Are we always doomed to second-rate software?

Technical excellence and commercial success have always seemed to be negatively correlated in software, whether it was Algol/Fortran, Pascal/C, Interlisp/C++, and endless other examples. After a forced computer update, this still seems to be true.

Good news for Mozilla, I suspect. 

Opera is now miles ahead of Firefox in terms of Quality In Use, but miles behind in market share.  Thunderbird is claimed as the latest, biggest, best thing for email clients, but it is actually amateur hour compared to Outlook (which is hanging on with established corporates).

Apple seems to be the bright exception, and has also provided a sensible market for frustrated open source coders, but I cannot  bring myself to trust them with any of my IPR (generated or bought) because they are so predatory.

Learning from weak signals

Michael Krigsman's excellent blog has a post about learning from the weak signals of failure. Well worth a read, and illustrates the synergy between good management from a commercial point of view and from a safety point of view. Being able to give senior managers bad news is key to both.

He also has a link to a classic Dilbert cartoon.

Quality In Use for cabin baggage

Business travel for men requires suits, shirts, smart shoes. This means a wheelie-bag a) to look after same and b) because backpacks ruin suits.
I have had a cheap Carlton (wheel squeak was terrifying and above safe levels), expensive Tripp (fell apart), cheap frameless case (zip went), mid-price Muji (lovely, but telescopic mechanism jammed - shut fortunately). I don't know anyone who has cracked the problem. Having just ordered a new case, this is the situation as I see it.
User requirements
The trade-offs are between cost, weight, durability (or perceived durability), detail design (pockets, straps, handles, quality of zips, luggage tags), and satisfaction, presentation of self (social significance in Susan Boztepe's framework below).

Candidate designs
Fashionable and not given bad reviews
Briggs and Riley, Rimowa

Sensible and probably what I should have bought
Antler, Samsonite

Interesting but not for my business purposes
Tom Bihn
Patagonia
Eagle Creek
Cool Tools has a favourable review of Rick Steves Convertible Carry-on

Sounded great, but doubts about actual weight
Travelite

What I bought
Sub-0-G (not least because it was half-price). I chickened out of the tiedot design and now have to work out how to make a black case stand out.

Useful places for advice
Forums
Flytertalk
Tripadvisor (new forum)
OBOW

Gurus
Onebag

Quality = ease of use

Pure Digital's Simon Fleming-Wood(Flip video camera) defines quality entirely in terms of ease of use. He says "We will always prioritize accessibility over features".

This appears in the Wired article 'The Good Enough Revolution: When Cheap and Simple is Just Fine'.

The article says much that is not new. Which? magazine has been banging on for a long time about how people like VW Beetle (original not retro) technology and dislike 'featuritis'. However, it has some interesting observations about the potential for mini-clinics, which I suspect that the current NHS plans will not realise for us in the UK

We need some tools to be able to relate Quality In Use to price point; the usability community has kept itself 'pure' by ignoring the framing that price brings.