I see customer as someone who appropriates the deliverable of the programming. If you do programming just for fun, i.e. you get pleasure from the process, not the deliverable, then the term customer is really not appropriate.

Same way, if write to a web forum or go running for fun, there is no customer involved.

mikko

Well.... This is just nitpicking anyway. And I beg to differ :-D

I understand that you have trouble seeing my point. Maybe some day..

Have a good week-end!

I understand your point, and I know some people who share that view. Most commercial software developement is indeed customer driven. (some rebel programmers could do things that are not customer driven every once and a while)

For non programmer, it might be hard to see, however, that software can also be developed for fun or as an artistic effort.

And talking about customers in these two cases is a bit funny.

Just claiming that someone does not get your point when you are not right is a bit childish

mikko

HI

Achintya here .. following this discussion/argument with interest.

I think I can see both sides here; the software developers have fun and inspiration producing stuff for themselves to play with and debug etc; and out in the world there is a group of people looking for something which will let them improve on the basic Joomla/Mambo registration and membership system.

That is fine; so long as the two don't mix.

The problem comes WHEN THE SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS OFFER THEIR WORK TO THE PUBLIC TO USE.

At this point there is a responsibility to then listen to ensure that what is offered is useable, futureproof and open to future development based on customer feedback.

If software developers don't want that responsibility THEY SHOULD NOT OFFER THEIR WORK FOR PUBLIC TO USE.

I am typing that in caps because I think this is the point you are not getting Mikko.

You want the best of both worlds without the responsibility? You want the enjoyment and inspiration of producing the software and playing with it and also the knowledge that people are using it; but not the responsibility of ensuring it is actually serving people's needs?

This is where market research, customer delight and satisfaction and all the other central Marketing/Sales criteria interface with software development.

Community Builder IS BEING OFFERED TO THE PUBLIC TO USE and those producing and developing it have a DUTY OF CARE because it is being offered to the public.

If you don't want to serve your customer needs and don't want to exercise your duty of care to your customers; THEN DON'T OFFER IT TO THE PUBLIC?

There is a duty of care for the customer too, especially if they are using 'open source' software. Part of the deal is to offer to develop the software via feedback and participation in beta trials, connection with the developers and perhaps financial support to get new versions underway.

I am currrently advertising on a Joomla Project Board for developers to produce an Advanced Search module, and I am offering money. Not a lot because I am poor, but it is my way of contributing.

I am also in connection with a software developer and discussing how Roberts component could be improved.

This is my contribution as a CUSTOMER; I am doing my bit. And I expect you programmers to do yours and respond to your customers who are using your work.

That is simple isn't it? Well, it is to me...


achintya

achintya wrote:

The problem comes WHEN THE SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS OFFER THEIR WORK TO THE PUBLIC TO USE.

The problem comes when people expect to get commercial grade software from open soure projects. What many people do not understand is that it is beneficial for software to be released as unstable versions.

The advantages of "release early - release often" principle are numerous. You get free testing, maybe free debugging and you get the end user directly involved earlier in the development process. This results in better quality than traditional closed source development.

At this point there is a responsibility to then listen to ensure that what is offered is useable, futureproof and open to future development based on customer feedback.

If software developers don't want that responsibility THEY SHOULD NOT OFFER THEIR WORK FOR PUBLIC TO USE.

No. You can and should release work in process to get other people give their inputs. Did you read the licensing terms of this software? It states for example that the software is served as is and without any warranty. The preample is really worth reading, you can find it here www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html

Free software, from the point of view of the free software movement refers to freedom, as in freedom of speech. You can release what ever you wish on the internet if you do not break any law.

Free software gives people possibility to release software that they find usefull without the legal bindings of warranties etc. This is the reason why it gan be given out without getting any money for return.

You do not have to use software produced in this way. Similarly, freedom of speech does not force you to listen to people who you do not want to listen to.

You want the best of both worlds without the responsibility? You want the enjoyment and inspiration of producing the software and playing with it and also the knowledge that people are using it; but not the responsibility of ensuring it is actually serving people's needs?

Well, let's use an analogy here. I like to paint for fun. That is ok and no-one tells me what to paint. I can also post my work on my wall and then people can say their opinions about it. Some times people like it and sometimes not. I would prefer the latter, but it still does not quide the way I paint.

This is where market research, customer delight and satisfaction and all the other central Marketing/Sales criteria interface with software development.

Here you refer to commercial software development, I suppose.

Community Builder IS BEING OFFERED TO THE PUBLIC TO USE and those producing and developing it have a DUTY OF CARE because it is being offered to the public.

No, read the license. There is no warranty or duty of care what so ever. By downloading the software you have agreed to the license.

If you don't want to serve your customer needs and don't want to exercise your duty of care to your customers; THEN DON'T OFFER IT TO THE PUBLIC?

Again, people are free to publish just about anything and that is one of the corner stones of the western society. It is up to the users to filter what software they see as appropriate and what not.

There is a duty of care for the customer too, especially if they are using 'open source' software. Part of the deal is to offer to develop the software via feedback and participation in beta trials, connection with the developers and perhaps financial support to get new versions underway.

And this is exactly why people release pre alpha or evevn before.

I am currrently advertising on a Joomla Project Board for developers to produce an Advanced Search module, and I am offering money. Not a lot because I am poor, but it is my way of contributing.

I am also in connection with a software developer and discussing how Roberts component could be improved.

This is my contribution as a CUSTOMER; I am doing my bit. And I expect you programmers to do yours and respond to your customers who are using your work.

I appreciate your help here. Unfortunately most people are just free riders of free software.

That is simple isn't it? Well, it is to me...

The open source is far from simple. The idea (and legal side) of releasing without any warranty or any support is a key enabler of free software. Consider the possible legal issues and costs when mission critical system fails in a big company. The "no responsibility what so ever" is a protective measure for the people who do the programming.

There are some big companies making some big money by offering this care and warranty. Take for example redhat with market cap of close to $5B. If you need warranty or care these companies are there for you.

As a customer (or I prefer end user, since customer is mostly used in context of financial transactions), you can give feedback and request improvements. If these suggestions are fair, then developers an take them into consideration.

But then again, it is mostly up to individual developers and teir morales to code what contributing end users want. It is not, however, part of the system, since the software is officially release "as is".

mikko