Unless it's a used in the sense of "in general" or "the average", (which it is) and mean, median and mode averages all confirm the statement. They don't care enormously about UX, but UX is hard and expensive and not solo.
"Authors of graphviz" doesn't really map well to "Open source software authors". Which is petty, picking-on-illogic type of criticism.
graphviz wasn't originally open source - it came from AT&T Research in the 90s, didn't it? AT&T kind of open-sourced it in the early 2000s. I personally have used it a lot over the years because there's nothing else like it, as near as I can tell. If you want to draw a nodes-and-edges type graph, it works well.
Also, there's that annoying tools-vs-appliances dichotomy. Tools are general purpose, and don't often come with very specific "do exactly my thing" features. Think of drill presses, or radial saws or even screwdrivers. Then think about appliance-type tools, Radio Shack metal detectors, maybe. Some people need tools, others need appliances. Some people need minivans, others need pickups. Why try to force an appliance mindset on a tool?
7 comments
[ 2.4 ms ] story [ 29.1 ms ] threadFor the record, I'm a HN reader and I don't feel disrespected.
graphviz wasn't originally open source - it came from AT&T Research in the 90s, didn't it? AT&T kind of open-sourced it in the early 2000s. I personally have used it a lot over the years because there's nothing else like it, as near as I can tell. If you want to draw a nodes-and-edges type graph, it works well.
Also, there's that annoying tools-vs-appliances dichotomy. Tools are general purpose, and don't often come with very specific "do exactly my thing" features. Think of drill presses, or radial saws or even screwdrivers. Then think about appliance-type tools, Radio Shack metal detectors, maybe. Some people need tools, others need appliances. Some people need minivans, others need pickups. Why try to force an appliance mindset on a tool?