[enqk]

The tools provide some value and we depend on them, however they also abuse us by being very unfriendly and disrespectful of our time.

I think this emerge of a certain way that programmers think of other programers.

There are of course exceptions, but often tools made by other programmers don't seem to respect us as users and have bad user experience: - Few thoughts given to make common operations good, - Lots of clunky menus, - Poor performance,

Basically going out of their ways to make us do something else than programming by killing the feedback loop. (Think libraries that are slow to compile, tools that run slowly or require assistance or are otherwise too granular)

The absolute worst example I can give is something like Hudson or Jenkins.

[mikestew]

> The absolute worst example I can give is something like Hudson or Jenkins.

Though I agree with you to some extent, IMO you chose a bad example. Jenkins has one of the most shallow learning curve of any the tools I use, and doesn't require a lot of fussiness. If I can it to build from a terminal window, I can get it working on Jenkins in 30 minutes.

Might I suggest Appium for your example? The one where, in the official docs, it says "If install fails, keep trying to install a few times." Rest assured that you'll need those instructions. Gawd, I hate Appium.

[enqk]

My experience is using Jenkins with Matrix jobs (and various plugins) for building native code on multiple platforms. There, the Jenkins UI doesn't shine.

Problems navigating between pages and knowing what one is looking at abound. Organizing jobs in various tabs works but isn't extremely easy. The UI doesn't handle well dealing with large lists of nodes/labels.

The plugin based architecture might be to blame for it, however I think it's a conscious choice from the original designers and they should be hold responsible for it.