[1vuio0pswjnm7]

"Support free alternatives if you can, even if they underperform by some measure."

I value _control_ more than I do performance

Better performance is, IMHO, not a reason to sacrifice _control_, but that's just me

If users have control, i.e., can compile from source, then in theory performance improvement is possible through DIY or work of others. However performance is not always the only important issue. Today's commercial software tends to be rushed, lower quality, bloated. Releasing work-in-progress software that requires constant remotely-installed "updates" in place of a thoroughly-tested final product is a norm

Without control, if performance, _or anything else about the software_, is unsatisfactory, then there is nothing users can do

[Forgeties79]

Basically a lot of current software teams operate like many modern video game companies. Ship the broken thing, (maybe) repair/improve it as people suffer through the experience.

[baq]

Turns out people see value in imperfect experiences.

[Forgeties79]

There’s a difference between tolerating something and seeing its value. I tolerate lines at restaurants, I don’t see value in them for me.

You’re also operating under the assumption that people always have a choice.

[pastel8739]

But you clearly see value in the restaurant experience, even with the shortcoming of a line. Or else you wouldn’t go.

[Forgeties79]

You’re missing the point. The restaurant experience would be better without a line. I tolerate lines if the restaurant experience is good enough.

If it is not, I go somewhere else. “Going somewhere else” is not always an option when it comes to computers/software.

[poszlem]

Which is exactly what the OP was saying. You see a value in a imperfect restaurant experience.