You know what John, I am totally convince they are confused and pick the first one. It's really hard to explain the inversion otherwise. I wonder what would happen if we put the C++ package first. This is really proving the marketing people right about
product placement…
I'm not sure of the external need for the ultimate package, but I would like to see it as a showcase of what's possible and as a driver for interop issues. (And I've seen much bigger packages come out of Rational :). So even if we don't put it up on the
download page, I'd like us to build it and put it on a side page somewhere so we can get people to try it.
Doug.
So one interesting statistic that may be relevant, there was a complete inversion of the download stats this year compared to last year. Last year the JEE package was by a large margin the dominant download. This year it
was the recently rejigged "standard" package that was the large majority of downloads. My interpretation (perhaps wrong) is that it means people didn't actually want the much larger JEE package, and the much smaller "standard" package had what they needed.
Of course it could be they were just confused by all the choices and picked the first one on the list :)
FWIW, I think people would prefer something smaller and higher performance than an "ultimate" package with everything in it they might possibly need. Compare our downloads for example with the tightly focused IntelliJ packages...
John
From: Doug Schaefer <dschaefer@xxxxxxx>
To: Discussions about the IDE <ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date: 10/28/2013 05:02 PM
Subject: [ide-dev] Eclipse IDE Ultimate (totally not: Re: what about doing less?)
Sent by: ide-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
I'll throw my hat in the "while doing less would help performance, it
isn't what our users want" camp. At the end of the day they want a great
experience while working on their projects. The performance issue is
probably less important IMHO, than missing functionality.
To help contribute to our understanding, I'd like us to produce an EPP
that is the ultimate IDE with everything included that most Eclipse IDE
users would use. From there we can gain a better understanding of where we
are and where we need to go to improve performance and interop issues. And
that will likely kick off another discussion of what to put in it. :)
Thoughts?
Doug.
On 2013-10-27 4:10 PM, "Fabian Steeg" <fsteeg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>I realize I'm not convincing anyone here, just contributing some thoughts
>:-)
>
>This goal of a great OOTB universal IDE has always been there, and (I
>guess for multiple reasons) it isn't happening. So maybe it's time to try
>a different approach and embrace what Eclipse is instead of clinging to
>an inadequate version of something we'd like it to be.
>
>Because the OOTB experience has two sides: if everything is included and
>anything sucks, the whole thing sucks. That's, 'Eclipse sucks'. But if
>you have a stable platform plus plugins, it's 'Oh, this sucks since I
>added X, let me check my setup'. And maybe this can improve the common
>attitude towards Eclipse that I don't get: stuff that can be fixed, be it
>by changing some setting, updating or removing some plugin, etc. is
>considered an inherent part of 'Eclipse', which therefore sucks.
>
>It has been discussed that the Platform's been reluctant to accept
>contributions to avoid bloat. I think this is very important, and has
>worked. But that doesn't seem to contribute to today's impression of
>Eclipse. And how would a user today know about the modular nature of
>Eclipse? We all do, because we work with this technology. When I started
>as an Eclipse user 10 years ago, it was obvious to users, too. Maybe
>today it isn't.
>
>And maybe focussing less on providing the best OOTB experience, and more
>on being a great platform and ecosystem could help with that. I'm certain
>it would appeal to a lot of developers. And anyone who's happy today can
>continue that way, but this different focus would center around what's
>unique about Eclipse, and what we're actually best at.
>
>Cheers,
>Fabian
>
>On 26.10.2013, at 10:56, Denys Digtiar <duemir@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> I tend to agree with Konstantin. I am a regular user and I like when
>> my tools just work out of the box. TBH vim is an exception but maybe
>> that is the reason why I am not using it on a regular basis.
>>
>> In terms of doing less, what about removing CVS integration from
>> default packages? How many people is still using it? I have never used
>> it myself and never heard about anybody using it on commercial
>> projects. I understand that I am not representative, but I can see
>> Foundation running a poll on the website to get more broad feedback.
>>
>>
>>> Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 18:13:49 -0700
>>> From: "Konstantin Komissarchik" <konstantin.komissarchik@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> To: "'Discussions about the IDE'" <ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Subject: Re: [ide-dev] what about doing less?
>>> Message-ID: <00ca01ced1e8$a12afd10$e380f730$@komissarchik@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>>
>>> My point is that will not work. The user reaction is not going to be
>>> positive. A common description of Eclipse is already "some assembly
>>> required" while other IDEs work out of the box. Turning "some
>>>assembly" into
>>> "a lot of assembly" isn't going to improve user perception of Eclipse.
>>>
>>> - Konstantin
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ide-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ide-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
>>>On
>>> Behalf Of Fabian Steeg
>>> Sent: Friday, October 25, 2013 5:42 PM
>>> To: Discussions about the IDE
>>> Subject: Re: [ide-dev] what about doing less?
>>>
>>> I also prefer a feature rich IDE, and I'm happy enough with some parts
>>>of
>>> Eclipse to view the others as challenges on the way to the ultimate
>>>IDE. So
>>> personally, I totally agree. It just bugs me that people seem to hate
>>> Eclipse for what it's trying to be, instead of loving it for what it
>>>is and
>>> looking forward to what it might become. The things that really shine
>>>and
>>> attract users and contributors seem to get missed. The platform nature,
>>> customizability, and plugin ecosystem are some of these things, so
>>>maybe
>>> it's better to actively get users into that, instead of trying to hide
>>>it.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Fabian
>>>
>>> On 26.10.2013, at 00:38, Konstantin Komissarchik
>>> <konstantin.komissarchik@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> So as another crazy idea, we could make the Platform (plus
>>>>> Marketplace
>>>> client) the
>>>>> default download, and focus on making it easy to build the IDE that's
>>>> right for you
>>>>> from there (one part of that could be the changes to the Marketplace
>>>> mentioned by
>>>>> Marcel in the other thread).
>>>>
>>>> This sort of approach is something that a few power users would
>>>> appreciate, but a typical user is just not interested in finely tuning
>>>> their IDE composition. I have seen too many frustrated questions from
>>>> users regarding why their Eclipse doesn't understand XML files (for
>>>> instance), when Netbeans has no issue with them. No amount of
>>>> improvements to Eclipse Marketplace is going to make users feel good
>>>> about having to manually pick the technologies that they want to use
>>>>and
>>> then hope that they install without issues.
>>>>
>>>> Rather than trying to ignore performance issues by including less, a
>>>> good item for the IDE working group to tackle is interop between
>>>> projects when many projects are installed concurrently. There are
>>>> performance issues that are not evident when only a few plugins are
>>>> installed. There are UI pollution issues. Like, why do we need a dozen
>>>> views to show external resources, like app servers, databases, source
>>>> repos, task repos, etc. when other IDEs can get away with a single
>>>>view.
>>>>
>>>> - Konstantin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: ide-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ide-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
>>>> On Behalf Of Fabian Steeg
>>>> Sent: Friday, October 25, 2013 3:23 PM
>>>> To: Discussions about the IDE
>>>> Subject: Re: [ide-dev] what about doing less?
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I really like the general idea of doing less. I think a lot of grief
>>>> around Eclipse today is rooted in one of its actual strengths: a
>>>> large, open ecosystem.
>>>>
>>>> Some like using advanced tools, and gladly work around their bugs and
>>>> limitations, but others prefer to stick to a rock solid text editor
>>>> and the terminal instead of using a feature rich editor that hangs
>>>> while you're typing. So why not give people that option?
>>>>
>>>> On my current machine, the latest stable Platform build (4.4M2) starts
>>>> up in
>>>> 5 seconds something. That's not quite the 2 seconds mentioned by
>>>> Martin yet, but it's pretty close, and it's a start. As an easily
>>>> achievable goal, we could avoid adding more to that than really
>>>> required by a given user. And this is not just about startup time, but
>>>> overall user experience, like tools running background tasks etc.
>>>>
>>>> So as another crazy idea, we could make the Platform (plus Marketplace
>>>> client) the default download, and focus on making it easy to build the
>>>> IDE that's right for you from there (one part of that could be the
>>>> changes to the Marketplace mentioned by Marcel in the other thread).
>>>>
>>>> The open platform and focussed tools that made Eclipse great 10 years
>>>> ago are still here, but maybe seeing them has become more difficult
>>>> over the years, and is almost impossible for new and casual users
>>>>today.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Fabian
>>>>
>>>> On 24.10.2013, at 08:57, Max Rydahl Andersen <manderse@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:20:00AM +0200, Mickael Istria wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/23/2013 09:38 AM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
>>>>>>> Dart editor "solves" it by removing anything but Dart required
>>>> dependencies.
>>>>>> FWIW, It's already what Tycho does with tycho-surefire-plugin by
>>> default:
>>>> it generates the minimal application for a test to run. So we don't
>>>> need anything new to have something similar working.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not following why that is relevant ?
>>>>> Tycho's minimal application is rarely actually usable by users
>>>>> because it doesn't take into account add-ons that aren't related to
>>>>> your specific
>>>> tests.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think for this specific issue (performance) putting together
>>>> plan/resources to revive or reimplement focus on performance would
>>>> help alot.
>>>>>> Performance tests by themselves are generally a bit tricky to
>>>>>> analyze,
>>>> but coupling them with a profiler (yourkit-maven-plugin) could make
>>>> them much more relevant.
>>>>>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=420149
>>>>>
>>>>> Eclipse already have or at least had plenty of performance tests
>>>>> which
>>>> junit output usecase specific performance numbers instead of more
>>>> generic profiler output.
>>>>>
>>>>> There were tests for "opening workspace", "load of eclipse", import
>>>>> of project etc. which were then tracked to not have to big of a %
>>>>> difference
>>>> over time.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not saying having easy access to profiler data but doing it
>>>>> generically will probably not solve end-user problem faster IMO.
>>>>>
>>>>> /max
>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Mickael Istria
>>>>>> Eclipse developer at JBoss, by Red Hat <http://www.jboss.org/tools>
>>>>>> My blog <http://mickaelistria.wordpress.com> - My Tweets
>>>>>> <http://twitter.com/mickaelistria>
>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> ide-dev mailing list
>>>>>> ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ide-dev
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> ide-dev mailing list
>>>>> ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ide-dev
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> ide-dev mailing list
>>>> ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ide-dev
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> ide-dev mailing list
>>>> ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ide-dev
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ide-dev mailing list
>>> ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ide-dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> ide-dev mailing list
>> ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ide-dev
>
>_______________________________________________
>ide-dev mailing list
>ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ide-dev
_______________________________________________
ide-dev mailing list
ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ide-dev
|