• JayDee@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      65
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 hours ago

      There is a practice where software companies will either provide their software to schools and colleges for free or will pay schools and colleges to use their software. This leads to the students using this software, learning that software’s sole paradigm, and essentially forces them to use that software going forward because of how difficult it is to shift to another software with a different paradigm. This is Vendor Lock-In. The vendor locks you into their software.

      This leads to all future workers being trained in that software, so of course businesses opt to use that software instead of retraining the employee in another. This contrasts with the idea of what an ‘industry standard’ is. The name suggests that it’s used in the industry because it’s better than other software, but in reality it’s just standard because of lock-in.

      This is how Windows cornered the operating system market - by partnering with vendors to ship their systems with Windows pre-installed.

      • Dave@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        My kids use Chromebooks at school. What I call “Word” they call “Docs”. It’s very clear why Google gives this operating system away for free.

      • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 hours ago

        For decades Apple paid schools to teach on their computers. In the 80s and much of the 90s, all you’d find in computer labs was Macs.

        It didn’t work because PCs were just better for businesses at the time.

          • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            5 hours ago

            Software mainly. Apple made software companies pay a license to release software on the Mac, so most companies chose to release on PC exclusively.

      • MarauderIIC@dormi.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Your description of vendor lock-in is obviously solvable by developers making a competing UI and workflow similar to the most popular software, and enabling new features under another menu. That said, there is obviously minimal interest in doing so.

        This is UI. UI is not vendor lock-in. Lock-in costs users money to break out of, not developers.

        • Nalivai@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          11 hours ago

          Oh yeah, when a school receives a hundreds of computers with Windows preinstalled, they obviously consider spending hundreds of man-hours on installing a different OS, but decide against it because Windows has quantifiably superiour UI. Because that’s exactly how it works.

        • dustyData@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Have you ever heard of SAP? Salesforce? UI quality and UX workflows have never been the deciding factor for choosing a piece of software in a corpo setting. It’s money and whose friend is pocketing it. That’s all that CFO make decisions on. Windows became a standard because Microsoft literally paid schools to buy computers with it, in exchange all schools had to do was let them conduct their indoctrination workshop, disguised as a “how to use a computer” course. But of course they exclusively talked about Windows.

        • JayDee@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          That entire solution immediately falls apart when the paradigm is patented by the vendor, who immediately sues any competing software using UI elements even vaguely similar to theirs. This has been going on for decades, and the three things that usually happen are that the competitor either gets bought up, sued out of existence, or has to keep their UI different enough that there is little-to-no bleedover between the userbases (and usually starves to death from too little revenue).

    • Voyajer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      15 hours ago

      It’s an thing people used to say when they wanted to justify not using the software gimp

      • Cypher@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        14 hours ago

        You mean a common user experience that leaves many new users frustrated.

        • MBM@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          I kept seeing recommendations of gimp as a photoshop alternative, so I installed it and… I was convinced that I must’ve downloaded the wrong thing. It didn’t even look like an image editor to me. I’m sure it’s a wonderful program, maybe the UI got better since then, but I ended up much happier just using paint.NET

        • Nalivai@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 hours ago

          Agree, Adobe products always leave me frustrated, and my experience is universal.

        • Kushan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          12 hours ago

          Yup and honestly the hostility those users get when mentioning it is the same reason Linux doesn’t get more traction in the mainstream.

          When a lot of users expect software to work in a particular way and it doesn’t, you change the software - if you insult, belittle or otherwise expect the user to change their working habits then you’re going to have a bad time and be all shocked Pikachu when the user doesn’t use the software.

          Apple is (was lol) the most valuable company on the planet because they understood that the user experience is the absolute most important thing. They are the textbook example of vendor lock in and yet people flock to them because “it just works”.

          • Nalivai@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            10 hours ago

            the hostility

            “Hey, why this free software I tried once IS SO SHIT AND UNINTUITIVE AND EVERYONE WHO MADE IT IS PLAIN STUPID AND WRONG, NOW HELP ME IMMEDIATELY YOU FUCKING NERDS. Man, nobody fixed my problem immediately, what a hostile envoroment”.

            you change the software

            Oh, so that’s what big corpos were doing this whole time? Damn, what a cool environment that should be, you buy software and it behaves like you want it to be, and if it doesn’t, you complain to the corpo and it fixes it for you immediately.

            Apple is (was lol) the most valuable company on the planet because they understood

            that you don’t need to sell software or hardware, you need to sell brand recognition, feel of premium exclusivity, and smug satisfaction of being better than the plebs. And as long as your shit doesn’t crap out tremendous amount, you can ruse the rubes.

              • Nalivai@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 hours ago

                They didn’t came for help with their problem or whatever, they came to argue about their favourite way to organise software development, brandishing hostility and accusations from the beginning. Different situations, really.

              • dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                9 hours ago

                Maybe, but people who demand volunteers to provide more labor than they are willing to also are the problem. You don’t seem to grasp the nature of volunteering. It isn’t meant to serve you—volunteers do what they want when they want to because you won’t do what they want. They have your same frustrations: I want it to do X! So they do it.

                I’ll also say this: arguments like yours have been used for decades while Linux is getting more and more popular. Maybe, just maybe, you’re wrong.

                • Kushan@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  9 hours ago

                  Linux is getting more popular because corporations like valve have put the effort into refining the user experience. I’m not just talking about a pretty UI either, I’m taking things like proton that makes playing games on Linux as easy as playing on windows.

                  I’m not saying there aren’t people out there that demand free labour from volunteers - of course there are; I maintain and have contributed to a few open source projects myself so I know all too well what that’s like.

                  However, I would say those folks are a very small (albeit vocal and annoying) minority. The vast, vast majority of users simply dismiss Linux/GIMP/Whatever because it’s not suitable for them. They don’t go screaming into GitHub demanding features, they don’t post on Lemmy that the software sucks or otherwise create a fuss, they just gravitate towards the stuff that works for them (usually something proprietary) with the least friction.

                  • dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    9 hours ago

                    Then maybe we shouldn’t be complaining about GIMP’s UI and instead be giving them money :D It seems like that’s how you fix Linux, not posting “can’t make circle tho” or “it isn’t like Photoshop and I refuse to use Krita tho”

                    I’m just bringing it to the main thread topic: GIMP often has complaints that it isn’t like Photoshop. Well, Krita is. So what’s the point of complaining about GIMP anymore? Just complain about Krita please. Let GIMP do its own thing with the people that care about it and let Krita be the Photoshop replacement that everyone desires. I use Krita instead of GIMP because I am very used to Photoshop—I don’t complain about GIMP because it’s literally pointless when I have a tool I enjoy.