[anjakefala]

I feel like this is the core of how "Open Software" is aiming to combat this. By removing the consumer-driven model away from software and putting users in closer touch with developers, we are supposedly developing tools together that better fit our needs. Though, OSS arguably is struggling to meet this theoretical ideal, especially with the current lack of support most OSS devs have.

My life improved considerably when I switched from Sublime to vim, Excel to VisiData, Word to LaTeX (though, I am unsure if LaTeX is completely OSS), etc. I invested the time in learning the language of the tool, but it pays off in droves.

[matt4077]

There's no difference between OSS and proprietary software for the users, except price and the (most often theoretical) ability to modify the software and redistribute it.

Don't get me wrong: I use OSS wherever possible, contribute where I can, and love the freedom to tinker with the software's innards. But UI just isn't OSS' strong suit. Mainstream Linux desktops are no faster than MacOS, and quality as perceived by end users is far lower.

Some of that is due to missing hardware support, and some of it is a result of the OSS' "bazaar model" of development simply not being as good a fit for UIs as it is for CLI applications. But in any case, the forces at play in the market are the same for OSS and proprietary software.

[digi_owl]

Sorry to say, but the big name DEs are off chasing the UX tail of the big name commercial stuff, come hell or high performance costs...

[gunnihinn]

> I am unsure if LaTeX is completely OSS

The TeX sources are widely available and (infamously) well documented. The LaTeX macros are merely widely available. I forget what licence they're under, though.

What makes you unsure they're open source?