• Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    It’s usually actually the other way around in my experience

    Anything that has the label “pro” or “enterprise” suuuuuucks, is badly designed, full of bugs… take the open source app, and it just works

    • BigDiction@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      3 days ago

      There’s just so much more opportunity for feedback, use case stories, and a variety of perspectives in open source development.

      Good enterprise development does all those things as well, but there is always a bigger barrier to the user when you have to design behind a curtain.

      • madcaesar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        3 days ago

        I’m pretty sure it’s not lack of user feedback. It’s MBAs deciding the user is wrong and unprofitable, therefore better add more tracking and ads.

        • namarupa@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 days ago

          Exactly. These companies have more feedback than they could ever parse. They only listen if said feedback results in loss of profit.

        • CtrlAltDyeet@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yup, and not just ads. At one of my jobs at a SECURITY company the bugs are considered a liability. Features were prioritised, vulnerabilities be damned.

          After that experience I doubt most proprietary software is more secure than open source

    • Boomkop3@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Corporate apps do tend to have game breaking bugs fixed sooner, while some open source apps just don’t