Day after day, or at least once a week, we discuss the following topics at work lunch:
* structure programming or object-oriented programming;
* java or languages ​​in .NET;
* questions of how many people go around the world programming 'untitled' which generates horrifyingly handcrafted pages that will never ever validate a standard;
* web browsers;
* free software.
We don't usually come up with any special solutions, because we always get stuck in the same phrases:
«I want to be paid for what I do»
«you and your left-handed software«
I suppose you have noticed that in my work environment there is an important atmosphere windowser. Not bad, because we are oriented to use the operating system that uses the highest percentage of users who surf the web (and will eventually consume the applications we develop). We also usually assume that these users use IE.
Despite this, we have at our disposal (if we want to use it, and it is preferred that we do so) many small applications to fulfill specific tasks, for example, tools to view PDF's, FTP clients, PDF printers, even office software (yes ... the OpenOffice).
Personally, when I install some specific software (free or not) I pretend that it meets two basic requirements: do what you have to do and do it fast. I am not very interested in the name, or who developed it, I am mainly interested in the functionality.
Let's go to a concrete example: I want to see a pdf. What should I use?
Adobe Reader : yes, I'm going to see the pdf, and also the little ruler, the options to rotate it, zoom in, the update messages, the multiplicity of pages utilities, again the update sign, the search options, and finally the happy one update sign ... again.
SumatraPDF: used to view pdf's. And that's it. I can zoom, rotate, select text and voila. It does what it has to do.
And what is the difference?
That the SumatraPDF it doesn't bother me every other day, it installs and does its job without disturbing me.
The same thing happens to me with browsers. It is preferred and mandatory that some of the tasks we carry out are done using IE, and many sites (luckily less and less) are highly compatible with IE and not as compatible with other browsers.
When it is not necessary to use IE, I use Safari (for Windows, of course) and I am often asked "why do you want Safari?", To which I answer: because it goes fast, it does not crash and it does not bother. IE7 hangs, is extremely slow, and is less intuitive than Windows Vista inclusive.
If you look at the discussions we have, there are very deep questions. Do I use a program that does what it has to do or do I use this one that everyone uses? Do I install this free software that surely has one or more developers behind it, with the possibility of reporting them the inconveniences and suggesting improvements, or do I use this other one that I am going to have to crack but that everyone uses, and I stick to the possible future versions to cover my expectations?
What is preferable, three small programs that fulfill their function or just one that does a little of everything?
What do I prefer to do, use a software that a developer gives me for free and gives me the possibility of obtaining the source code to improve it, expand it and correct its errors, or I crack this software that other developers probably charged to develop or hope to obtain profits from it by providing support and selling it to cover the man-hours it took to develop it?
I do not know what you will believe, but I, from my little place, try to spread free software as much as I can. I don't know if I will be able to help, and I honestly hope one day to develop something that will serve many, to provide it for free and for which I will be recognized. : D
Meanwhile, I fight every day so that my desktop is a little more full of free applications.
I already got rid of the Adobe Reader.
Will I be able to get rid of Windows?
LINKS: A humble tribute to Krzystof Kowalczyk, who likes to do things very simple and useful! :)