Fewer features is the new, biggest feature. US Mag interviews David Heinemeier Hansson (co-owner of 37signals):
“When people compare software products, they often compare checklists of features. In other words, the product that has the longest checklist appears to be the best. Well we try to do exactly the opposite. We try to “under-do” our competition by doing less than they do, by having the shortest feature list. That is, in essence, our biggest feature.”
He continues with an excellent analogy:
“We keep comparing ourselves to the notion of chefs. When you walk into a high-end restaurant, you really don’t get a whole lot of choice. Usually, the hallmark of a high-end restaurant is the chef’s menu. The chef prepared courses of a dinner in advance where he made all the choices. You eat there because you trust the chef’s judgment and want his taste. Well, we try to do the same thing. Instead of just giving you a super-long menu, we’ll just give you this set course of plates and you’ll have to trust our judgment on it, and I think you’ll end up with a much tastier meal in the end.”
monthly email
RSS 2.0
I usually judge software based on what I want it to do. Anything beyond that is usually counted as a negative. I just downloaded the new Office Beta 2010. It’s so confusing compared to its predecessor, yet Microsoft calls it an upgrade. I’d argue it several steps backward.
Same for Thunderbird. I upgraded my work computer to Thunderbird 3 (from 2) and I find the “improved” search function worse than before.
Stick to the basics. Less features, less code, less bugs, etc.