Free and Loving It

I have a soft spot for Open Source Software. When I compare two software products, I will almost always lean towards the Open Source alternative, if it can accomplish my task with some amount of pleasure.

Just tonight, I was working with Open Office with my fiancée. We ran into several kinks along the way, ultimately costing us the night. We couldn't finish our task, though I mostly blame my procrastination.

In particular, we were trying to print out some labels, given a spreadsheet of addresses. I had no problem finding howtos and working through the problem. However, we ran into small problems here and there. For example, I couldn't create a database out of a spreadsheet right away because Ubuntu didn't package the Database portion of Open Office along with the rest. I then innocuously named our database SomeName_12.1.2009. When trying to print, this ended with an error that it couldn't connect to the database. Renaming the database to SomeName_12_1_2009 solved the problem. Something we could figure out easily enough, but not something I would expect an average user to think of (nor do I think they should have to think of it). She became frustrated, rightfully so, and ultimately exclaimed that she's going back to Windows (for her Office needs).

At this point, it dawned on me that I don't mind giving Open Source the benefit of the doubt. The hacker in me enjoys figuring out how to work with the software (as long as what I want to do is possible, and reasonably easy). The hacker in me also appreciates that the project was built by people that are likely much more passionate about writing software, and much more passionate about getting something useful to people (instead of making a bunch of money). This is not to say there aren't people in the proprietary world that love software and want to deliver awesome stuff to people, but I just can't identify with that crowd of enthusiastic developers as much.

This is also why I foam at the mouth when I read comments like Jeff Atwood's:

as predicted, Google's "let's copy how Microsoft does phones, but open source!" model is a fail: http://is.gd/589U8

I've read the article he links to, and I consider it complete bullshit. I have a G1, and I love it. I have played with the Droid, and I drool over it. I know several people that have one (or some other Android powered phone), none are unhappy about the pick. Jason Calacanis of This Week in Startups (among many other things) has commented on his show that he loves his new Droid. Browsing some of the comments on that negative post, I see several that point to rogue processes as the likely culprit of the device slowdown discussed in the article. I've found this to be true of my G1. Sometimes I will discover my battery drained much faster with little reason during the day, or it will become extremely sluggish. Both cases I've had more than enough reason to believe it was a rogue process from something I had installed. With greater power comes greater responsibility.

In the Linux side of things, I have become far too attached to Emacs and the powerful command line based applications that I would never willingly go back to a Microsoft prompt. The Free world gets me, and I get them. I tend to believe in live and let live sort of philosophies, which has no room for restrictive licenses and the likes of DRM. Software patents scare me because I want to be able to develop anything I want, without having to worry that someone else may have already thought of the idea and patented it. I also don't care if someone takes my ideas and tries to make them better. I may be a bit envious, but I firmly believe the meat of a product is in the execution, not the imagination. Ideas are a dime a dozen, but passion for your users and the desire to develop something of quality and value is truly rare.

I don't understand the Microsoft world, and I don't want to. Which world do you identify with, and why?

Serve Your Users

I'm a bit upset. Some friends and I were planning a trip to San Francisco soon, and a few of them have booked a night at the Sheraton Fisherman's Wharf (don't worry, I will tie this in to software in a bit, trust me). I needed to book a night for me and my fiancée, so I brought up their website. Uh oh! The hotel was booked solid that night. This was bad... what if we have a hard time finding a place? This wasn't what made me mad though... well, besides at myself for not booking earlier.

What if the website wasn't accurate? I dialed up the hotel, just to be sure. It went something like the following (though it's coming from memory, so expect a bit of embellishment):

Me: Hi! Do you have a room available for the night of X?

Them: I'm sorry, I don't see anything available. Is the night flexible?

Me: Well, my friends already booked the night with you, soooo...

Them: I can check the Starwood Hotels, Le Meridien. It is about a mile away. Shall I check availability for you?

Me: Uuuuh, well, my friends are already staying at your hotel. Is there anything nearby that might have a room?

Them: ... It's only a mile away. Shall I look that up for you?

Me: Sure.

... She proceeds to book a night at Le Meridien, informing me of an offer comparable to what my friends had, though I made sure I had a refundable option so I could think it over ...

Ok, so this may seem like pleasant help from the reservations department at the Sheraton, but it's not quite why I'm angry. You see, after I hung up, I first checked how far on the map the 2 hotels were. It ended up being 1.4 miles... not exactly easily walkable for a night on the town. This wasn't why I was steaming though.

I then did a quick search of the nearby hotels to the Sheraton. I zoomed in on Google Maps, and all the hotels nearby were listed right on the map. The Hyatt, a block away. Holiday Inn, a block away. Best Western, across the street. Radisson, across the street. This was when my anger bubbled up. I called up the Best Western and found out that not only was a room available, but I could get the same price my friends got (and which was offered me at Le Meridien). I quickly cancelled the night at Le Meridien, quite thankful I didn't rush into the no refund deal I was initially offered.

Let's be clear, I fully understand where the Sheraton employee was coming from. They may get some kind of commission for redirecting my business to their sister hotel. They want to ensure they are getting my money. What irks me, though, is that I made it clear I preferred to be near my friends, yet she proceeded to push an option to me when she very likely knew full well there were alternatives that would have suited me better. It may be that any of the hotels I saw would do the exact same thing in a heartbeat, but I feel it is a grave mistake.

First, the Sheraton had a great opportunity to turn me into a fan. Had they pointed me to one of the numerous walking distance competitors, I would have remembered that fondly, and told everyone about my experience. Not many companies clearly have your best interests at heart. Instead, I remember it angrily... and tell everyone about my experience.

This is how I feel this story relates to software... well, more about business, but same thing if you are a software company. The way you need to treat your customers is as if your goal is to see their goal achieved in the way that best makes them happy. If that means pointing them to a competitor who would solve their problem better... then happily point them to your competitor's open arms. Don't treat your customers (or potential customers) as if their money is the only thing you care about, like the Sheraton did in this case. Your users will find out you weren't being completely honest, and they will hate you for it. They will speak out and write on some puny but public blog and tell everyone about the experience. Ultimately, your users will find their way to the option that is aligned with solving their problem, not extracting their money.