The Coalition for User's Rights

The driving vision behind CUR is our firm belief that users have the right to expect and demand the following:

• Software that does not require taking courses or reading tomes to even begin to understand how to use it. This sometimes seems to be used as a way to lock users into using a particular product forever. Once the user has invested a large effort in learning the software, he or she will not want to switch because it will be too painful to start over. Most companies probably don't do this intentionally, but this simply means that management needs to realize how important it is.

  Granted, users always want more features, and this always increases the complexity of the software. However, a truly beautifully user interface can integrate a slew of seemingly unrelated features together in a simple and intuitive way. (cfr. The Humane Interface, by Jef Raskin) Our belief is that if you can't see how to do this, you haven't thought enough about the problem. (Of course, if a feature just doesn't fit into a program, then don't add it at all.)

  A good example of how to design a user interface is the water faucet.

  The Nightmare Before Christmas can be used to explain why so many user interfaces don't end up this way. Microsoft programs provide excellent examples of what actually results. The Interface Hall of Shame provides many more examples.

  We are compiling a list of design rules based on experience and reading.

• Software that works as promised now, not several versions down the line. This seems to be a common trick for sucking even more money out of users, beyond the already inflated initial price. (Yes, we know how expensive advertising is. That's why we support shareware!)

  Granted, the razor / razor blade effect is a serious problem. The need for a steady cash flow into the company means that users have to be compelled to upgrade regularly, and bugs are the best incentive known. New features don't work as well for the reason mentioned above: most users like to stick with something that works and that they are familiar with. So far, there does not seem to be a solution to this dilemma, other than appealing to morality. One goal of CUR is to stimulate discussion to try to find a solution.

Our belief is that these goals can only be acheived when the operating system is public domain (or at least totally open) so that everybody has the same opportunity to write applications on top of it. This is why we support Linux and strongly encourage other developers to do the same by writing useful applications for it.

We call ourselves CUR because that is the way many software developers seem to feel about their users: annoying curs who yap for more features and fewer bugs and who can be kicked around without consequences.

However, no matter how loudly we shout from atop our soapbox, it is ultimately up to the users to use their buying power to force software developers to be responsible. If users are willing to buy junk from developers, developers will continue to provide junk. So...

Stand up for your rights!

Demand easy-to-use, bug free software

on an open operating system!

Reward those who provide it and shun those who don't.

All constructive comments and discussions are welcome. Flames and other attempts to start religious wars will be ignored. We do not believe that it is practical for all software to be totally and utterly free, and we do not support the idea that all software should be impossible for anybody other than the "initiated" to use.