This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Software Sucks

edited May 2009 in Flamewars
It has come to my attention that all software sucks. My OS, my web browser, my development tools; everything that I have to use on a day-to-day basis sucks.

Take for example Windows Vista, the windows management for which feels like I'm using windows 95. Alt+Tab only gets you so far when you have to test against six different web-browsers, all while your text editor and free-floating Firebug window are open.

Or how about Firefox, which has a tendency to break your important extensions during dot releases! Sure, del.icio.us keeps working, but I'd love it if Firebug could inspect XHR responses, and the W3C validator didn't crash my browser when I hit refresh. Both of these issues have been resolved, but they were definitely both broken when I needed them.

Adobe has made it their mission to roll their own UI widgets, which had lead to nothing but trouble. Flash CS4 Win doesn't play nicely with Synergy (which hasn't been updated since 2006 8D), making the mouse disappear when you transfer screens. The OSX version also does not work with Spaces, putting it in line with the entire Creative Suite!

Don't assume I think Chrome, OSX, Linux, Gimp etc. are any better, because I could (and probably will!) spend other posts talking about how much they suck too.

How about you? What awful experiences have you had with software this day/month/year?
«13

Comments

  • Unreal Editor is the worst piece of cocksucking shit I've ever had the displeasure of using.
  • I reinstalled iTunes to see if it improved since I last used it years ago. It didn't :(
  • The big question is: what about this software makes it so bad? I use iTunes on a daily basis, and certainly don't find it any more vomit-inducing than its primary competitors (WMP11/Rhythmbox).
  • The big question is: what about this software makes it so bad? I use iTunes on a daily basis, and certainly don't find it any more vomit-inducing than its primary competitors (WMP11/Rhythmbox).
    The fact that it is a resource hog
    Will not autoupdate as I add stuff to my library via non-itunes without a custom script
    It tries to do stuff for me without asking
    No FLAC or OGG support
    Don't like the UI

    I just like Winamp better for my needs. That's all.
  • The big question is: what about this software makes it so bad? I use iTunes on a daily basis, and certainly don't find it any more vomit-inducing than its primary competitors (WMP11/Rhythmbox).
    The fact that it is a resource hog
    Will not autoupdate as I add stuff to my library via non-itunes without a custom script
    It tries to do stuff for me without asking
    No FLAC or OGG support
    Don't like the UI

    I just like Winamp better for my needs. That's all.
    All of that plus some more. iTunes is a pain in the ass. I don't think it will ever improve to the level it needs to.
  • I just like Winamp better for my needs. That's all.
    How is Winamp's iPod support? Especially with syncing podcasts? I know it can do some of that stuff, but I've never quite had the motivation to try to figure it all out. I don't think iTunes is awful, but it's far from great, and I wouldn't mind having a better alternative.
  • I really liked iTunes when I was still using Win2K (which I also really liked) but that was then and now it's such a resource hog.

    I used to like Steam but then they decided it was perfectly normal to gouge people outside the US for the same product and there's the fact that it's still DRM.

    I still somewhat like Ubuntu, even though the linux community is a disorganized mess and features like sound are nowhere near where they should be, the improvement in just the last few years is quite something and each new release has several things that make me go "Oh, that' really useful." (i.e. sound finally working acceptably, much faster boot times, non-brown themes).

    I haven't really been wowed by a program since Firefox originally came out.
  • I really liked iTunes when I was still using Win2K (which I also really liked) but that was then and now it's such a resource hog.
    I've been using foobar2000 for a while, myself.
  • I just like Winamp better for my needs. That's all.
    How is Winamp's iPod support? Especially with syncing podcasts? I know it can do some of that stuff, but I've never quite had the motivation to try to figure it all out. I don't think iTunes is awful, but it's far from great, and I wouldn't mind having a better alternative.
    I don't know too much about the iPod support. All I have is a shuffle so I just drag and drop a couple albums at a time take on my workouts. I imagine organizing a bigger iPod might be a little more difficult than that.
  • I just like Winamp better for my needs. That's all.
    How is Winamp's iPod support? Especially with syncing podcasts? I know it can do some of that stuff, but I've never quite had the motivation to try to figure it all out. I don't think iTunes is awful, but it's far from great, and I wouldn't mind having a better alternative.
    Winamp is ok. I have ran into issues where it deleted the file correctly but it remains on the list of file on your IPOD. I never solved that issue and I am really not sure how common it is. Overall winamp just allows you drag and drop and the auto sync works fine but is limited.
  • I just like Winamp better for my needs. That's all.
    How is Winamp's iPod support? Especially with syncing podcasts? I know it can do some of that stuff, but I've never quite had the motivation to try to figure it all out. I don't think iTunes is awful, but it's far from great, and I wouldn't mind having a better alternative.
    I don't know too much about the iPod support. All I have is a shuffle so I just drag and drop a couple albums at a time take on my workouts. I imagine organizing a bigger iPod might be a little more difficult than that.
    That's why you hate iTunes. Trust me, if you have a real iPod, iTunes is where it's at. Nothing else can sync with an iPod/iPhone properly. If you're syncing with something other than iTunes, you are missing out on a lot of features, and not even realizing it.

    Also, Winamp is nice for playing individual songs and such, but it is no good for song libraries. Yes, I know it has library functionality, but it's unmanageable. Not that iTunes is amazing at it, but it's the best of what's out there. It's the least smelly poop.
  • It's the least smelly poop.
    True story, man. iTunes has easily the best library management system I've used yet, not to mention the best click-and-it-works music sharing system out there. Have you ever tried getting your 360 to play files from WMP11? It's like configuring Samba. (No, not really; nothing is that bad.) But from iTunes-iTunes? No problems; all smooth sailing.

    Not to say its not without its flaws, "other codec" support being chief among them. See, Apple realized that not everyone wanted to use AAC, so it provided a "Quicktime Component" interface, which gets you your OGG support. Yay! Until you try to play it on your Airtunes speakers ... you see, iTunes does not allow any "third-party" components to stream to Airtunes, and it fails silently to boot! This means you'll be enjoying music in your living room, until suddenly it cuts out and is playing in your bedroom because it hit an OGG file. Good work, guys.
  • Not to say its not without its flaws, "other codec" support being chief among them. See, Apple realized that not everyone wanted to use AAC, so it provided a "Quicktime Component" interface, which gets you your OGG support. Yay! Until you try to play it on your Airtunes speakers ... you see, iTunes does not allow any "third-party" components to stream to Airtunes, and it fails silently to boot! This means you'll be enjoying music in your living room, until suddenly it cuts out and is playing in your bedroom because it hit an OGG file. Good work, guys.
    Failing silently is a huge Apple problem in general. In their epic quest to make things easy for users, and to make things "just work" they eliminated lots of error messages, and have removed all important information from the messages that do exist. I know that Steve Jobs would like for nothing to ever go wrong, but that's just impossible. When something does go wrong, it is almost impossible to fix because you have no information to go on.
  • Failing silently is a huge Apple problem in general. In their epic quest to make things easy for users, and to make things "just work" they eliminated lots of error messages, and have removed all important information from the messages that do exist. I know that Steve Jobs would like for nothing to ever go wrong, but that's just impossible. When something does go wrong, it is almost impossible to fix because you have no information to go on.
    Seriously, they don't have a developer-mode type thing?
  • Seriously, they don't have a developer-mode type thing?
    Safari does, but its borderline useless. The last time I used it (Safari3 OSX) there was no line-by-line Javascript debugging (including variable inspection) nor real-time CSS property editing.
  • Firefox - been really shitty lately. Flashblock has been working really shittily, and some videos have been totally unable to play (ANN videos, some other random shit, etc). PDFs have been causing my firefox to hang and crash every time I click on one. PDFdownload doesn't help whatsoever, unless I tell it to automatically open it as HTML, and even then it doesn't always work.
    I think it's a Firefox problem, not a problem with my extensions (Adblock plus, firegestures, fission, flashblock, personal menu, secure login).

    Google Chrome - I absolutely love how the tabs are separate processes (which would likely prevent the PDF hanging and crashing that I've been running into with Firefox), but there are absolutely no advanced features or easy ways to get "under the hood" like you can with Firefox ala about:config and chrome hacks and shit like that (unless they've changed a LOT about the browser since the last time I used it).

    foobar2k- no library support, have to add music for each playlist/no drag and drop playlists

    Toucan (a backup/syncing program) - fucking crashed when I was trying to backup my music folder...and I had to redo it all by hand because a lot of stuff got fucked up.
  • and some videos have been totally unable to play (ANN videos, some other random shit, etc)
    I get that also, except sometimes AdBlock is the culprit. I don't use Flashblock. Either way, I'm sticking with Firefox until Chrome gets equal or better than FF in terms of advanced features, add-ons, themes, etc.
  • Songbird - open source and customizable (the lyricmaster add-on finds the lyrics and adds it to the song's tag so that you can search for specific lyrics), but it's very similar to Firefox 2 in that it's an incredible memory hog and noticeably slow.

    Chrome - love almost everything about it, but wish it'd get more advanced cookie settings (on Firefox, I set it so that it deletes all cookies when I close it, except for the ones I want to keep)
  • I absolutely love how the tabs are separate processes (which would likely prevent the PDF hanging and crashing that I've been running into with Firefox)
    Wasn't it the case that plugins, like flash, pdf, etc, weren't tied to the individual tabs, but still in the root process? I.e. Chrome'd still die when the flash plugin screwed up, individual processed tabs or not.
    (on Firefox, I set it so that it deletes all cookies when I close it, except for the ones I want to keep)
    I guess you use an extension to select which cookies to keep?
  • Okay, I'm seeing what you're all saying about Chrome v. Firefox in the advanced features realm, and it all makes a lot of sense. Still, I'm just going to put this out there:

    I hope Chrome never ever gets extension support, nor almost any of the features you're talking about.

    Here me out: I think this is 80% of why Firefox sucks now. Firefox wants to do everything, everywhere, in every way possible, and all it has lead to is a browser that is too big and too clunky to get out of its own way. I think that FF and Chrome can happily share market space, with Firefox being the "advanced persons" browser, and Chrome being the browser that is fast and nimble and will get 90% of people through a day on the internet. No need to try to turn everything into Firefox, and likewise no need to try to turn everything into Chrome.
  • I'm sorry, but without any sort of ad-blocker support for Chrome, I'll never be able to use it.
  • Firefox wants to do everything, everywhere, in every way possible, and all it has lead to is a browser that is too big and too clunky to get out of its own way.
    I don't think Firefox wants to do everything, it just wants to be customizable. As a result it is possible to adapt it to do everything, everywhere, etc.

    It's been quite a while since I last used Chrome, so Firefox doesn't feel so slow and clunky to me. Runs only 227MB with 2 windows, each with 4 or so tabs.
  • edited May 2009
    I'm sorry, but without any sort of ad-blocker support for Chrome, I'll never be able to use it.
    Fortunately, that's fine. Firefox will be more than happy to pick up the slack, though by using Privoxy or something similar you can get the same effect in any application.

    EDIT: I don't think we're a good representation of what most people need on the internet, mind you.
    Post edited by konistehrad on
  • EDIT: I don't think we're a good representation of what most people need on the internet, mind you.
    Yes we are, and if we're not, most people are WRONG ON THE INTERNET.
  • Yes we are, and if we're not, most people are WRONG ON THE INTERNET.
    I've noticed a tendency for technologically inclined people to intrinsically "know" what users want. Maybe this is why software sucks so much?
  • In other news: Synergy is the worst. It's gotten to the point where it has started registering all of my clicks as double clicks until I bounce the client. Simply: this is unacceptable. Does anyone know of a replacement to this fossilized piece of crap?
  • In other news: Synergy is the worst. It's gotten to the point where it has started registering all of my clicks as double clicks until I bounce the client. Simply: this is unacceptable. Does anyone know of a replacement to this fossilized piece of crap?
    Yeah, x2x.
  • Yeah, x2x.
    I guess I should further quantify: It's between Windows and OSX.
  • Has anyone mentioned PDF? I mean the standard in general.
  • Has anyone mentioned PDF? I mean the standard in general.
    No, but a PDF isn't software, it's just a format. Now, adobe reader sucks fucking cock for PDFs. Foxit is so much better.
    But as of right now I really have no idea why PDFs are fucking up my Firefox so badly. Is it happening to anyone else?
    Firefox wants to do everything, everywhere, in every way possible, and all it has lead to is a browser that is too big and too clunky to get out of its own way.
    You know what? Opera actually has more shit built into it than Firefox does (email, mouse gestures, IRC chat, some other bullshit, etc) yet it runs smoother, for the most part (or at the very least uses a LOT less RAM). I think the devs are doing something wrong with Firefox. Really, if Firefox just gets each tab as a separate process, or if chrome got adblocking and some way to tweak the interface, I'd be a lot happier about both browsers.
Sign In or Register to comment.