[Ffmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Universal binary support for Mac OS X

[Dan Villiom Podlaski Christiansen]

On 05/02/2006, at 16.02, Rich Felker wrote:

> BTW, do mac developers really consider their users so stupid that they
> can't figure out which binary to download, and that they need to waste
> twice the download time and disk space to make sure they have the
> right binary? If so I find this really insulting to users, and sad..

This has nothing to do with stupidity, and everything to do with  
usability.

When designing software that targets specific users, it's generally a  
good assumption that anything the user wants to do is "right", or at  
least the user should want to do "the right thing". Anything which  
makes the user suddenly become aware of technicalities or  
requirements of the system, is unacceptable. This is called  
usability, and is target of a lot of scientific research, just like  
the math and DSP algorithms used in FFmpeg.

Imagine the following use case scenario:

A user downloads a copy of an application, e.g. VLC, to his work  
computer, e.g. an x86-based Mac. The user then transfers this  
application to his home computer, e.g. a PowerPC-based Mac, which  
isn't connected to the Internet.

With universal binaries the user just downloads the updated VLC,  
without them, the user would have to choose which copy to download,  
and would have to have different copies of the application to run on  
different systems. Your assumption that the system to which a file is  
downloaded is the same as the system to which is intended is not  
always fulfilled.

Another scenario:

A user downloads VLC and installs it in the home directory in the  
campus computers. Being a properly setup computer network, this home  
directory is shared among all Macs on the network; both the fancy new  
Intel-based ones and the older PowerPC-based ones.

Without universal binaries, the user would have to have separate  
binaries for the Intel Macs and PowerPC Macs, and would be forced to  
verify the architecture of the current computer before doing anything.

Both these scenarios require the user to obtain knowledge and do  
things the developer could have dealt with.

Simply doubling the space used for binaries isn't all the big a  
problem: OTOH it allows you to have only one copy of non-binary  
application-related data ? which often takes up far more space than  
the binaries do. It's just like having a massive GUI library  
installed; it takes up a shitload of HD space, but it's acceptable  
considering the benefit to the user.

In general, I would suggest that you try not to make too many  
assumptions about the needs and knowledge of Mac users. You cannot  
extrapolate your own experiences to people who are far less skilled  
in computer usage than you are, and have absolutely no interest in  
attempting to reach a skill level comparable to yours.

Indeed, if the needs of Mac users were the same as yours, the would  
probably be running the same OS as you. They aren't, so they  
obviously do not share your priorities. And that is in no way  
insulting to neither them nor you.

Pretty much any Mac application using FFmpeg will want to have a  
universal copy of FFmpeg. VLC being a prime example. Handbrake being  
another.

IMHO you're remarks are needlessly inflammatory. There's no reason to  
suggest that I or others consider users "stupid". It's just that the  
average Mac user and the average Linux user are very, very different.

--

- Dan Villiom Podlaski Christiansen