info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The Beauty of Finished Software
6 views
Skip to first unread message
Ben Collver
Jan 1, 2024, 1:03:53 PMJan 1
to
# The Beauty of Finished Software
by Jose M. Gilgado
October 31, 2023
Let me introduce you to WordStar 4.0, a popular word processor from
the early 80s.
[Screenshot]
As old as it seems, George R.R. Martin used it to write
"A Song of Ice and Fire".
Why would someone use such an old piece of software to write over
5,000 pages? I love how he puts it:
> It does everything I want a word processing program to do and it
> doesn't do anything else. I don't want any help. I hate some of
> these modern systems where you type up a lowercase letter and it
> becomes a capital. I don't want a capital, if I'd wanted a capital,
> I would have typed the capital.
> --George R.R. Martin
This program embodies the concept of finished software--a software
you can use forever with no unneeded changes.
Finished software is software that’s not expected to change, and
that’s a feature! You can rely on it to do some real work.
Once you get used to the software, once the software works for you,
you don’t need to learn anything new; the interface will exactly be
the same, and all your files will stay relevant. No migrations, no
new payments, no new changes.
This kind of software can be created intentionally, with a compromise
from the creators that they won’t bother you with things you don’t
need, and only the absolutely necessary will change, like minor
updates to make it compatible with new operating systems.
Sometimes, finished software happens accidentally; maybe the company
behind it has disappeared, or the product has been abandoned.
There are also some great examples in the UNIX world of finished
software: commands like cd (to change the current directory) or ls
(to list what’s there) won’t ever change in a significant way. You
can rely on them until the end of your career.
# The seduction of constant updates
Our expectations for software are different from other products we
use in our daily lives.
When we buy a physical product, we accept that it won’t change in its
lifetime. We’ll use it until it wears off, and we replace it. We can
rely on that product not evolving; the gas pedal in my car will
always be in the same place.
However, when it comes to software, we usually have the ingrained
expectations of perpetual updates. We believe that if software
doesn’t evolve it’ll be boring, old and unusable. If we see an app
with no updates in the last year, we think the creator might be dead.
We also expect new versions of any software will be better than the
previous ones. Once it’s released, most of our problems will be
solved! What a deceiving lie.
Sometimes, a software upgrade is a step backward: less usable, less
stable, with new bugs. Even if it’s genuinely better, there’s the
learning curve. You were efficient with the old version, but now your
most used button is on the other side of the screen under a hidden
menu.
# Finished software is a good reminder
In a world where constant change is the norm, finished software
provides a breath of fresh air. It’s a reminder that reliability,
consistency, and user satisfaction can coexist in the realm of
software development.
So the next time you find yourself yearning for the latest update,
remember that sometimes, the best software is the one that doesn’t
change at all.
# References
[1] George R.R. Martin in Conan show (2014).
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5REM-3nWHg>
From: <https://josem.co/the-beauty-of-finished-software/>
by Jose M. Gilgado
October 31, 2023
Let me introduce you to WordStar 4.0, a popular word processor from
the early 80s.
[Screenshot]
As old as it seems, George R.R. Martin used it to write
"A Song of Ice and Fire".
Why would someone use such an old piece of software to write over
5,000 pages? I love how he puts it:
> It does everything I want a word processing program to do and it
> doesn't do anything else. I don't want any help. I hate some of
> these modern systems where you type up a lowercase letter and it
> becomes a capital. I don't want a capital, if I'd wanted a capital,
> I would have typed the capital.
> --George R.R. Martin
This program embodies the concept of finished software--a software
you can use forever with no unneeded changes.
Finished software is software that’s not expected to change, and
that’s a feature! You can rely on it to do some real work.
Once you get used to the software, once the software works for you,
you don’t need to learn anything new; the interface will exactly be
the same, and all your files will stay relevant. No migrations, no
new payments, no new changes.
This kind of software can be created intentionally, with a compromise
from the creators that they won’t bother you with things you don’t
need, and only the absolutely necessary will change, like minor
updates to make it compatible with new operating systems.
Sometimes, finished software happens accidentally; maybe the company
behind it has disappeared, or the product has been abandoned.
There are also some great examples in the UNIX world of finished
software: commands like cd (to change the current directory) or ls
(to list what’s there) won’t ever change in a significant way. You
can rely on them until the end of your career.
# The seduction of constant updates
Our expectations for software are different from other products we
use in our daily lives.
When we buy a physical product, we accept that it won’t change in its
lifetime. We’ll use it until it wears off, and we replace it. We can
rely on that product not evolving; the gas pedal in my car will
always be in the same place.
However, when it comes to software, we usually have the ingrained
expectations of perpetual updates. We believe that if software
doesn’t evolve it’ll be boring, old and unusable. If we see an app
with no updates in the last year, we think the creator might be dead.
We also expect new versions of any software will be better than the
previous ones. Once it’s released, most of our problems will be
solved! What a deceiving lie.
Sometimes, a software upgrade is a step backward: less usable, less
stable, with new bugs. Even if it’s genuinely better, there’s the
learning curve. You were efficient with the old version, but now your
most used button is on the other side of the screen under a hidden
menu.
# Finished software is a good reminder
In a world where constant change is the norm, finished software
provides a breath of fresh air. It’s a reminder that reliability,
consistency, and user satisfaction can coexist in the realm of
software development.
So the next time you find yourself yearning for the latest update,
remember that sometimes, the best software is the one that doesn’t
change at all.
# References
[1] George R.R. Martin in Conan show (2014).
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5REM-3nWHg>
From: <https://josem.co/the-beauty-of-finished-software/>
yeti
Jan 1, 2024, 2:28:53 PMJan 1
to
In today's WordStar I'd want to have Eshell, Org/Babel and Tramp.
--
^K ^Q X
Ooops!
Wrong window!
--
^K ^Q X
Ooops!
Wrong window!
cr0c0d1le
Jan 1, 2024, 2:35:22 PMJan 1
to
yeti <ye...@tilde.institute> writes:
> In today's WordStar I'd want to have Eshell, Org/Babel and Tramp.
Ah, I See You're a Man of Culture As Well.
> In today's WordStar I'd want to have Eshell, Org/Babel and Tramp.
Tramp can be a PITA sometimes, though. I shall add Gnus to your list.
Julieta Shem
Jan 1, 2024, 11:05:09 PMJan 1
to
yeti <ye...@tilde.institute> writes:
> In today's WordStar I'd want to have Eshell, Org/Babel and Tramp.
I'd want scribble. The book is a program.
> In today's WordStar I'd want to have Eshell, Org/Babel and Tramp.
Julieta Shem
Jan 1, 2024, 11:05:46 PMJan 1
to
yeti
Jan 2, 2024, 12:35:16 PMJan 2
to
--
GNUS. The final frontier. They say GNUS has more than 800 commands and
functions. Just call them SPELLs! So who needs other MUDs? Be a hero!
Survive world wide Emacs. Survive GNUS! (20231209T2338/yeti)
The Real Bev
Jan 3, 2024, 10:35:31 PMJan 3
to
On 1/1/24 10:03 AM, Ben Collver wrote:
> Why would someone use such an old piece of software to write over
> 5,000 pages? I love how he puts it:
>
>> It does everything I want a word processing program to do and it
>> doesn't do anything else. I don't want any help. I hate some of
>> these modern systems where you type up a lowercase letter and it
>> becomes a capital. I don't want a capital, if I'd wanted a capital,
>> I would have typed the capital.
>> --George R.R. Martin
Good for him! I liked WS a lot. There's a linux look-alike (can't
> Why would someone use such an old piece of software to write over
> 5,000 pages? I love how he puts it:
>
>> It does everything I want a word processing program to do and it
>> doesn't do anything else. I don't want any help. I hate some of
>> these modern systems where you type up a lowercase letter and it
>> becomes a capital. I don't want a capital, if I'd wanted a capital,
>> I would have typed the capital.
>> --George R.R. Martin
remember the name) which I tried and decided I didn't want to use it --
but I felt bad about it. If I have to write something pretty I'll use
LibreOffice, but I don't need to do that often enough to get really good
at it like I was with WS.
The past is a long time ago.
And Game of Thrones was better than the book.
--
Cheers, Bev
"Why put fault tolerance in the OS, when it's already built
into the User?" -- Steve Shaw, regarding Win95
yeti
Jan 4, 2024, 5:19:43 AMJan 4
to
The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> writes:
> On 1/1/24 10:03 AM, Ben Collver wrote:
> I liked WS a lot. There's a linux look-alike (can't remember the
> name) which I tried and decided I didn't want to use it
Jstar? Joe configured to mimic WS key commands.
> On 1/1/24 10:03 AM, Ben Collver wrote:
> I liked WS a lot. There's a linux look-alike (can't remember the
> name) which I tried and decided I didn't want to use it
<https://joe-editor.sourceforge.io/>
Despite having a WS history, I preferred Joe's Jmacs. Its nice to have
a choice!
--
I do not bite, I just want to play.
Retrograde
Jan 4, 2024, 12:15:12 PMJan 4
to
On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 19:35:26 -0800
The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Good for him! I liked WS a lot. There's a linux look-alike (can't
> remember the name) which I tried and decided I didn't want to use it --
There are several, now. I use JOE (Joe's own editor), whose jstar mode
The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Good for him! I liked WS a lot. There's a linux look-alike (can't
> remember the name) which I tried and decided I didn't want to use it --
emulates WS well-enough for me. There's also WordTsar, who aims to
replicate it exactly.
http://wordtsar.ca
Their website is a hoot: "the keyboard controls we love -- the user
interface we all know, etc." Fun to see this running on a Mac though.
I'm going to take a laptop with 32GB of RAM and run a binary whose
original version ran in, what, 16MB in DOS? What will you do with all
your extra RAM not otherwise in use?
Kees Nuyt
Jan 4, 2024, 1:10:42 PMJan 4
to
On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 19:35:26 -0800, The Real Bev
<bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I liked WordStar a lot.
Yummy, WordStar on CP/M on a North Star Horizon [Z80] computer.
--
Kees Nuyt
<bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I liked WordStar a lot.
Yummy, WordStar on CP/M on a North Star Horizon [Z80] computer.
--
Kees Nuyt
The Real Bev
Jan 4, 2024, 2:38:41 PMJan 4
to
some other stuff. I still have the masters for the documentation and
I'm sure he still has the software. Somewhere, in a safe place...
--
Cheers, Bev
I love the way Microsoft follows standards. In much the
same manner that fish follow migrating caribou.
-- Paul Tomblin
Bob Eager
Jan 4, 2024, 3:24:13 PMJan 4
to
--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
Nyssa
Jan 4, 2024, 4:08:04 PMJan 4
to
I non-document mode for writing programs. :)
Nyssa, who used WS for years until she discovered AmiPro
The Real Bev
Jan 5, 2024, 12:15:00 AMJan 5
to
On 1/4/24 11:38 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 1/4/24 10:10 AM, Kees Nuyt wrote:
>> On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 19:35:26 -0800, The Real Bev
>> <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I liked WordStar a lot.
>>
>> Yummy, WordStar on CP/M on a North Star Horizon [Z80] computer.
>
> Hubby wrote software for the Horizon. A lot of cross-assemblers and
> some other stuff. I still have the masters for the documentation and
> I'm sure he still has the software. Somewhere, in a safe place...
The first thing was PDS (Program Development System). Everything you
> On 1/4/24 10:10 AM, Kees Nuyt wrote:
>> On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 19:35:26 -0800, The Real Bev
>> <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I liked WordStar a lot.
>>
>> Yummy, WordStar on CP/M on a North Star Horizon [Z80] computer.
>
> Hubby wrote software for the Horizon. A lot of cross-assemblers and
> some other stuff. I still have the masters for the documentation and
> I'm sure he still has the software. Somewhere, in a safe place...
need to write assembly language programs to do whatever you want.
--
Cheers, Bev
Organized people will never know the sheer joyous ecstasy of finding
something that was believed to have been irretrievably lost.
-- D. Stern
Andreas Eder
Jan 6, 2024, 5:25:04 AMJan 6
to
'Andreas
Rich
Jan 6, 2024, 11:47:28 AMJan 6
to
Bob Eager <news...@eager.cx> wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Jan 2024 12:15:05 -0500, Retrograde wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 19:35:26 -0800 The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Good for him! I liked WS a lot. There's a linux look-alike (can't
>>> remember the name) which I tried and decided I didn't want to use it --
>>
>> There are several, now. I use JOE (Joe's own editor), whose jstar mode
>> emulates WS well-enough for me. There's also WordTsar, who aims to
>> replicate it exactly.
>> http://wordtsar.ca
>>
>> Their website is a hoot: "the keyboard controls we love -- the user
>> interface we all know, etc." Fun to see this running on a Mac though.
>> I'm going to take a laptop with 32GB of RAM and run a binary whose
>> original version ran in, what, 16MB in DOS? What will you do with all
>> your extra RAM not otherwise in use?
>
> Did you mean to say 16MB?
Less than that, by four times, at least.
> On Thu, 04 Jan 2024 12:15:05 -0500, Retrograde wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 19:35:26 -0800 The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Good for him! I liked WS a lot. There's a linux look-alike (can't
>>> remember the name) which I tried and decided I didn't want to use it --
>>
>> There are several, now. I use JOE (Joe's own editor), whose jstar mode
>> emulates WS well-enough for me. There's also WordTsar, who aims to
>> replicate it exactly.
>> http://wordtsar.ca
>>
>> Their website is a hoot: "the keyboard controls we love -- the user
>> interface we all know, etc." Fun to see this running on a Mac though.
>> I'm going to take a laptop with 32GB of RAM and run a binary whose
>> original version ran in, what, 16MB in DOS? What will you do with all
>> your extra RAM not otherwise in use?
>
> Did you mean to say 16MB?
I ran WordStar 7.0d, under DesqView on top of MSDOS, with a copy of
Qmodem 7 and two command.com windows also running at the same time, on
a 33mhz i386 with 4MB of RAM (yes, 4 MegaByte). It (WS 7.0d) ran just
fine. This was 1991 to somewhere about 1994.
immibis
Jan 6, 2024, 11:10:00 PMJan 6
to
On 1/4/24 18:15, Retrograde wrote:
> Their website is a hoot: "the keyboard controls we love -- the user
> interface we all know, etc." Fun to see this running on a Mac though.
> I'm going to take a laptop with 32GB of RAM and run a binary whose
> original version ran in, what, 16MB in DOS? What will you do with all
> your extra RAM not otherwise in use?
Don't worry - your web browser will use the other 31.984GB.
> Their website is a hoot: "the keyboard controls we love -- the user
> interface we all know, etc." Fun to see this running on a Mac though.
> I'm going to take a laptop with 32GB of RAM and run a binary whose
> original version ran in, what, 16MB in DOS? What will you do with all
> your extra RAM not otherwise in use?
0 new messages