Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932653Ab0FERQh (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jun 2010 13:16:37 -0400 Received: from mail-bw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.214.46]:49310 "EHLO mail-bw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753145Ab0FERQf convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jun 2010 13:16:35 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=AP0wBiTiw2sm5EI7dzqpGLbyVGLfFBBQSOd168Jzirg3e7q/+ilDoIRx+RMmlke42i lt/zAdZLFsg5yllQK8PZznPMUMkapY7fhk1Hg0Ky/xBnudWn3xx8ztG4gRfVX8Pe40IC UxWksDRCYl8+6gRFDb+JaLBIiC/HKz7F5UCV8= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <201005312314.12391.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <20100527222514.0a1710bf@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <1275149418.4503.128.camel@mulgrave.site> <1275156734.1645.496.camel@laptop> <201005312314.12391.rjw@sisk.pl> Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 20:16:33 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8) From: Felipe Contreras To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Peter Zijlstra , James Bottomley , =?UTF-8?B?QXJ2ZSBIasO4bm5ldsOlZw==?= , tytso@mit.edu, LKML , Florian Mickler , Linux PM , Thomas Gleixner , Linux OMAP Mailing List , felipe.balbi@nokia.com, Alan Cox Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2514 Lines: 50 On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > Do you realistically think that by hurting the _user_ you will make the > _developer_ write better code?  No, really. As an application writer, if my users complain that their battery is being drained (as it happened), they stop using it, and other people see there are problems, so they stop using it, if people get angry about it they will vote it down. New users will see it has low score; they will not install it. That's a network effect. Having users is the quintessential reason people write code. > If the user likes the app very much (or depends on it or whatever makes him > use it), he will rather switch the platform to one that allows him to run that > app without _visible_ problems than complain to the developer, because _the_ > _user_ _doesn't_ _realize_ that the app is broken.  From the user's > perspective, the platform that has problems with the app is broken, because > the app apparently runs without problems on concurrent platforms. Yeah, right. I don't think anybody has every bought an iPhone because of Tweetie. People care how the applications run on their phones, not how their phone's platform runs their favorite application, in fact, most probably it became their favorite application because it was running great on their phone, and they wouldn't expect it to run on phones with other platforms. Either applications run on S60, iPhone OS, Android, or Maemo, but not in a combination of those. And if their certain app that runs on multiple platforms, and the user actually knows that (probably a geek), then he knows he can't expect it to work exactly the same. > The whole "no reason to tolerate broken apps" midset is simply misguided IMO, > because it's based on unrealistic assumptions.  That's because in general users > only need the platform for running apps they like (or need or whatever).  If > they can't run apps they like on a given platform, or it is too painful to them > to run their apps on it, they will rather switch to another platform than stop > using the apps. You seriously think people switch high-end phones just to run their favorite apps? It's much cheaper to switch apps, and that's what users do. -- Felipe Contreras -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/