit extra for software that does its job and gets out of the way. With hardware, one could argue that can be made a part of the price for the device - if I buy a "premium" component, I prefer to have a clean user experience that does not create a hole in my network to manage RGB lights.

Thanks for responding! I guess I was mainly reacting to your claim about the move to subscriptions. It costs $10/mo to make software these days. $0.33/mo (your stated price) isn’t tenable.

I expect the added costs apply similarly for other portions of the supply chain. Apple hardware provides similar quality to what you’re asking for. It is 2-4x more expensive and that’s with the advantage of scale.

Post reply on HN