Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> when are there not alternatives?

Example: Steam cloud save. Countless time I have to force quit Steam's background service because Cyberpunk 2077 and GTA V freeze while saving.

Steam doesn't show the launch game button, even though the game is killed from task manager.

There are no heartbeat like mechanism to keep in check the game process state.

And there are no alternative to launch the game that I bought from steam, so the instability becomes little of nuisance.

But that's a minor issue where unstable features are unimportant ones.

> It is all about how often stability is not a priority when it could and or should be.

And I'm on your team too. That's why my argument is that stability IS A feature too. Countering grant parent's argument that says stability is ignorable as long as the features are validated by the market.

> And in the no alternative scenario, it can be compelling to continue to ignore robustness to get growth and lock in.

As a paranoid user I agree this has been a nightmare. I constantly have to make sure I wont get locked in to services that I pay for, and often time I find myself using open source solutions rather than paid one because of the same reason.



I agree, and was very unclear and incomplete with my question. One alternative is to simply not use the tool. Can be rough though. Your pain is acute!

It absolutely is a feature.

Guess the externalities problem crops up in this context.

How to actualize those costs better so the equation makes more sense?

And yes! I hate lock in viscerally. Frankly, will avoid it at very considerable cost.


> How to actualize those costs better so the equation makes more sense?

Which equation exactly? The balance between effort to stability and other stuffs? Sorry I'm a bit lost




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: